Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Turner should pay society for the governments protection of his exclusive use of land and TV spectrum's.
What makes you think he doesn't? Turner pays taxes and fees in proportion to what he owns. He's not getting federal government services for free like the 47% of American households that pay no federal income tax.
What makes you think he doesn't? Turner pays taxes and fees in proportion to what he owns. He's not getting federal government services for free like the 47% of American households that pay no federal income tax.
We don't have a land value tax, some areas have a very small property tax. Property taxes are usually heaviest on improved, not unimproved land.
He is hoarding a million acres from the rest of society, all because he was able to buy it from ancestors who were given it by government after it was taken.
We should eliminate all income, payroll, corporate, sales and other taxes and just have a single tax on government granted and protected privilege.
We don't have a land value tax, some areas have a very small property tax. Property taxes are usually heaviest on improved, not unimproved land.
Not necessarily. Property is taxed on its value, as any tax assessor knows. If the value is high due to the presence of recoverable natural resources, the property tax will be high.
Quote:
He is hoarding a million acres from the rest of society
Make him an acceptable offer, and he'll sell it to you. He's not hoarding anything. He's acquired it the same way you or anyone else can - work your butt off to earn the means to acquire what you wish to own.
Not necessarily. Property is taxed on its value, as any tax assessor knows. If the value is high due to the presence of recoverable natural resources, the property tax will be high.
Make him an acceptable offer, and he'll sell it to you. He's not hoarding anything. He's acquired it the same way you or anyone else can - work your butt off to earn the means to acquire what you wish to own.
Look at your property tax bill, the tax on home is higher than land. The home tax should be eliminated.
He has used public airwaves for little cost to enrich himself, plus the more land you buy the higher the rest of the prices go, why would I want to buy artificially inflated land? Plus he has wisely picked areas where the government buys land around his, driving up the value even more.
We got rid of royalty for just such a thing.
You really need to read Progress and Poverty if you thinking our Federal Reserve Controlled, privileged elite system is easy to compete with by getting a job. A Synopsis of Henry George's "Progress & Poverty"
A right of property in movable things is admitted before the establishment of government. A separate property in lands not till after that establishment.... He who plants a field keeps possession of it till he has gathered the produce, after which one has as good a right as another to occupy it. Government must be established and laws provided, before lands can be separately appropriated and their owner protected in his possession. Till then the property is in the body of the nation. [RIGHT]--Thomas Jefferson
AFTER conquest and confiscation have been effected, and the State set up, its first concern is with the land.... In its capacity as ultimate landlord, the State distributes the land among its beneficiaries on its own terms.
--Albert J. Nock, Our Enemy the State
[/RIGHT]
Men did not make the earth.... It is the value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property.... Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds. [RIGHT]--Tom Paine, "Agrarian Justice," paragraphs 11 to 15
[/RIGHT]
Ground rents are a species of revenue which the owner, in many cases, enjoys without any care or attention of his own. Ground rents are, therefore, perhaps a species of revenue which can best bear to have a peculiar tax imposed upon them. [RIGHT]--Adam Smith[/RIGHT]
Landlords grow richer in their sleep, without working, risking, or economizing. The increase in the value of land, arising as it does from the efforts of an entire community, should belong to the community and not to the individual who might hold title. [RIGHT]--John Stuart Mill
Look at your property tax bill, the tax on home is higher than land.
Actually, it's not. The assessed value of my land is higher than the assessed value of the building. Land is valued very highly where I live.
Quote:
He has used public airwaves for little cost to enrich himself
What about broadcast licensing fees do you not understand? If he uses the airwaves, he pays. The cost can run into millions of dollars.
Quote:
You really need to read Progress and Poverty if you thinking our Federal Reserve Controlled, privileged elite system is easy to compete with by getting a job.
Hmmm... and yet, that's exactly how Turner started out. Worked a job, and leveraged an inheritance that was MUCH smaller than his current net worth.
In fact, 68.5% of the Forbes 400 richest Americans are self-made. They earned their wealth. If they can do it, why can't others?
