It is not the owner of a productive asset who earns money, but rather the asset, and there is no reason whatever why privileged property rights - such as exclusive rights over the commons of land or knowledge; or 'free' limited liability on investment through joint stock limited liability corporations - should not be taxed.
It is a misleading canard to say that people are taxed twice: they are taxed once (too highly IMHO) on earned income and then the income from the asset is taxed.
There is a bonus here in that taxation of such property rights is much less avoidable, and much easier to collect. Friedman himself considered Land Value tax to be the 'least worst' and most economically efficient tax.
So I would (if I did not regard taxation as pretty Last Century) advocate drastic cuts in taxation of earned income and commensurate increase of taxes on unearned income from privileged property rights. "Any economic unit can emit money. The serious problem is to get it accepted" Hyman Minsky
There should be limited taxation on useful investment and massive taxation on hoarded resources (including land, gold, artworks, antiques, etc) and casino speculation.
Enhanced taxation on luxury spending wouldn't be a bad thing either.
But while we're in fantasy land, it would also be a good idea to disbar anyone with a net worth of more than £x million from political office, and to make it an offence for any corporation with a net worth of more than £y billion to spend money on lobbying.
These things will not happen, but most of our current problems are caused by corrupt money swilling around politics, and they'll only be solved once money and politics become separated.
Taxation is about power redistribution, not about money as a conserved object.
When the Inland Revenue in the UK let Goldman Sachs off a sizeable tax bill while bankrupting small business owners for relatively tiny amounts due, that's very much a live political issue.
There must be taxation (or rental of the commons) as long as we want to have a government (and the alternative is Somalia, not Ayn Rand fantasy). There is no a priori reason to tax A rather than B. Ideally, we'd like to tax negative things more than positive things -and so wealth more than income since it has more negative consequences. But, of course, externalities even more so.
Besides, any tax on the value of houses would be priced in so only a sudden major hike after buying would have a significant negative effect.
Also besides, there is nothing inherently virtuous in saving
Also also besides, refusing taxes on wealth is the ultimate fait accompli policy. All you need is a few years of conservative governments, those in position of power make out like bandits (think Russian oligarchs) and thereafter maintain a huge position while the plebs who need to work for a living suffer through years, nay decades of adjustment. Rinse, wash, repeat. Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi
Instead, we're hearing noises about Merkozy wanting to shift gear to "growth and jobs" at the January 30 summit, but the proposals will be along the lines of "active employment policies" which is EUspeak for blaming the unemployed for the lack of job offers. tens of millions of people stand to see their lives ruined because the bureaucrats at the ECB don't understand introductory economics -- Dean Baker
Old Soviet Union joke:
They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work.
I think the concept needs work. Align culture with our nature.
Guaranteed living income means that everyone receives Y% of median income. tens of millions of people stand to see their lives ruined because the bureaucrats at the ECB don't understand introductory economics -- Dean Baker
The problem currently is not that they do exist, but that governments (such as the French) do issue them. tens of millions of people stand to see their lives ruined because the bureaucrats at the ECB don't understand introductory economics -- Dean Baker
Now seriously, why is this funny? tens of millions of people stand to see their lives ruined because the bureaucrats at the ECB don't understand introductory economics -- Dean Baker
Why should the value of that home be taxed again?
related topic: I sometimes think there should be a way to flag one's comment as "my fantasy wish / utopia" and "realistically doable now or in the futurs". No offence to anyone, just sayin'...
