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

RE: [LandCafe] Liberty and chaos

Expand Messages
  • Paul Metz
    Yes, more accurate is The promotion of liberty alone . . It is a product of social development, which is difficult to produce and easy to lose. In the
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 4, 2008
    • 0 Attachment

      Yes, more accurate is " The promotion of liberty alone … ". It is a product of social development, which is difficult to produce and easy to lose. In the European tradition - perhaps also in the US constitution - the connection with equality and brotherhood (or solidarity) seems to contribute to this social development process.

       

      The promotion of freedom by Bush in Iraq is only an example of a narrow-minded approach.

       

      Paul Metz

       

      From: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LandCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fred Foldvary
      Sent: vrijdag 4 januari 2008 16:00
      To: land cafe
      Subject: RE: [LandCafe] Liberty and chaos

       

      > Liberty or freedom alone too easily create chaos
      > Paul Metz

      If there is chaos, there is violence, and there is no
      liberty, so how does liberty create its opposite?

      Fred Foldvary

    • Peter Bjørn Perlsø
      Paul, There is no promotion of freedom in Iraq. What Bush & Co. does is merely the ubiquitous lip service to concepts that have long ago become hollowed-out
      Message 2 of 8 , Jan 4, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Paul,

        There is no promotion of freedom in Iraq. What Bush & Co. does is merely the ubiquitous lip service to concepts that have long ago become hollowed-out husks in and by western democracies and their politicians.

        Also freedom does not create wealth gaps (and usually not chaos). State-provided privilege does.

        Today the states of the world do not secure freedom - they eradicate it, and *always* provides the few with unjust privileges. But I hope nobody disputes that, on this list?

        --
        vh, Peter Perlsø - web: http://titancity.com - tel: +45  2685 5909 - Skype: neglesaks


        As Michael Lind has written in his Vietnam: The Necessary War (1999), “Communist agriculture could not produce good harvests – but it repeatedly produced bumper crops of the dead.”



        On Jan 4, 2008, at 16.44 , Paul Metz wrote:

        Yes, more accurate is " The promotion of liberty alone … ". It is a product of social development, which is difficult to produce and easy to lose. In the European tradition - perhaps also in the US constitution - the connection with equality and brotherhood (or solidarity) seems to contribute to this social development process.
         
        The promotion of freedom by Bush in Iraq is only an example of a narrow-minded approach.
         
        Paul Metz
         
        From: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LandCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fred Foldvary
        Sent: vrijdag 4 januari 2008 16:00
        To: land cafe
        Subject: RE: [LandCafe] Liberty and chaos
         

        > Liberty or freedom alone too easily create chaos
        > Paul Metz 

        If there is chaos, there is violence, and there is no
        liberty, so how does liberty create its opposite?

        Fred Foldvary


      • Paul Metz
        As I wrote, an example - and not the best one. My point remains the superiority of the European Revolution s more balanced triple approach. Paul Metz From:
        Message 3 of 8 , Jan 4, 2008
        • 0 Attachment

          As I wrote, an example - and not the best one.

          My point remains the superiority of the European Revolution's more balanced triple approach.

           

          Paul Metz

           

          From: Peter Bjørn Perlsø [mailto:peter@...]
          Sent: vrijdag 4 januari 2008 17:00
          To: Paul Metz
          Cc: 'land cafe'
          Subject: Re: [LandCafe] Liberty and chaos

           

          Paul,

           

          There is no promotion of freedom in Iraq. What Bush & Co. does is merely the ubiquitous lip service to concepts that have long ago become hollowed-out husks in and by western democracies and their politicians.

           

          Also freedom does not create wealth gaps (and usually not chaos). State-provided privilege does.

           

          Today the states of the world do not secure freedom - they eradicate it, and *always* provides the few with unjust privileges. But I hope nobody disputes that, on this list?

           

          --

          vh, Peter Perlsø - web: http://titancity.com - tel: +45  2685 5909 - Skype: neglesaks

           

          As Michael Lind has written in his Vietnam: The Necessary War (1999), “Communist agriculture could not produce good harvests – but it repeatedly produced bumper crops of the dead.”



           

          On Jan 4, 2008, at 16.44 , Paul Metz wrote:



          Yes, more accurate is " The promotion of liberty alone … ". It is a product of social development, which is difficult to produce and easy to lose. In the European tradition - perhaps also in the US constitution - the connection with equality and brotherhood (or solidarity) seems to contribute to this social development process.