Actually, it's not. The assessed value of my land is higher than the assessed value of the building. Land is valued very highly where I live.
What about broadcast licensing fees do you not understand? If he uses the airwaves, he pays. The cost can run into millions of dollars.
Hmmm... and yet, that's exactly how Turner started out. Worked a job, and leveraged an inheritance that was MUCH smaller than his current net worth.
In fact, 68.5% of the Forbes 400 richest Americans are self-made. They earned their wealth. If they can do it, why can't others?
Broadcast license fees were very low for decades, HDTV was way undervalued.
I am not looking to be rich like turner, I know it can be done, I want to have a system that fosters, not penalizes innovators on their way up.
What I am talking about is a system that allows everyone to have a decent life without the stress of public and private debt in order to live in a decent house.
For the most part you need to "partner" with government in order to succeed today.
I just don't see a problem having people pay for their government granted, protected and encouraged privilege. We don't need Royalty in the US.
Broadcast license fees were very low for decades, HDTV was way undervalued.
Depends on the market. National broadcast licensing fees are quite expensive.
Quote:
I am not looking to be rich like turner, I know it can be done, I want to have a system that fosters, not penalizes innovators on their way up.
Then this isn't it. Achievers are penalized for their successes under our current system. Just look at the tax code. Those who have worked and sacrificed to finally make their way into upper incomes pay federal income taxes at nearly TWICE the percentage of their share of the income, while 47% of American households pay no federal income tax whatsoever. Achievers are punished. Slackers are rewarded with freebies.
Quote:
I just don't see a problem having people pay for their government granted, protected and encouraged privilege.
Then it's time to start taxing the 47% of American households that currently pay nothing for the federal government services they receive.
Oh, and just so we're all clear on exactly what the results are of not taxing everyone at an equal rate and even worse, providing freebies to the non-productive, the U.S. Census has the facts, as I stated earlier...
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
By 'providing' other people's money to the poor, the government has encouraged the overgrowth of the dependent class. Women receiving public assistance have a birth rate 3 times that of women not receiving any public assistance. In other words, the poor whose lives depend on government handouts of other people's money are outpopulating those who pay taxes to support them at a rate of 3 to 1. Who thinks that's sustainable?
Take that overgrowth of the dependent class to its logical conclusion, and the proportionately shrinking productive class will have to be taxed so much to support the dependent class that we'll all be pulled down to a third world standard of living.
Quote:
"The 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) gave states greater flexibility to formulate and implement initiatives to reduce welfare dependency and encourage employment for members of low-income families with children. For the nation, in 2006, 10 years after passage of the Act, the birth rate for women 15 to 50 years old receiving public assistance income in the last 12 months was 155 births per 1,000 women, about three times the rate for women not receiving public assistance (53 births per 1,000 women)."
Depends on the market. National broadcast licensing fees are quite expensive.
Then this isn't it. Achievers are penalized for their successes under our current system. Just look at the tax code. Those who have worked and sacrificed to finally make their way into upper incomes pay federal income taxes at nearly TWICE the percentage of their share of the income, while 47% of American households pay no federal income tax whatsoever. Achievers are punished. Slackers are rewarded with freebies.
Then it's time to start taxing the 47% of American households that currently pay nothing for the federal government services they receive.
I agree, hence why I want to go after "royalty", not achievers. The Irvine family who own a million acres in Orange County CA, much of it was passed down from the ancestors who got land after the Mexican land grants in the 19th century. Government granted privilege was 150 years ago can't be competed against today.
If we reduced spending dramatically we could do as Alaska does today and pay a dividend from natural monopolies. We would not need most government services that they receive today due to lower cost of living and other services could be paid for privately with the dividend.
Oh, and just so we're all clear on exactly what the results are of not taxing everyone at an equal rate and even worse, providing freebies to the non-productive, the U.S. Census has the facts, as I stated earlier...
Again, I am for cutting government by about 80%.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
