Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Toward Rent Recovery (was Re: Half a loaf is better than none)

Expand Messages
  • Roy Langston
    ... How do you propose to implement Stage 1 before implementing Stage 2? There is no individual right to collect rent, and I guarantee you that whatever
    Message 1 of 4 , Apr 30, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Mark Porthouse <lists1@...> wrote:
      >While reading this I couldn't help but think of the advantage of 
      >splitting LVT implementation into two main stages (as per Jeffrey
      >Smith's comments on another thread last night: "Some enquiries of
      >article 'Size Of Rent""):
      >Stage 1: Recover the rent to individuals.
      >Stage 2: Tax that rent rather than other things.

      How do you propose to implement Stage 1 before implementing
      Stage 2?

      There is no individual right to collect rent, and I
      guarantee you that whatever portion of rent you once
      distribute to people, you will have an even harder time
      ever recovering for public purposes than the rent
      individuals currently pocket.

      >To mix the two ideas (which can be kept separate) increases the
      >complexity and hurdles exponentially (in my mind):
      >One change -> level 1 complexity (1 squared)
      >Two
      changes -> level 4 complexity (2 squared)

      "Everything should be made as simple as possible -- but no
      simpler." -- Albert Einstein

      >People can get their heads around the concept of land being a commons
      >and the idea that the rent is theirs,

      ?? Which people? I don't know that I've ever met more than
      a handful of people who could even understand what land rent
      _is_.

      >but to simultaneously get them to
      >recognise that taxing that rent is also the best thing is another
      >matter.

      IMO it is far easier to explain and disseminate the idea
      of recovering land rent for public purposes than of
      distributing it for private ones.

      >We mustn't forget that LVT is two different concepts brought together
      >under one umbrella: Renting the Commons and Taxation.

      I'm just trying to figure out how you think the commons can
      be rented other than by having government collect the rent.

      -- Roy Langston


      Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
    • Mark Porthouse
      ... Hi Roy, Without going in to detail I would suggest that people might quite like the idea of receiving rental income (stage 1). Then after stage 1 they may
      Message 2 of 4 , May 1 11:48 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Roy Langston said the following on 30/04/2007 18:22:
        > */Mark Porthouse <lists1@...>/* wrote:
        >
        >>While reading this I couldn't help but think of the advantage of
        >>splitting LVT implementation into two main stages (as per Jeffrey
        >>Smith's comments on another thread last night: "Some enquiries of
        >>article 'Size Of Rent""):
        >>Stage 1: Recover the rent to individuals.
        >>Stage 2: Tax that rent rather than other things.
        >
        > How do you propose to implement Stage 1 before implementing
        > Stage 2?

        Hi Roy,

        Without going in to detail I would suggest that people might quite like
        the idea of receiving rental income (stage 1). Then after stage 1 they
        may be happy to *consider* being taxed on their rental income rather
        than other things (stage 2). Shout if you want detail - much of it will
        be taken from yours and Mark Monsons implementation ideas. Do you see a
        particular barrier to implementing rent recovery to the private
        individual without it being tied to taxation?

        > There is no individual right to collect rent, and I
        > guarantee you that whatever portion of rent you once
        > distribute to people, you will have an even harder time
        > ever recovering for public purposes than the rent
        > individuals currently pocket.

        If we can't convince them that being taxed on their rental income is
        better than being taxed on other things then so be it - but I reckon
        that given the choice of a tax on rental income rather than the
        multitude of other taxes (where they see the rich achieving tax
        avoidance) they will go for a tax on rental income.

        I note that to talk in terms of LVT being a tax on rental income is a
        rather different perspective to the rent being paid as a tax.

        >>To mix the two ideas (which can be kept separate) increases the
        >>complexity and hurdles exponentially (in my mind):
        >>One change -> level 1 complexity (1 squared)
        >>Two
        > changes -> level 4 complexity (2 squared)
        >
        > "Everything should be made as simple as possible -- but no
        > simpler." -- Albert Einstein
        >
        >>People can get their heads around the concept of land being a commons
        >>and the idea that the rent is theirs,
        >
        > ?? Which people? I don't know that I've ever met more than
        > a handful of people who could even understand what land rent
        > _is_.

        Oh dear! :)

        >>but to simultaneously get them to
        >>recognise that taxing that rent is also the best thing is another
        >>matter.
        >
        > IMO it is far easier to explain and disseminate the idea
        > of recovering land rent for public purposes than of
        > distributing it for private ones.

        And IMO it is easier to understand why the rent should be distributed to
        private individuals than going into great arguments about whether one
        should have big government and how much money they should have. Even on
        this list some are libertarians and some are socialists, each with
        different ideas about the degree of government intervention and
        financing. The philosophical argument about the commons is much simpler
        and much less subjective than what level of taxation should be levied.

        >>We mustn't forget that LVT is two different concepts brought together
        >>under one umbrella: Renting the Commons and Taxation.
        >
        > I'm just trying to figure out how you think the commons can
        > be rented other than by having government collect the rent.

        You must have got the wrong impression. The collection of rent from the
        commons can only be by government (directly or indirectly). The
        alternative would seem rather close to an individualistic Robin Hood
        system or perhaps a mafia style system! Rent collection and
        redistribution has to be rooted in law.

        Cheers,

        Mark
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.