Ending inequality in UK

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
7 Jan 2010
Messages
14,175
Reaction score
4,171
Location
Dystopia, a small island too close to Europe
Country
United Kingdom
Much is said about inequality, how the poor suffer because of it etc etc. if there was a peoples revolution and an equal share out of all the wealth in the UK, does anyone know (roughly) the amount each family would be worth ? I have no idea, just pondering.
 
Land Value Tax time - Churchill approved, and Thatchers favourite economost Milton Friedman agreed also.
 
Just over £75k per person

Although taking into account the debt the country now has (and should we wish to 'balance the books'), that figure falls to approximately £35k per person.
 
Gal:

How would LVT work?

Let's assume that next week, it is agreed that LVT will be implemented. At the moment, everyone has a house "worth" whatever someone else is willing to pay for it.

How would the transition be made?
 
Let's suppose that you live in York. You have a nice house and garden worth a million pounds. Your cleaner lives in a smaller house worth a hundred thousand pounds. Lord Arndale has a mansion worth ten million pounds.

Let's suppose that York City Council has a budget of a billion pounds, and it is all gathered from local residents. At the moment, you pay a council tax of a thousand pounds a year, and your cleaner pays a council tax of five hundred pounds a year. Lord Arndale also pays a thousand pounds a year (Council Tax Top Band for York).

So your house is worth ten times as much, but you only pay twice as much as your cleaner. Lord Arndales house is worth ten times as much as yours, but he pays the same.

Tomorrow, York will still have a budget of a billion pounds, and a billion pounds a year is what they will still collect.

They will divide up the LVT according to the value of the properties in it.

Lord Arndale will complain a lot. Luckily for him, he has a lot of rich and influential chums among the government.

If LVT ever comes in, the time will come (after any transitional arrangements) when he pays ten times as much as you, and you pay ten times as much as your cleaner.

It is to be expected that the price of property will change, and some people will reconsider how much of it they wish to own.

The Tory press will pretend that the amount of tax gathered under LVT will be more than the amount under Council Tax. This is not true. The amount of tax each person pays will be in proportion to the value of the land. I don't know how many multibillionaires are paying very little.
 
Since no bill for LVT has been laid before Parliament, nobody knows yet how it would be arranged.

It would be based on value, not on square footage.

But see a sensible document in the "potential value" link below:

"A Land Value Tax is a tax on the potential value of land itself, ignoring anything that's built on it. It isn’t being proposed as an additional tax, but as a potential replacement for council taxes and/or business rates.

Some media outlets have dubbed it a 'garden tax', as the Daily Express did."
 
Well Jd, if I had wrote that I’d be heading for bed. My head hurt just reading it. But thanks anyway a very interesting take on being a Tory fat cat.
 
However the upsides is with tories valuing the land we will all pay less! Is that how it works. Can’t see them valuing their properties at full value can you. We’re on a winner with this one then.
 
If LVT ever comes in, the time will come (after any transitional arrangements) when he pays ten times as much as you, and you pay ten times as much as your cleaner.

He'll move into a smaller house and have a holiday home in a tax haven, used as his main residence. So the prices of small houses will rocket as his main aim is money and appearance so he will still drive a Rolls and might even own a helicopter.
 
the prices of small houses will rocket

You have misunderstood the words "potential value of the land" and "based on square footage. "

The price of small houses is already set at the maximum that buyers can afford.
 
You have misunderstood the words "potential value of the land" and "based on square footage. "

The price of small houses is already set at the maximum that buyers can afford.

Change the people who buy them changes that relationship which has already changed prices - eg Landlords so they are already above what people can really afford. That in turn sets rental prices. Just wait for the screams from landlords if interest rates rise and some start going bust.

It's already possible to raise a mortgage on a property to buy another.

Following the 2 mentioned for good ideas - I wouldn't. They come from a different world and both will protect their own.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top