🚀 go-pugleaf

On 28 Oct 2004 02:51:56 -0700, fbonsignore@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J.
Bonsignore) wrote:

>royls@telus.net wrote in message news:<4176fbaa.29885183@news.telus.net>...
>> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:15:31 -0400, Tiny Human Ferret
>> <ixnayamspay_klaatu@earthops.net> wrote:
>> 
>> >royls@telus.net wrote:
>> >> On 18 Oct 2004 08:27:30 -0700, fbonsignore@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J.
>> >> Bonsignore) wrote:
>> >> 
>> >>>How do you tax a vertical condominium based on land?
>> >> 
>> >> You tax the value the property would have if the vertical condominium
>> >> were not there.
>> >
>> >You don't tax it based on land, you tax a percentage of the landlord's 
>> >receipts if it's rental, you tax a percentage of the fair market value 
>> >if it's owned.
>> 
>> Right, if you want a tax system about as bad as the current one, which
>> does not tax based on land.
>
>And you still don`t understand: MOST people in the world DO NOT OWN
>LAND.

I know that very well.  What of it?

>What you mean is to make landowners pay the rent of EVERYBODY.

_You_ still don't understand: landowners are currently privileged to
collect land rent that _they_do_not_produce_ in addition to the
payment for use of improvements which they do produce.  Taxing the
land rent portion away would leave them in a neutral position: they
would collect payments for _both_ land and improvements, and remit the
land rent portion to government, keeping the payments for use of the
improvements (which is what they contribute).

>Which is, perhaps, the most socialist tax scheme ever.

You need a better dictionary.

-- Roy L