The free market does not compensate this undoubtedly indispensable service to society. Throughout history and across cultures, societies have successfully created collectives to pool resources in support of this indispensable service. They're called "families", and they're perfectly capable of existing in a free market. |
|
|
|
|
The problem of reconciling different ideas about land ownership isn't unique to a land tax system. What problems would nomadic peoples encounter under a land tax system that they wouldn't encounter in the current system? What solutions does the current system offer that a land tax system could not?
|
|
|
|
do you have a youtube channel with your type of thinking?
I don't know of any, but terms to search for would be "Georgism" and "geolibertarianism". @bitcoin.me - Thanks, I'll check it out. |
|
|
|
That's it? No discussion or anything?  Ok, whatever you say. if we dont own the land, at the least id want general widespread land designated as public for us landless (hint, homeless) people to be on legally without taxes. and how does that jive with the notion, its not your land but your house is on it? unless its a mobile home on wheels then you can't really MOVE your house if the land owners want you to move...so not owning the land doesn't really make sense to me Some people think that some or all of the tax should be redistributed to the community. The idea being, as grantbdev's post suggested, that the landholders must pay rent to those who don't hold land. I have one problem with that idea: It requires us to define who is and isn't a member of the community. I'm against citizenship and restricting immigration. That's why I would prefer it be spent on defense and infrastructure, including the public spaces you mentioned, and if there's some left over, maybe even some (gasp) anti-poverty spending. I'm not sure how well this fits in with what other geolibertarians would say, but my position is that you would still own your land in one sense: You get to decide who has first priority in leasing the land after you leave. Thus, you can still sell your house when you move. It's like domain names on the internet. If you want to register a new one, you just have to pay a registration fee to an ICANN accredited registrar. If you want to buy an existing domain name, say because someone built a popular site with it, you'll have to buy it from its current owner. I'm not sure what you meant when you said "if the landowners want you to move". You mean if you default on your taxes? Then you would need to find a buyer within a certain period. If you mean eminent domain, presumably there would be some kind of required compensation, as there is now. If you mean being evicted because you broke some rule, well, that would probably be a matter for a civil case with your neighbors or in severe cases a criminal court to decide. Why can't all the taxes just be incorporated into the purchase price and paid up front? (like normal bank can loan u money, they pay full up front to old owner, you pay bank the loan according to their terms) The taxes are recurring, so if your stay is indefinite, then you won't know how much you'll eventually end up owing. Even if you do know how many years you want to stay, the land value may change, and with it the amount of taxes you owe. Still, if enough people demand this kind of stability, I'm sure the market can provide something. Maybe if you want a place to retire to, you can sign a contract with someone saying they'll pay all the taxes on your house for the rest of your life, but upon your death they inherit your house. There could be a whole industry of "tax insurance" where the company will pay your taxes for the next few decades in return for a large down payment now. FYI, these answers are coming off the top of my head. This is a concept I've only become interested recently, so I haven't read the existing literature in depth. |
|
|
|
That's it? No discussion or anything? Ok, whatever you say. if we dont own the land, at the least id want general widespread land designated as public for us landless (hint, homeless) people to be on legally without taxes. and how does that jive with the notion, its not your land but your house is on it? unless its a mobile home on wheels then you can't really MOVE your house if the land owners want you to move...so not owning the land doesn't really make sense to me Some people think that some or all of the tax should be redistributed to the community. The idea being, as grantbdev's post suggested, that the landholders must pay rent to those who don't hold land. I have one problem with that idea: It requires us to define who is and isn't a member of the community. I'm against citizenship and restricting immigration. That's why I would prefer it be spent on defense and infrastructure, including the public spaces you mentioned, and if there's some left over, maybe even some (gasp) anti-poverty spending. I'm not sure how well this fits in with what other geolibertarians would say, but my position is that you would still own your land in one sense: You get to decide who has first priority in leasing the land after you leave. Thus, you can still sell your house when you move. It's like domain names on the internet. If you want to register a new one, you just have to pay a registration fee to an ICANN accredited registrar. If you want to buy an existing domain name, say because someone built a popular site with it, you'll have to buy it from its current owner. I'm not sure what you meant when you said "if the landowners want you to move". You mean if you default on your taxes? Then you would need to find a buyer within a certain period. If you mean eminent domain, presumably there would be some kind of required compensation, as there is now. If you mean being evicted because you broke some rule, well, that would probably be a matter for a civil case with your neighbors or in severe cases a criminal court to decide. |
|
|
|
|
I'm currently looking for new projects. As I mentioned in the title, I have an understanding of a variety of web technologies. Just let me know what capabilities you want your website to have, and I'll work with you to find a solution.
I'm particularly knowledgeable about bitcoin, both from the merchant and customer side. So, if you're building a website for a bitcoin related business, or anything else, and you're looking for a coder, feel free to ask me for a quote. I'll accept payment in bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
That's it? No discussion or anything? Ok, whatever you say. |
|
|
|
So if there are hyperinflation for inflationary currencies and deflationary spirals for deflationary currencies... is there another type of currencies that avoids these two problems...?
I'm sure you've read the arguments in this forum that bitcoin deflation is not a bad thing. Rather than repeat those, I'll just point out that an easy solution to the problem is to allow currency competition. You can limit the damage caused by hyperinflation if you allow people to abandon the failed currency for a healthier alternative. That's what you saw in story #2, where they replaced hogge money with tobacco. Argentina's coin shortage could have been dealt with by private organizations issuing their own tokens, possibly backing them up with pesos. |
|
|
|
I liked the shoe shop idea. Handbags, cosmetics, etc would interest me although I'm also into technology and borderline Libertarian. You should have a whole group of women on board since one company pays their contractors who are mostly women in bitcoin. Again, I think it's the trust factor. Most women want to feel secure. Non-centralized money does not make them feel secure. There is a vicious rumor going around that people in bitcoin use the service for illegal things and this scares many of them. I've seen them mention it on twitter and why they won't take their pay with bitcoin.
