Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
And why shouldn't it be?
We can ask the "why should A be taxed?" question on anything we don't want to see taxed. It doesn't make it decisive.

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

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Fri Jan 20th, 2012 at 01:43:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

Display:

Occasional Series