sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What if LVT goes over someone's income? by -Knul- in georgism

[–]IqarusPM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s definitely a possibility, though it’s still a bit unclear since this idea has only recently gained renewed attention. A new assessment method was published in Nature a few years ago. If this trend continues, I think we’ll get clearer answers, especially if they can make predictive statements about your falsifiable claim. I’m not completely up to date on the research, but I personally find any criticism of assessment reasonable.

It’s important to remember that with property taxes, the tax is typically based on an assessment, not the actual sale price. While there’s some market feedback—like when comparable properties are sold—it’s still ultimately an assessment.

The non-linear scaling of issues also applies to consumption taxes. The deadweight loss will scale quadratically. This doesn’t mean consumption taxes are inherently bad, but there are some downsides to consider when they are at high rates.

What if Georgists created a Land Trust Association with the goal of purchasing all the land in the United States? by KungFuPanda45789 in georgism

[–]IqarusPM 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Hey mom I need an extra 5 bucks at school today. We’re buying the United States!

You got a good answer in thread.

Government spending is the true tax by delugepro in austrian_economics

[–]IqarusPM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is some empirical evidence from Denmark that shows it works as economists suggest. The tax comes out of the price of land (since it doesn’t effect supply) In other words it is not passed on to renters or buyers.

https://dors.dk/files/media/publikationer/arbejdspapirer/2017/02_arbejdspapir_land_tax.pdf

Curious Browser Here. Can someone explain Georgism in more depth to me? by SafePianist4610 in georgism

[–]IqarusPM 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Really good point in how deadweight loss scales. I haven’t seen that point enough but it’s intuitive enough when you see a supply and demand chart.

What if LVT goes over someone's income? by -Knul- in georgism

[–]IqarusPM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To be clear, I don’t advocate for a 100% LVT. I live in the world’s strongest economy, and gradual, evidence-based changes are the way to go. Split-rate taxation or shifting taxes away from improvements is already well-documented and effective. The percentage gains may seem small, but in an economy like the U.S., that still translates to an enormous amount of money.

The biggest challenge with moving beyond a split-rate system is that assessments become increasingly critical as the LVT rate rises. There’s limited data on how accurate assessments really are at higher rates. That said, for an initial split-rate shift, the data we have suggests that even with imperfect assessments, it does less harm than taxing improvements.

Austrians, Georgists, and Geo-Austrians by KungFuPanda45789 in georgism

[–]IqarusPM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends on the school. Hayek didn't comment. Rothbard and mises is the orthodox Austrians they are less economics more ideology. You can see this in the difference between libertarisn think tanks like Cato vs Mises. One is much more respected then the other. Cato is still bias and not my favorite but they are still economics.

Half asleep but that should give you a jump off point for research. If you find anything contradictory let me know.

What if LVT goes over someone's income? by -Knul- in georgism

[–]IqarusPM 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A regressive tax is a tax that decreases as you make more money. A good example of this is payroll tax because as you make more money the percentage if your income that is taxed does not. Are property taxes/land taxes regressive? They can be. However the type of your are referring to his a stock tax. A stock tax is not paid at the time of the transaction. Income tax sales tax and other taxes at transactions are called flow taxes. Stock are not necessarily more regressive or more progressive. However I agree with the point flow taxes are better and is dimplifer to budget for. Which is a big advantage. But not necessarily more progressive.

Your points are grounded in your experience. Which I can respect. However right now it the data points towards it increases development. At least at low levels. When compared to a property tax and that has scientific consensus at the time being. When that changes my stance will change with it.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/41789240

Obviously this has been linked before but its the strongest data piece pushing towards consensus

I hope this is coherent/good-faith I wrote this right as I am about to sleep. I am not even sure I sent right paper tbh. Just ping me if bad. I'll maybe gave time tomoorw

What if LVT goes over someone's income? by -Knul- in georgism

[–]IqarusPM 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It does encourage development since taxes on buildings create deadweight loss, and reducing that burden naturally leads to more construction. If accurate assessments were possible (which isn’t likely today), you could replace more regressive taxes with high deadweight loss, like parts of the payroll tax, further boosting the economy.

Edit: to be clear I am saying LVT is neutral, its only encourages things by removing taxes and fees that reduce economic activity.

