View Poll Results: Do you support the Fair Tax?

Voters
63. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes

    39 61.90%
  • no

    19 30.16%
  • other

    5 7.94%
Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910
Results 91 to 100 of 100

Thread: The Fair Tax

  1. #91
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: The Fair Tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    One must remember that we are only talking about collecting site rent and ground rent,
    No.

    You need to learn that we're discussing taxes, not rents. If you insist on calling them rents then you must accept that owners collect rents from tenants.

    And therefore you are not discussing the benefits of private ownership of property, but socialism.

  2. #92
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    04-04-14 @ 01:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,233

    Re: The Fair Tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    No.

    You need to learn that we're discussing taxes, not rents. If you insist on calling them rents then you must accept that owners collect rents from tenants.

    And therefore you are not discussing the benefits of private ownership of property, but socialism.
    Do you even know what ground rent is?
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  3. #93
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    04-04-14 @ 01:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,233

    Re: The Fair Tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Why the hell would you ask me, did I say I supported this "Fair tax" nonsense?

    No, I did not. I support a national point-of-retail-sale tax.
    Much the same thing within the context of our argument. And you dare to accuse me of wanting serfdom.


    So? That means it's an extraordinary property tax.

    The last two words are the important two words.
    Not an argument.

    And introduces ALL the problems associated with state-granted land tenure, which is different from serfdom only in the present quality of modern technological life.
    State-land tenure is the current system. I'm talking of alleviating its ills.
    Are you aware that the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the owners of the land, municipalities and other levels of government, can evict tenants from their land to reassign tenantship to other private parties promising a greater return on the owner's land than the current tenants?

    Naturally, the court approving such nonsense didn't describe it like that, but that is the effect of the Kelo vs New London decision.

    The worst attribute of serfdom, forcible eviction.
    Irrelevant to our discussion.

    I understand what I'm talking about. Since you refuse to acknowledge the reality of the feudalist society you're demanding, it's clear you don't understand what you're talking about and it's clear you don't understand what I'm talking about.
    Not an argument.

    Right. The owner doesn't own the property, he's just a tenant.
    He does not own the site rent and ground rent. He owns the rest. He is not a tenant.


    Oh. So you're saying that the tenant subletting his lease from the government to other tenants is prohibited by law from increasing the rents he is collecting to cover the cost of rent the owner is imposing on his own lease.

    Why would the owner of the land care who pays the rent so long as it's paid?
    Did you even read what I wrote and quoted? He cannot move the burden because of the situation of the supply of land relative to the demand and [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricardian_rent"]how rent is determined[/ame].

    File:Perfectly inelastic supply.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



    The "law of Rent states that the rent of a land site is equal to the economic advantage obtained by using the site in its most productive use, relative to the advantage obtained by using marginal (i.e., the best rent-free) land for the same purpose, given the same inputs of labor and capital." Therefore by raising the rent to get around this burden all the landlord does is increase the ground and site rent which is collected and gets no benefit.

    Property taxes are property taxes and their existence makes the putative owner of the land a tenant.
    Not an argument. As he is in complete control of everything but the ground and site rent which he did not create. Unlike your system where is labour is partly the states'.


    That's a damn foolish statement. Whenever the cost of goods sold begins to increase, in this case via increases in the rents the government is demanding of it's serfs, the seller of the goods, the lessor subleasing living space to residential tenants for example, will accordingly raise the cost of his sublease to those tenants.
    You really don't understand this at all do you? The ground and site rent is already being collected by the landlord, this is simply collecting that and giving it to the community. The landlord cannot shift the burden because as Ricardo showed, and Smith in that quote alludes to, the rate of ground rent and site rent is determined by the difference between the land in question from that on the margins of usage. If the landlord raises the ground rent, that is collected.

    Funny watching a socialist quote Adam Smith.
    You do know I'm one of the most conservative posters on this board right? Far more so than you.

    And I at least understand and have read Smith.

    Try discussing what you're told. Since the government imposes the tax, enforcable by rude men with weapons, the government arrogates the ownership of the land and relegates the would-be owner to the status of lessor.

    Can you accept this, or not?

    If you can't accept this simple and undeniable truth, what's your purpose?
    Not an argument.
    Last edited by Wessexman; 06-03-09 at 10:32 PM.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  4. #94
    User
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    06-05-09 @ 05:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    12

    Re: The Fair Tax

    People would save more and spend less! I'm for it over the current system.
    Wouldn't a Flat tax for everyone be better?

