chaz wyman wrote:So a millionaire living in a swanky apartment in the city centre would pay a tiny fraction of the cost that a poor farmer would have to fork out on his scrubland, in the hinterlands?
Depends if this millionaire owned any land I'd guess. This farmer would probably have to pay less tax than he does now as its "scrubland, in the hinterlands" so I'd guess it'd depend upon how its valued and I assume he'd not be paying other taxes. Not saying its perfect tax system as there isn't one I think but we could combine it with a low wealth tax I guess. Just thinking of different approaches to the diabolical systems we have now.
It just struck me that owing land - does not relate to the ability to pay, which would always be my chief criterion.
I am horrified as to how easy it has been for VAT to be invented, introduced, extended and increased in my own lifetime to a rate where it now matches PAYE. This FLAT tax has been a boon for the higher paid and a bane for poor people.
When it was first introduced, it was designed as a special luxury tax, in a time of austerity and only counted on things such as colour TVs.
chaz wyman wrote:So a millionaire living in a swanky apartment in the city centre would pay a tiny fraction of the cost that a poor farmer would have to fork out on his scrubland, in the hinterlands?
Depends if this millionaire owned any land I'd guess. This farmer would probably have to pay less tax than he does now as its "scrubland, in the hinterlands" so I'd guess it'd depend upon how its valued and I assume he'd not be paying other taxes. Not saying its perfect tax system as there isn't one I think but we could combine it with a low wealth tax I guess. Just thinking of different approaches to the diabolical systems we have now.
It just struck me that owing land - does not relate to the ability to pay, which would always be my chief criterion.
I am horrified as to how easy it has been for VAT to be invented, introduced, extended and increased in my own lifetime to a rate where it now matches PAYE. This FLAT tax has been a boon for the higher paid and a bane for poor people.
When it was first introduced, it was designed as a special luxury tax, in a time of austerity and only counted on things such as colour TVs.
What if you inherit land that you could not afford to own otherwise? are only the rich allowed to own land? I already think the council tax system is one of the least fair forms and that is a form of land tax. Where you live has no relation to your ability to pay x
hello Dawn, thanks. i'm not an 'organizer' type of person, but because of the way things are, i have spent a majority of my life trying to solve these things, including what your thread is about. although i am about on the street myself, somehow i think i've found a way to end current homelessness in a few years. and then find a way to prevent it. i do believe i've found some peaceful ways that could slowly start turning america around as well. it will require alot. and then to dedicate to that your entire life, to not even know if it will happen, and even if it does, should've it been bothered with anyway.
yes i think they can be combined but the only way you can combine then is by putting a limit on peoples wages and You what a company can earn. You would also need your energy to be mostly green energy and such would proved cheaper energy. You would also need the government own alot of the main elements needed for basic living. for example all the electricity supply, banks ,supermarket chain , education, transportation. You would run each company to make small profit set a limit. Then all profit would be put back into health care and education development and transportation companies would pay for the roads and other needs for transport.
So that the main companies you buy off for your basic needs would go to the government and would go back into helping the community.
And so creating a more equal wage throughout society and would spread the wealth around.
By limiting peoples wages i mean say anyone who earns over 100,000 get 100 % tax rate for everything earned over 100,000 but also making a minimum wage.
Set these companies up as a new type of company that mean they can't be sold by the government and all profits must go back into the system towards eduaction and health. So in this way the farmer gets fair price for his crops and meat and consumer gets fair price for their food.
then the luxury items and other services would be for private businesses.
Also this would reduce the amount of tax needed to be paid by each individual and would stop the unbalanced spread of wealth.
Arising_uk wrote:Depends if this millionaire owned any land I'd guess. This farmer would probably have to pay less tax than he does now as its "scrubland, in the hinterlands" so I'd guess it'd depend upon how its valued and I assume he'd not be paying other taxes. Not saying its perfect tax system as there isn't one I think but we could combine it with a low wealth tax I guess. Just thinking of different approaches to the diabolical systems we have now.
It just struck me that owing land - does not relate to the ability to pay, which would always be my chief criterion.
I am horrified as to how easy it has been for VAT to be invented, introduced, extended and increased in my own lifetime to a rate where it now matches PAYE. This FLAT tax has been a boon for the higher paid and a bane for poor people.
When it was first introduced, it was designed as a special luxury tax, in a time of austerity and only counted on things such as colour TVs.
What if you inherit land that you could not afford to own otherwise? are only the rich allowed to own land? I already think the council tax system is one of the least fair forms and that is a form of land tax. Where you live has no relation to your ability to pay x
If you are poor you can get help with it. If you are unemployed you don't pay at all.
How is it relevant to the FLAT TAX VAT, for which we all pay double, and it completely indiscriminate?
the_irish_man wrote:yes i think they can be combined but the only way you can combine then is by putting a limit on peoples wages and You what a company can earn. You would also need your energy to be mostly green energy and such would proved cheaper energy. You would also need the government own alot of the main elements needed for basic living. for example all the electricity supply, banks ,supermarket chain , education, transportation. You would run each company to make small profit set a limit. Then all profit would be put back into health care and education development and transportation companies would pay for the roads and other needs for transport.
So that the main companies you buy off for your basic needs would go to the government and would go back into helping the community.
And so creating a more equal wage throughout society and would spread the wealth around.
By limiting peoples wages i mean say anyone who earns over 100,000 get 100 % tax rate for everything earned over 100,000 but also making a minimum wage.
This would only work in a place where it was illegal to leave the country, unless it could be pushed forward as a Universal tax- dream on. Already places like Switzerland and Monaco are havens for those wishing to avoid taxation.
I think 100k is a little low BTW.
bobevenson wrote:Can capitalism and communism be combined? Of couse, just like oil and water, but you have to shake the hell out of it, and eventually they separate.
Dah, no. The more you shake the more they combine, and you get emulsion.
the_irish_man wrote:yes i think they can be combined but the only way you can combine then is by putting a limit on peoples wages and You what a company can earn. You would also need your energy to be mostly green energy and such would proved cheaper energy. You would also need the government own alot of the main elements needed for basic living. for example all the electricity supply, banks ,supermarket chain , education, transportation. You would run each company to make small profit set a limit. Then all profit would be put back into health care and education development and transportation companies would pay for the roads and other needs for transport.
So that the main companies you buy off for your basic needs would go to the government and would go back into helping the community.
And so creating a more equal wage throughout society and would spread the wealth around.
By limiting peoples wages i mean say anyone who earns over 100,000 get 100 % tax rate for everything earned over 100,000 but also making a minimum wage.
This would only work in a place where it was illegal to leave the country, unless it could be pushed forward as a Universal tax- dream on. Already places like Switzerland and Monaco are havens for those wishing to avoid taxation.
I think 100k is a little low BTW.
bobevenson wrote:Can capitalism and communism be combined? Of couse, just like oil and water, but you have to shake the hell out of it, and eventually they separate.
Dah, no. The more you shake the more they combine, and you get emulsion.
Sorry, let me clarify my statement. You can shake oil and water until the cows come home, but they will never combine, remaining in an acrimonious colloidal suspension, just like capitalism and communism.
bobevenson wrote:Can capitalism and communism be combined? Of couse, just like oil and water, but you have to shake the hell out of it, and eventually they separate.
Dah, no. The more you shake the more they combine, and you get emulsion.
Sorry, let me clarify my statement. You can shake oil and water until the cows come home, but they will never combine, remaining in an acrimonious colloidal suspension, just like capitalism and communism.