           

          The promotion of freedom by Bush in Iraq is only an example of a narrow-minded approach.

           

          Paul Metz

           

          From: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LandCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fred Foldvary
          Sent: vrijdag 4 januari 2008 16:00
          To: land cafe
          Subject: RE: [LandCafe] Liberty and chaos

           

          > Liberty or freedom alone too easily create chaos
          > Paul Metz 

          If there is chaos, there is violence, and there is no
          liberty, so how does liberty create its opposite?

          Fred Foldvary

           

        • Roy Langston
          ... According to Nationmaster, Switzerland is one of the half-dozen top users of property taxation for government revenue, with about 8% of total government
          Message 4 of 8 , Jan 4, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Bruno Moser wrote:

            >Doubling a 0.015% (yes, it is that ridiculous)
            >property tax to an allowed 0.03% property tax would allow
            >reductions on current income taxes by 20-69%. That's how
            >valuable land is in our Swiss economy.

            According to Nationmaster, Switzerland is one of the
            half-dozen top users of property taxation for government
            revenue, with about 8% of total government revenue (over 3%
            of GDP) coming from property taxes. It doesn't seem
            possible that it could get that much revenue from a 0.015%
            ad valorem tax (even in Japan at the height of the land
            bubble, real estate was not worth worth 200 times GDP!).
            So what is missing in this picture? Is the 0.015% just the
            national property tax, and the cantons or towns also levy
            their own property taxes?

            -- Roy Langston


            Looking for a X-Mas gift? Everybody needs a Flickr Pro Account.



            http://www.flickr.com/gift/
          • bruno moser
            Property taxes are mostly local taxes (so is the income tax). My canton limits the max rate to 1.5 permille. The governor agrees with me that they should
            Message 5 of 8 , Jan 4, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Property taxes are mostly local taxes (so is the income tax).  My canton limits the max rate to  1.5 permille.  The governor agrees with me that they should opt for an unlimited rate (and counsel the municipalities to levy it revenue-neutral only against the land value, which needs to be reassessed and made publicly available).

              But the governors administrators resistance is quite big as they don't like change and like to be the big shots (and always right) as well.  The head tax man is the utmost lunatic, having "proven" me (the claims of LVT) wrong over the last ten years over and over again.  Anyway, the Governor and I are working on it.  Now the tax man delivered the numbers that basically makes him a fool for his repeated attacks against LVT... so we'll see what we can do from here.

              Property in Switzerland also gets taxed as homeowners have to declare a self-rental amount as income, then it gets taxed at whatever (30 so %).  However, then you can deduct  improvements and maintenance and depreciation.  Property is also part of your declared wealth that gets mostly taxed federally.

              But again, if the underlying assessment are fraudulent (and not publicly available) the taxation of real estate is quite a farce as we have seen in Philadelphia.

              Land gets also "taxed" when it's transferred as the cantonal government requires the assistance of a lawyer's office... nice nest work.  Instead of paying a clerk marginal costs one ends up with thousands of dollars transferred to that class of self-declared societal parasites.

              Well, they had 200 years to set it up and two world wars to push it through.  I have challenged the tax department 10 years ago on the grounds that they call up on laws that were passed in 1944... all men were in the ditches, the women working in the house, factories, and fields, and with no voting rights... so what nice people did pass those laws???

              It is like the National Bank (the fed) that was imposed when the globe was busy at a 1st global war with no reason other than oppression and money making interests.

              bruno

              --
              International Land Economics
              Hanoi, Viet Nam
              mobile +84.91.239.7423

              On Jan 5, 2008 9:08 AM, Roy Langston <roy_langston1@...> wrote:

              Bruno Moser wrote:

              >Doubling a 0.015% (yes, it is that ridiculous)
              >property tax to an allowed 0.03% property tax would allow
              >reductions on current income taxes by 20-69%. That's how
              >valuable land is in our Swiss economy.

              According to Nationmaster, Switzerland is one of the
              half-dozen top users of property taxation for government
              revenue, with about 8% of total government revenue (over 3%
              of GDP) coming from property taxes. It doesn't seem
              possible that it could get that much revenue from a 0.015%
              ad valorem tax (even in Japan at the height of the land
              bubble, real estate was not worth worth 200 times GDP!).
              So what is missing in this picture? Is the 0.015% just the
              national property tax, and the cantons or towns also levy
              their own property taxes?

              -- Roy Langston




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