Quote from: Hawker on March 31, 2014, 03:56:23 PM

Quote from: Khadaji on March 31, 2014, 03:52:31 PM

Quote from: Hawker on March 31, 2014, 03:49:52 PM

Quote from: Khadaji on March 31, 2014, 03:11:11 PM

Quote from: Hawker on March 31, 2014, 06:45:23 AM

Quote from: Khadaji on March 31, 2014, 01:09:13 AM

Quote from: countryfree on March 31, 2014, 12:31:14 AM

Quote from: Khadaji on March 28, 2014, 08:57:31 PM

Quote from: Hawker on March 28, 2014, 08:30:08 PM

Quote from: Khadaji on March 28, 2014, 07:15:26 PM

Quote from: Hawker on March 28, 2014, 07:06:19 PM

Google "straw man" - I never proposed a progressive taxation system so need not defend one.

If you have no interest in taxing a millionaire at a higher rate than you do his janitor, then we agree.

I would not tax either of them a penny on their wealth or income. The one with more property will pay more tax and if it happens to be the millionaire, he will reduce the wage he pays his janitor. Call it trickle down taxation.

The important thing is that both are encouraged to employ their assets and there is no penalty for success.

If you are only taxing those who own property, then you're intentionally pushing people into renting rather than ownership.

Don't worry about that. Owning a property is appealing. When you reach a certain age, you want to own the place you're staying in. The young can hesitate between the two, most old folks are property owners. Buying a home is also one the best investment a man can make. You just have to avoid the cities where property tax is high.

What you encourage, you get more of, what you punish, you get less of.

A property tax is paid whether you are a tenant or an owner as its reflected in the rents.

If the property tax is not paid, who goes to jail?

The person who owes the tax. So what? If a sales tax is not paid, who goes to jail?

This admission illustrates who pays property tax. It's not the renter.

You are being childish. A sales tax is paid by the seller but the costs are born by the buyer. A resource tax is paid by the owner but the costs are born by the consumer.

I'm merely pointing out facts.

A renter does not pay the property owner's tax. Quite clearly, an owner has to take taxes into account, as well as property maintenance & upkeep, but it's silly to state that the *RENTER* is responsible for these costs.

Quote from: Hawker on March 31, 2014, 03:56:23 PM

I'm not sure there is more to say in this thread. You are in favour of a bigger state with a collection agency that can monitor citizens and hunt then down for unreported sales transactions.

This was already dealt with. Most countries have sales tax. The bureaucracy needed for property tax wouldn't be dramatically different from that needed for sales tax.

And, as sales tax is more equally divided between people, it would present less of a burden.

Quote from: Hawker on March 31, 2014, 03:56:23 PM

You aren't going to change you mind since nothing we say can make a resource tax require the large collection force you envisage.

Facts would be nice. A better argument would certainly help. I'm not tied to this opinion.

Quote from: Hawker on March 31, 2014, 03:56:23 PM

The plurality of votes here is for a resource tax that can be run by the land registration office."

Methinks that you overstate the importance of 12 people. That is, after all - the number of votes currently existing for a property tax. And were you to quiz those 12 people, chances are good that at least some of them voted for more than just the property tax.

Quote from: Hawker on March 31, 2014, 03:56:23 PM

Good luck with persuading people in this forum to join your ideal of increasing government size and adding to policing the public.

Still beating that strawman, eh?