How the Rentier Class Cannibalizes the Economy

[MavsSuperFan]

[QUOTE=K

[K]

So if you are so against renting, how do you propose poor people obtain housing? Should they just live on the street?

How do you propose people who rent space for their commercial business get space otherwise? Eg. restaurants, beauty parlors, etc.

Edit: and actually respond in your own words please, and not just a text wall you found on the internet.

Sigh, you're creating a straw man (I also think you have some confusion with 'rent' which has a different meaning in economics. That may be my fault.)
Anyways, for now I'll just answer your question (although I think I've explained it before):

Think of a car. The car manufacturer produces a car and then you pay for the car. Win win. The problem is, when you put a building somewhere, you not only charge for the building, but, because it's a fixed improvement, you also charge for the land below it, which you did not provide or produce. You impose a deprivation on everyone else and then demand to get paid for it. Furthermore, the reason land has value, and the reason you are able to charge as much as you do for it, is because others make it so valuable: The population around it, the infrastructure around it, the services around it, and so on and so forth. The public has created this value, not you. What I want to do is make the real estate market a win win market just like car manufacturing. You provide/produce a building, you get paid for the building, but NOT for the land. The way you do that is not by forbidding people to collect rent, but by implementing the land value tax. This will funnel what you get paid for the land to be used as tax revenue. Then you get rid of the income tax, the sales tax, and a plethora of other harmful taxes.

Think of this for a second: You're a middle class worker and you pay income tax, sales tax, etc. Then the government taxes you on that productive activity and spends it on infrastructure and services, which makes land more valuable in locations where those are available, and then you have to PAY AGAIN for the same stuff when you pay a landowner for land (whether you pay it periodically as part of a lease agreement or pay it upfront as part of a purchase.) The government squeezing the productive to subsidize landowners is unjust, unfair, oppressive, and I'm sure I could find plenty of other words to describe it.

And, remember, I'm ONLY referring to what's paid for the land, NOT what's paid for the building. Please stop making the claim that I'm opposed to people collecting rent, or other claims along those lines. You should get paid for any buildings you provide just like a car manufacturer gets paid for the cars he provides. I just want to turn the real estate market into a purely productive market instead of an extract as much publicly created value as possible while contributing as little as possible market.

[K]

Can't let this thread die. Gotta spread the truth. Instead of taxing productive economic activity, we could base all taxes on economic rent instead. Land value (by far the most important), natural resource value (still in the ground, not the product of labor at the pump), electromagnetic spectrum, and so on. Just tax the pure economic rent of things in perfectly inelastic supply. Get rid of the damn income tax, get rid of the damn sales tax, get rid of the damn VAT, get rid of the damn improvement portion in the property tax, and so on. We could have completely burden free production with wealth distributed according to productive contributions to the economy. Overall prosperity would skyrocket and we would have much less wealth inequality (Though addressing wealth inequality is not the point of such a tax system, justice is, it just happens to be that injustice is what caused the wealth inequality.).

[K]

Bump.

[MavsSuperFan]

[QUOTE=K

[DCL]

everyone's opinions probably depends on what stage they're in.

i'm out of the renter class, so my personal interests are not in line with renters now. in fact, i actually hope rent can go up as high as possible forever while everything else remains the same, but that's not in my control.

right now, the top 1% owns about 40% or 50% of the wealth. i'm not getting what the very top are getting, but i'm not complaining much yet because i'm still getting some of the pie, however small it is. capitalism is great. capitalism is justice. blah blah blah...

but okay, what if the trend continues and the top 1% starts to own 90% of the wealth and my portion becomes didly squat?

or worse, it hits 99% of the wealth??

i'm sure by that point i would had already said FU(K this capitalism bullshit, we need to socialize this shit! lol

[gigantes]

just came across this...