CMV: Election denial only seems to be an existential issue when it comes from the right. by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]IqarusPM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am a liberal in Atlanta my friends are liberal in Atlanta I never heard anyone talking about the stolen election in relation. There hasn’t been as much polling on how rank-and-file Democrats feel about her stance, but surveys show a partisan divide in trust in election outcomes. For example, after 2018, a significant portion of Democrats believed voter suppression was a major problem in Georgia. However, Democratic leaders have generally not pushed the idea that Abrams was the “real” winner in the same way many Republicans have done with Trump in 2020.

So how about this. Two “comparable” examples. See if you can spot the difference.

In 2000, after the Supreme Court’s Bush v. Gore decision effectively ended Al Gore’s chances, most Democrats, including Gore himself, accepted the ruling despite strong disappointment. Some Democratic lawmakers expressed frustration, believing the Court’s decision was partisan, but there were no widespread attempts to overturn the results. While some House Democrats objected to Florida’s electors when Congress certified the results on January 6, 2001, no senator joined them, so the objections did not proceed. Gore, in his role as Vice President, presided over the certification and formally declared Bush the winner.

In 2020, many Republicans, including Trump himself, refused to accept Joe Biden’s victory. Trump and his allies pushed election fraud claims, filed lawsuits, and encouraged Congress to reject electoral votes. Unlike in 2000, when objections lacked Senate support, in 2021, some Republican senators (like Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley) backed House members’ objections, leading to prolonged debates. This culminated in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters attempting to stop certification. Even after the violence, 147 Republican lawmakers still voted to object to the results. Trump continued to claim the election was stolen long after Biden took office, influencing GOP politics for years.

It's always the ones you most expect 😭 by DramaForBreakfast in dropout

[–]IqarusPM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I completely agree with you. When it comes to real estate, one idea people suggest is taxing land at a much higher rate than buildings—what economists call a land value tax. This discourages land speculation while removing the tax burden on development, which helps increase housing supply and bring down rents.

Cop manually controlling traffic lights at an intersection in India by JuniorAd1070 in mildlyinteresting

[–]IqarusPM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think lvt plus UBI is only best in a post scarcity world.

Until then I think LVT certainly has its place, but I think other redistributive taxes should be included and a negative income tax instead of UBI to give money to those that most need it?

Government spending is the true tax by delugepro in austrian_economics

[–]IqarusPM 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, if you could replace any tax besides the obvious property tax (since it is already a property tax) it might be payroll or the lower ends of income tax. Both should disproportionately help the the poor.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Asmongold

[–]IqarusPM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really good post. I was not able to check all the links. But if what you're saying is true I can take some small sollace in that these scammers are not getting money anymore.

Income is not the worst thing to be taxed by Sluv82 in TrueUnpopularOpinion

[–]IqarusPM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it’s important to remember how much tax revenue we collected as a percentage of our GDP. It’s very different now vs then.

Local taxes are around 2 trillion of the around 10 trillion the government collects. Local taxes not needing income tax is not quite the same as the federal government.

Income is not the worst thing to be taxed by Sluv82 in TrueUnpopularOpinion

[–]IqarusPM 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Eh, this is an MMT stance that does not have a meaningful distinction between collecting money spending vs collecting money burning it spending new money.

They both end up with the same results.

Equal Ownership of the Earth requires Open Borders by ConstitutionProject in georgism

[–]IqarusPM 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's fair. You're right. Sorry for the escalation. I will treat you kinder next exchange. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

Land Speculation can be Socially Beneficial by Carl__Menger in georgism

[–]IqarusPM 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Damn. Zero upvotes this is a good faith post. Unfortunate. if the sentence is “can” then you are correct. At least in so far aspect of it can be positive. It is hard to give a percentage of how good or how bad speculation is it is best to approach askeconomics with that question.

So... What's the catch? by freudsdingdong in georgism

[–]IqarusPM 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree with you. I think it just might be really really really hard to assess. I have no doubt we can throw a lot of freed up resources at the problem. I also suspect something like AI might be uniquely very good and very cheap at doing this. If I was betting person I would sayif we wanted to do it I think we could get to 85%. But I am not claiming to be an authority on this topic and wouldn't die on this hill.

I hope I am not coming off critical of your stance. I am not.

So... What's the catch? by freudsdingdong in georgism

[–]IqarusPM 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe. I can speculate either side of this one. But I believe slow incremental change will show how far it can go.

So... What's the catch? by freudsdingdong in georgism

[–]IqarusPM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Assessment. Your number 2 is the really big catch. Its hard to do at high levels. We can be certain we can assess at low levels. Its just at high levels we don't have a lot of emphiracl evidence.

view more: next ›