+++1 you could start SR women edition "high heels" put some sixpack guys for rent I'm not sure if new retailers will attract new bitcoiners, unless those retailers can offer something that the traditional retailers ones can't, the way SR does. |
|
|
|
To be realistic, the few women in here is only a symptom of where bitcoin is operating.
There are still about 90% Geeks here. (Which I count myself to)
It would be interesting how many % of the people here are not working in some kind of IT-Field, or study something IT related.
I think it's still less than 25%.
I think that's the main thing. Bitcoin does well with two groups: technologists and libertarians. Women are under-represented in both of these groups. Figuring out why and what to do about it is probably beyond the scope of this forum. Thus, I think we can expect the gender gap to shrink if-and-when bitcoin goes more mainstream. Couldn’t it be as simple as surveying women about what they want and providing it? Maybe it is as simple as shoes or makeup or maybe it’s something we would never think of but can be easily provided. What would happen if you surveyed random men about what they wanted? Most men aren't technologists, libertarians, or bitcoiners. In order to get useful results, you'd have to find the women who would be one of these save for one thing, and that would imply you already know what that thing is. Still, worth considering. Might be nice to see a study about women where the author hasn't already made up her mind to blame the men for a change. |
|
|
|
To be realistic, the few women in here is only a symptom of where bitcoin is operating.
There are still about 90% Geeks here. (Which I count myself to)
It would be interesting how many % of the people here are not working in some kind of IT-Field, or study something IT related.
I think it's still less than 25%.
I think that's the main thing. Bitcoin does well with two groups: technologists and libertarians. Women are under-represented in both of these groups. Figuring out why and what to do about it is probably beyond the scope of this forum. Thus, I think we can expect the gender gap to shrink if-and-when bitcoin goes more mainstream. |
|
|
|
Land Tax - If you own land, you pay a percentage of its value to the government every year, or you stop owning it. It differs from property tax because improvements to the land are not counted as part of its value. There are probably multiple ways of calculating value, but I don't know which one is best. Basically, all land is leased from the government. I believe Hong Kong has a system somewhat similar to this. Unlike sales in income tax, it doesn't act as a disincentive to productive economic activity. Instead, it acts as a disincentive to urban sprawl and the destruction of wilderness. I think it's consistent with the principles of self ownership, because land is neither your self nor the result of your labor. my point was the commercial was being retarded saying its harder to avoid taxes, when is ome cases it's easier, if you work for big business, pay no income tax, but if you buy at household businesses without a name or license, pay no fairtax...haha maybe a libertarian's secret wet dream to defund the government slowly Income tax: -Employees of registered businesses pay tax when they're paid. -Black marketers pay no tax. Sales tax: -Employees of registered businesses pay tax when they buy stuff in stores. -Black marketers pay tax when they buy stuff in stores. It's no more difficult to prosecute a store for tax dodging than it is an individual. Black market or not, I doubt there are many people who never go to supermarkets, pharmacies, clothing boutiques, and such. EDIT: Sorry, I didn't see the link to the commercial. Watching now. Ok, watched it, and I think I see your point. Going back to your original post, no, the labor of "Derrick from down the road" would not be taxed, but he would pay taxes when he spends the money he earns. "Ashikabob in Pakistanilandstan" is guilty of tax-dodging. Even if he isn't prosecuted, he at least probably paid taxes on some of the materials for his flutes, and will pay more when he spends the money HE makes. |
|
|
|
People literally only used the currency because they knew Tucker would kill or torture them if they didn't. If anyone wants to know the definition of "fiat currency", there you go. Although aside from #3, all five of these stories are fine examples. |
|
|
|
|
Those guys wouldn't pay income tax anyway.
At least under fair tax they pay tax when they spend the money, if they do so at a taxpaying business.
But I still think the best tax is land tax. It requires no invasion of financial privacy, no control over currency, and there's no easy loophole. Philosophically it's a little more justifiable for me, because the government defends your claim to your land.
|
|
|
|
|
Topaz - A type of gem
an - random syllable added because one of the sites I tried using Topaz in required six letters in the username. That, or Topaz was taken, don't remember which.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow. Between this and pirate, remind me never to trust anyone who uses a villainous username.
|
|
|
|
|
"Gilesbie", like the girl who wrote the infamous 'My Immortal' fanfic. Yes I know the B and S are in the wrong order, but that's how it looks to me.
Also, why are we mocking GLBSE? Was there a scandal or something I missed?
|
|
|
|
Great post, OP.
One other important point - all those great inventions, whether fire, metals, coins, or integrated circuits - they can all be used equally for evil or for good. So too it is with Bitcoin. I wonder if, when fire was invented, the creators were shunned and scorned for the potential damage their invention could cause. I wonder if that invention was almost snuffed out, so as to ensure "disruptions" were kept to a minimum, and safety, as conceived in the years prior to the invention, remained undisturbed.
Caveman science fiction. |
|
|
|
...Selected by a panel of Royal Canadian Mint judges from 25 finalists determined by public voting. Dang, maybe we should've put 25 bitcoin related suggestions up. An online currency could be used to buy bitcoin ASICs. An online currency could be used to invest in bitcoin hedge funds. An online currency could be used to pay for bitcoin laundering services. Etc, etc. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
