- 08 Apr 2015 00:24
#14544918
The old one is in a better location, and has been updated, repaired, and restored. The recent investments in improvements also have value, which
will over time depreciate.
Evidence? Of course not.
No:
?? It's a frickin' MUSEUM!!
http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/quarry-bank/
It's owned by the National Trust, and has benefited from enormous expenditures on restoration. When you spend money on restoration, repairs, etc., that subsequent investment in improvements ALSO starts at its full value, then depreciates. Duh.
Context chopping again, I see....
I already told you how fair and beneficial revenue sources could raise about 30% of GDP:
First, there is all the commercial, industrial and agricultural land to charge LVT on, and which gets no UIE. That's nearly 10% of GDP right there, added to the 13.3% from residential land. Then there are natural resources in addition to locations that can be taxed, such as broadcast spectrum, oil and other mineral resources, forests, etc. [i]These could raise a few to several percent of GDP, depending on the country. I also advocate removing private banksters' privilege of issuing money, and using the seigniorage from government money issue as a source of public revenue. That could raise a few percent of GDP without inflation in the kind of rapidly growing economy LVT would make possible. I also advocate Pigovian taxes on things like industrial pollution, alcohol, tobacco, and currently illegal drugs, which should be legalized and taxed. Call it another few percent of GDP. The total revenue is then near 30% of GDP, enough to fund a government that is not spending most of its revenue trying to undo the harm caused by unjust and economically destructive taxes.[/i]
Remember? And as already explained, removing the burden of unjust taxes increases potential LVT revenue even more. By 5% of GDP? 10%? 20%? We won't know until we do it.
Oops, you're makin' $#!+ up again, as proved above.
I am definitely going to cut the welfare subsidies to rich, greedy takers.
Private pensions?? What on earth do you erroneously imagine they could have to do with public revenue?
And transfer 10% of GDP to medical rent seekers. I can cut healthcare and improve health outcomes by SHUTTING THE RENTIERS OUT.
What on earth do you erroneously imagine private school fees could have to do with public revenue?
Yep. Half the median land value used is enough to secure access to economic opportunity. Remember, the economic action happens at the margin.
So many errors, so little time...
There is no "boss" class screwing the workers. Managers are also workers, and except for a tiny minority at the very top, they are typically not taking more than they contribute. There is a RENTIER class (including the grossly overpaid CEOs) that IS taking more than it contributes, and the revolution I propose to get them off the backs of the workers is the real revolution, the revolution that all the other revolutions should have been, and the revolution that will make all the future revolutions unnecessary.
They obviously don't understand tax incidence, nor do they understand how those transfers are taken by landowners. Think: how is it possible for those people to get so much transferred to them and still stay poor? Obviously, it's all being taken away again. Stopping that is more than just a "tweak."
Truth to Power wrote: so it isn't worth anything.
ingliz wrote:2 bedroom 17th Century cottage: £325,000
New build two bedroom cottage: £325,000
The old one is in a better location, and has been updated, repaired, and restored. The recent investments in improvements also have value, which
will over time depreciate.
on how much valuable land?
Same price, same area, same amount of valuable land.
Evidence? Of course not.
No.
Yes
No:
Quarry Bank Mill and Styal Estate, Cheshire is still a working Cotton Mill producing over 9,000m (10,000 yards) of cloth each year.
?? It's a frickin' MUSEUM!!
http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/quarry-bank/
It's owned by the National Trust, and has benefited from enormous expenditures on restoration. When you spend money on restoration, repairs, etc., that subsequent investment in improvements ALSO starts at its full value, then depreciates. Duh.
you "forgot"
Truth to Power wrote:These could raise a few to several percent of GDP
£330billion + 4% GDP = £394 billion
Context chopping again, I see....
I already told you how fair and beneficial revenue sources could raise about 30% of GDP:
First, there is all the commercial, industrial and agricultural land to charge LVT on, and which gets no UIE. That's nearly 10% of GDP right there, added to the 13.3% from residential land. Then there are natural resources in addition to locations that can be taxed, such as broadcast spectrum, oil and other mineral resources, forests, etc. [i]These could raise a few to several percent of GDP, depending on the country. I also advocate removing private banksters' privilege of issuing money, and using the seigniorage from government money issue as a source of public revenue. That could raise a few percent of GDP without inflation in the kind of rapidly growing economy LVT would make possible. I also advocate Pigovian taxes on things like industrial pollution, alcohol, tobacco, and currently illegal drugs, which should be legalized and taxed. Call it another few percent of GDP. The total revenue is then near 30% of GDP, enough to fund a government that is not spending most of its revenue trying to undo the harm caused by unjust and economically destructive taxes.[/i]
Remember? And as already explained, removing the burden of unjust taxes increases potential LVT revenue even more. By 5% of GDP? 10%? 20%? We won't know until we do it.
Pensions: £154.7 billion
Healthcare: Central £131.8 billion; Local £3.3 billion
Education: Central £43.4 billion; Local £48.6 billion
Oops, no money left.
Oops, you're makin' $#!+ up again, as proved above.
Of course, you could always cut.
I am definitely going to cut the welfare subsidies to rich, greedy takers.
Truth to Power wrote:Personally, I don't think pensions should be designed to maintain the standard of living people had when they were working, and the most generous ones should be cut quite a lot.
Cut pensions - Hidden pension charges on private pensions can almost halve the value of people’s retirement saving
Private pensions?? What on earth do you erroneously imagine they could have to do with public revenue?
Cut healthcare - Medical bills cause 62 percent of bankruptcies in the US.
And transfer 10% of GDP to medical rent seekers. I can cut healthcare and improve health outcomes by SHUTTING THE RENTIERS OUT.
Cut education - Average private school fees are now more than minimum wage.
What on earth do you erroneously imagine private school fees could have to do with public revenue?
which the UIE ends.
£834 p.a.?
Yep. Half the median land value used is enough to secure access to economic opportunity. Remember, the economic action happens at the margin.
For a guy who preaches proletarian revolution, suddenly you're awfully sensitive to civil disorder
Your tweaking of the system so the boss class can screw the workers more efficiently is not a revolution.
So many errors, so little time...
There is no "boss" class screwing the workers. Managers are also workers, and except for a tiny minority at the very top, they are typically not taking more than they contribute. There is a RENTIER class (including the grossly overpaid CEOs) that IS taking more than it contributes, and the revolution I propose to get them off the backs of the workers is the real revolution, the revolution that all the other revolutions should have been, and the revolution that will make all the future revolutions unnecessary.
No, that's false and absurd, and has no basis in fact
According to the Centre for Policy Studies, in the year 2010/2011 taxes less transfers as a proportion of original income were minus 211 percent for the lowest quintile, minus 85 percent for the second lowest quintile and minus 23 percent for the middle quintile.
They obviously don't understand tax incidence, nor do they understand how those transfers are taken by landowners. Think: how is it possible for those people to get so much transferred to them and still stay poor? Obviously, it's all being taken away again. Stopping that is more than just a "tweak."