🚀 go-pugleaf

royls@telus.net wrote in message news:<4172a67f.1778613@news.telus.net>...
> On 16 Oct 2004 14:48:19 -0700, fbonsignore@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J.
> Bonsignore) wrote:
> 
> >royls@telus.net wrote in message news:<416d8317.13482821@news.telus.net>...
> >> On 12 Oct 2004 23:41:46 -0700, fbonsignore@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J.
> >> Bonsignore) wrote:
> >> 
> >> >royls@telus.net wrote in message news:<4166fb9c.13892742@news.telus.net>...
> >> >> On 7 Oct 2004 17:13:33 -0700, fbonsignore@beethoven.com (Fabrizio J.
> >> >> Bonsignore) wrote:
> >> >>   
> >> >> >I proposed a policy to handle land ownership with the purpose of
> >> >> >evening out wealth distribution, on the assumption that for families
> >> >> >owning a place to live is better than renting.
> >> >> 
> >> >> The problem is, your solution does not socialize land rent.  It
> >> >> socializes improvements.  It punishes and robs those who have
> >> >> contributed to the wealth of the community by constructing
> >> >> improvements where others live, while leaving the vast non-residential
> >> >> landholdings of the idle rich untouched.  It is a Band-Aid solution
> >> >> that would undoubtedly make the problem worse in the long run, not
> >> >> least by providing a convenient example of "failed land reform."
> >> >> 
> >> >Except that most rented housing had been depreciated and is own by
> >> >financially stable, rich people who didn`t pay the construction but
> >> >only bought the property to have an easy income, while paying very
> >> >small land taxes.
> >> 
> >> But taxing away the land rent rather than confiscating the
> >> improvements would give them an incentive to invest more in
> >> improvements, rather than punishing whatever investment in
> >> improvements they had already made.
> >> 
> >The improvements were very likely amortized long ago.
> 
> Some were, some weren't.  You propose to confiscate all.
> 
> >I am talking an
> >underdeveloped economy where construction drags along as most of the
> >economy...
> 
> How much will it drag when you start confiscating improvements?
> 
> >> >Tell the last to the families that suddenly would
> >> >have life stability plus additional disposable income to cover those
> >> >expenses they have been avoiding for lack of sufficient income.
> >> 
> >> They'd have more disposable income and better accommodation as well as
> >> life stability if the land rent were taxed.
> >> 
> >Instead of income? Might be... but you assume that income is related
> >to the value of the property's land.
> 
> No, I do not.
> 
> -- Roy L

How do you tax a vertical condominium based on land?