  5. #95
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: The Fair Tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    Do you even know what ground rent is?
    Yes, it's a tax imposed by the government on the tenants it allows to hold title to the land.

  6. #96
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: The Fair Tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    Much the same thing within the context of our argument. And you dare to accuse me of wanting serfdom.
    What do you call it when you see someone demanding that the owners of property be converted into tenants on a national scale?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    State-land tenure is the current system. I'm talking of alleviating its ills.
    Are no ills.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    The "law of Rent states that the rent of a land site is equal to the economic advantage obtained by using the site in its most productive use, relative to the advantage obtained by using marginal (i.e., the best rent-free) land for the same purpose, given the same inputs of labor and capital." Therefore by raising the rent to get around this burden all the landlord does is increase the ground and site rent which is collected and gets no benefit.
    In other words, you're using someone else's doublespeak to babble around the fact that the operators of a business will increase the price of their good or product to compensate for increases in the cost of running that business.

    Raise the TAX on a property, and the people liable to pay that tax will pass that cost on to anyone seeking to use that property, unless they themselves are occupying that land for non-commercial purposes, in which case they themselves have to pay out of their own pocket.

    If the feudal lord raises the TAX on that land to the point where the non-commercial occupants can no longer afford to pay that tax, they either abandon the property or are evicted. Just like in the feudal days of yore.

    This is what you're advocating, doesn't matter if you pretend your "land rent" isn't a "tax".

    Taxing property in that fashion converts the citizen owner into the serf.

    You want to lie to yourself and pretend otherwise, that's fine.

    Do not expect us to play along with you.

  7. #97
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    04-04-14 @ 01:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,233

    Re: The Fair Tax

    Right, I'm sick of this silliness, let's wrap it up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Yes, it's a tax imposed by the government on the tenants it allows to hold title to the land.
    Not an argument; an assertion that reveals ignorance of the entire conception.

    What do you call it when you see someone demanding that the owners of property be converted into tenants on a national scale?
    Not an argument.

    Are no ills.
    Already dealt with. Not an argument.

    In other words, you're using someone else's doublespeak to babble around the fact that the operators of a business will increase the price of their good or product to compensate for increases in the cost of running that business.

    Raise the TAX on a property, and the people liable to pay that tax will pass that cost on to anyone seeking to use that property, unless they themselves are occupying that land for non-commercial purposes, in which case they themselves have to pay out of their own pocket.

    If the feudal lord raises the TAX on that land to the point where the non-commercial occupants can no longer afford to pay that tax, they either abandon the property or are evicted. Just like in the feudal days of yore.

    This is what you're advocating, doesn't matter if you pretend your "land rent" isn't a "tax".

    Taxing property in that fashion converts the citizen owner into the serf.

    You want to lie to yourself and pretend otherwise, that's fine.

    Do not expect us to play along with you.
    In other words you are taking no notice at all of what I'm saying or even trying to debate in a mature, intelligent way. None of the above is relevant or much of an argument. I've proved my points, you have not.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  8. #98
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: The Fair Tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    Right, I'm sick of this silliness, let's wrap it up.



    Not an argument; an assertion that reveals ignorance of the entire conception.
    Not supposed to be an argument. It's a reassignment of definitions so people silly enough to think calling a tax a "rent" will alter the fact that it really is a rent can't escape what it is that being discussed, namely the imposition of feudalism on formerly free people.

    You failed to understand that basic concept and hence have been biting yourself in the forehead all this time.

  9. #99
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    04-04-14 @ 01:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,233

    Re: The Fair Tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Not supposed to be an argument.
    Then it carries little weight.

    It's a reassignment of definitions so people silly enough to think calling a tax a "rent" will alter the fact that it really is a rent can't escape what it is that being discussed, namely the imposition of feudalism on formerly free people.

    You failed to understand that basic concept and hence have been biting yourself in the forehead all this time.
    Not an argument. Do you have anything that properly addresses my points? Or are you to continue to evade them?
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  10. #100
    User
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    08-19-09 @ 11:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    62

    Re: The Fair Tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Whether I would support it or not would depend in part on the rate. I've heard rates quoted at more than .35 cents on the dollar... this I would not support.
    The rate is 23%. It is calculated like this: For a $100 item, $23 goes to the government, $77 goes to the store. Simple as that.

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •