Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7   Go Down

Author Topic: Low Tax Living - Selected States  (Read 36052 times)

jgmaynard

  • FSP Shadow Advertising
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2288
    • The Light of Alexandria
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #45 on: May 06, 2003, 05:33:40 pm »

I don't see why not, Hank.... Fine by me! :D
And will you build me one too? ;) They're really nice...
I actually know several people here who have lived in similar cabins, and a couple who have lived in domes!
So I take it you are in SD now?

JM
Logged
The Light of Alexandria By James Maynard

A history of the first 1,000 years of science, and how it changed the ancient world, and our world today.



http://www.lightofalexandria.com

Hank

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 334
  • "The Men That Don't Fit In"
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #46 on: May 06, 2003, 05:59:03 pm »

Compared to western wide open spaces, the adjustment could be rough on a claustrophobic. I'd be torn between hilltops up north where I could see forever or along the coast where I could see forever. Anything within sight of the coast probably is only for rich country folk. With property taxes (land rent) so high, maybe all I could afford would be a quarter acre. But I'd need that wide open space on one of the borders so I don't feel closed in.  I'd guess you'd call it a psychological back door.

P.S. I understand they've surrounded the "summit marker" of Mt. Washington with a multi-story summit building. So you can't stand on the "summit" and see a hundred miles anymore. You gotta stand on the roof?

P.P.S.
Libertarian40,
The last I saw the summit benchmark it was a lonely marker on a pile of rock surrounded on three sides by what looked to become a multi-story summit lodge/restaurant/mini-mall. I walked over to stand "on the summit" and figured it was the last time I'd ever be able to look over the roofs from that spot. Your post below led me to look up some "after" photos. I guess it is not as bad as the construction job looked like it was going to be. Maybe they decided to not do the upper story.
http://www.nhparks.state.nh.us/ParksPages/MtWash/MtWash.html
http://www.mountwashington.org/history/
« Last Edit: May 07, 2003, 08:44:02 am by Black Hills Hank »
Logged
There's A race of men that don't fit in,
A race that can't stay still;
So they break the hearts of kith and kin,
And they roam the world at will.
http://www.internal.org/view_poem.phtml?poemID=295

George Reich

  • FSP Participant
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 546
  • I just *love* it when Hank and Dagny brainstorm!
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #47 on: May 06, 2003, 06:24:02 pm »

I understand they've surrounded the "summit marker" of Mt. Washington with a multi-story summit building. So you can't stand on the "summit" and see a hundred miles anymore. You gotta stand on the roof?

There is a visitors center on top which is next to the summit. It is only one story. You can still stand on the actual summit and see hundreds of miles on a nice day.
Logged
If everyone were rich there would be no need for government assistance. If everyone were rich all children could attend private schools. If everyone were rich, government would become superfluous. Read the free e-book at this site:

http://www.scienceofgettingrich.net

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #48 on: May 06, 2003, 06:41:28 pm »

Quote
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.  New Hampshire's report...

http://www.itepnet.org/wp2000/nh%20pr.pdf

...shows that it has a much more regressive tax structure.  These reports show tax burden as a percentage of income  Many free staters would prefer an extremely low, if slighlty regressive, tax structure.  Progressive taxes amount to wealth redistribution.

We really ought to try to find better terms for this than "regressive" and "progressive". Those were terms coined by statists, and they have a huge PR value. Maybe we ought to call them "equal" and "unequal", or something like that. Any ideas? Let's banish the term "progressive tax" from polite discussion.  >:(

I am pleased with this report about Wyoming. When you have a class of people who vote but who don't have to pay taxes, you have a big problem.

Quote
Property taxes are the best type of tax to have! Why? Because no one will get upset if they have to pay $1.17 in sales tax on a purchase. Having to cut a check for $900 hurts like heck, then they go off, join the taxpayers groups, write letters to the editor, etc.  
You just don't get the "angry taxpayers" with sales and income taxes that you do with a property tax.

That's a definite point in their favor. In France, there is no witholding; they have to pay income taxes in one big lump, just like property taxes. That's something, isn't it?

What you are saying about the sales tax is what I call the "nickel and dime" effect - they nickel and dime you to death. The same is also true when you have a plethora of small taxes on specific items like phones, airline tickets, cigarrettes, ammunition and condoms.  ;)

There is one very bad effect of property taxes, at least for large landowners. People out in the country feel they have to put land into production just so that it will pay for its taxes. There is a lot of marginal land that really ought not be in production, for environmental reasons if nothing else. And you get over-production of certain commodities this way that drives the price down more than it normally would be, hurting people who are trying to make a living at it. Finally, when you have property taxes, you don't have property ownership! People are just glorified renters with the state as landlord.

So there are a lot of bad things about property taxes, too.
Logged

di540

  • Guest
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #49 on: May 06, 2003, 07:26:23 pm »

Quote
Property taxes are the best type of tax to have! Why? Because no one will get upset if they have to pay $1.17 in sales tax on a purchase. Having to cut a check for $900 hurts like heck, then they go off, join the taxpayers groups, write letters to the editor, etc.  
You just don't get the "angry taxpayers" with sales and income taxes that you do with a property tax.
.
Canaries in the coal mine?
.
Quote

There is one very bad effect of property taxes, at least for large landowners. People out in the country feel they have to put land into production just so that it will pay for its taxes. There is a lot of marginal land that really ought not be in production, for environmental reasons if nothing else. And you get over-production of certain commodities this way that drives the price down more than it normally would be, hurting people who are trying to make a living at it. Finally, when you have property taxes, you don't have property ownership! People are just glorified renters with the state as landlord.

All taxes are in some sense a tax of property, since you can
have property in abstract things such as rights. Henry George
wouldn't take your land but only your (economic) rents:

"For justice to be done between men it is not necessary for the
State to take the land; it is only necessary to take its rent."

If you don't get into 'imputed rent', & if you are not engaging
in any economic activity, then you don't pay tax on your land.
Thus, there would be no compulsion for you to put marginal
land into production, such that you'd be suffering a loss in
comparison to those w/above average land. And even if you were
so forced, that would be better than it is now, giving multi-
-nationals subsidies or privileges that skew the economy in
the name of 'free trade', and put small producers at a
disadvantage.

Ultimately, it's economic activity that creates wealth, but
if you're taxed for not creating more wealth, that could force
you to sell or rent it to others who can. A tax that works only
in this way can lead to a situation where no land owner pays tax,
if all owned lands are used to create more wealth. The state
would not be able to function on only such a means of raising funds.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2003, 09:09:42 pm by mAximo »
Logged

jgmaynard

  • FSP Shadow Advertising
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2288
    • The Light of Alexandria
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #50 on: May 06, 2003, 07:38:53 pm »

"People out in the country feel they have to put land into production just so that it will pay for its taxes"

There's a good idea ;) "Current use" is a popular term here... :D

And you are right... there are MANY bad things about property taxes.... that's why we are fighting them like mad at the local level.....

Hey Black Hills - I can understand how you would feel... I have been watching movies lately which take place out west, and am awed at the open country... Course, I hate to drive, so it has it's drawbacks ;) But, that is why God gave us so many darn mountains. :D Let me see what I can do to help you out. I have an idea...

Take care all.  

JM
Logged
The Light of Alexandria By James Maynard

A history of the first 1,000 years of science, and how it changed the ancient world, and our world today.



http://www.lightofalexandria.com

jgmaynard

  • FSP Shadow Advertising
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2288
    • The Light of Alexandria
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #51 on: May 06, 2003, 07:40:36 pm »

"Canaries in the coal mine?"

The trouble for the cage makers is that the canaries won't shut up! lol...

JM
Logged
The Light of Alexandria By James Maynard

A history of the first 1,000 years of science, and how it changed the ancient world, and our world today.



http://www.lightofalexandria.com

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #52 on: May 06, 2003, 09:02:21 pm »

Hey, look at this!

http://www.itepnet.org/wp2000/wy%20pr.pdf

Maybe Wyoming ain't so bad after all!

This report is very good.  Try to keep in mind that the entire report was written by a socialist group that is trying to cause massive destruction to the American economy, NO, I am not kidding.  Regressive is actually bad and the report was nothing but fact twisting, word changing, mush.

I am very happy of this report.  It shows that Wyoming has one of the most libertarian taxes structures around, a VERY good thing.  Thank you for posting this report.  This is very good news to me.  WHAT A FIND.

NH's report did not look so good for libertarians, though.  Clearly, as far as these reports understand it, WY is far better than NH for libertarians of all income levels (or no income at all).  However, this is just one factor and this comes from a socialist group so take it for what it is, or isn't.
Logged

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #53 on: May 06, 2003, 09:06:01 pm »


PLUS! Property taxes are the best type of tax to have! Why? Because no one will get upset if they have to pay $1.17 in sales tax on a purchase.

JM

According to almost all related libertarian thought, the sales tax is better than the property tax for freedom and liberty and related good things.

 If you do not understand why, well, you can ask.  However, you should prepare for several long posts.  I could rant for days about how bad property taxes are and how good sales taxes are when compared to property taxes.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2003, 09:17:14 pm by FreedomRoad »
Logged

George Reich

  • FSP Participant
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 546
  • I just *love* it when Hank and Dagny brainstorm!
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #54 on: May 06, 2003, 09:19:12 pm »

Hey, look at this!

http://www.itepnet.org/wp2000/wy%20pr.pdf

Maybe Wyoming ain't so bad after all!

This report is very good.  Try to keep in mind that the entire report was written by a socialist group that is trying to cause massive destruction to the American economy, NO, I am not kidding.  Regressive is actually bad and the report was nothing but fact twisting, word changing, mush.

I am very happy of this report.  It shows that Wyoming has one of the most libertarian taxes structures around, a VERY good thing.  Thank you for posting this report.  This is very good news to me.  WHAT A FIND.

NH's report did not look so good for libertarians, though.  Clearly, as far as these reports understand it, WY is far better than NH for libertarians of all income levels (or no income at all).  However, this is just one factor and this comes from a socialist group so take it for what it is, or isn't.

Yes, Wyoming looks very good:

Income                     State and Local Tax Paid

$1,000,000+            1.7%
$26,000 - $40,000   5.4%
Under $17,000          7.6%

New Hampshire is similar in regressiveness:

$1,000,000               2.4%
$34,000 - $55,000    5.8%
Under $20000            8.1%

Since we know that New Hampshire's overall tax burden as a % of personal income is much lower than Wyoming's, NH residents must be making much higher incomes.
Logged
If everyone were rich there would be no need for government assistance. If everyone were rich all children could attend private schools. If everyone were rich, government would become superfluous. Read the free e-book at this site:

http://www.scienceofgettingrich.net

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #55 on: May 06, 2003, 10:53:25 pm »

Quote
If you don't get into 'imputed rent', & if you are not engaging in any economic activity, then you don't pay tax on your land. Thus, there would be no compulsion for you to put marginal land into production

maximo, most of this post went over my head, sorry.

My point is that if you buy little in the taxed market (e.g. if you produce your own food or barter for it or buy what you need in a neighboring state that has no sales tax), then nothing bad happens with sales taxes. But if you hold land, just to have it (say it is rough land that has little productive value but you like the wildlife, etc.) then you can lose it just by doing nothing. States do sell land for back taxes that people have failed to pay, for whatever reason.

Property ownership (and I mean land, not just baubles and vehicles) is one of the anchors of western liberties. Property taxes just seems like a real strike against that anchor and therefore against freedom.
Logged

di540

  • Guest
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #56 on: May 06, 2003, 11:58:43 pm »

Quote
All taxes are in some sense a tax of property, since you can
have property in abstract things such as rights. Henry George
wouldn't take your land but only your (economic) rents:
"For justice to be done between men it is not necessary for the
State to take the land; it is only necessary to take its rent."
.
If you don't get into 'imputed rent', & if you are not engaging in any economic activity, then you don't pay tax on your land. Thus, there would be no compulsion for you to put marginal land into production
maximo, most of this post went over my head, sorry.

My point is that if you buy little in the taxed market (e.g. if you produce your own food or barter for it or buy what you need in a neighboring state that has no sales tax), then nothing bad happens with sales taxes. But if you hold land, just to have it (say it is rough land that has little productive value but you like the wildlife, etc.) then you can lose it just by doing nothing. States do sell land for back taxes that people have failed to pay, for whatever reason.
Quote
.
The quote by Henry George wasn't quite spot on, but
it was trying to say that a state should not be able to sell
off your property to pay taxes. That's using a sledgehammer
to drive in a nail. It should only be able to 'garnishee' the
'rents' that the property earns. Such a system would mean that
if your property earned no rent, then you owe no property tax.
In other words, if you had a market gardening business, you'd
pay property tax on the value of the land. This should prevent
marginal land that could not pay the property tax from going
into production, and would help preserve that land for a
better purpose. But if
you did not pay the property tax, you'd still have options that
allow you to stay on your land: give the state up front part of
your revenues; or go out of business--as most people would do
and get an ordinary job elsewhere instead.
.
Quote

Property ownership (and I mean land, not just baubles and vehicles) is one of the anchors of western liberties. Property taxes just seems like a real strike against that anchor and therefore against freedom.

Quote
.
But all taxes have property as a basis, in the broad sense of
the word property.
Logged

di540

  • Guest
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #57 on: May 07, 2003, 12:02:16 am »

Quote
All taxes are in some sense a tax of property, since you can
have property in abstract things such as rights. Henry George
wouldn't take your land but only your (economic) rents:
"For justice to be done between men it is not necessary for the
State to take the land; it is only necessary to take its rent."
.
If you don't get into 'imputed rent', & if you are not engaging in any economic activity, then you don't pay tax on your land. Thus, there would be no compulsion for you to put marginal land into production
maximo, most of this post went over my head, sorry.

My point is that if you buy little in the taxed market (e.g. if you produce your own food or barter for it or buy what you need in a neighboring state that has no sales tax), then nothing bad happens with sales taxes. But if you hold land, just to have it (say it is rough land that has little productive value but you like the wildlife, etc.) then you can lose it just by doing nothing. States do sell land for back taxes that people have failed to pay, for whatever reason.
Quote
.
The quote by Henry George wasn't quite spot on, but
it was trying to say that a state should not be able to sell
off your property to pay taxes. That's using a sledgehammer
to drive in a nail. It should only be able to 'garnishee' the
'rents' that the property earns. Such a system would mean that
if your property earned no rent, then you owe no property tax.
In other words, if you had a market gardening business, you'd
pay property tax on the value of the land. This should prevent
marginal land that could not pay the property tax from going
into production, and would help preserve that land for a
better purpose. But if
you did not pay the property tax, you'd still have options that
allow you to stay on your land: give the state up front part of
your revenues; or go out of business--as most people would do
and get an ordinary job elsewhere instead.
.
Quote

Property ownership (and I mean land, not just baubles and vehicles) is one of the anchors of western liberties. Property taxes just seems like a real strike against that anchor and therefore against freedom.

.
But all taxes have property as a basis, in the broad sense of
the word property.
Logged

di540

  • Guest
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #58 on: May 07, 2003, 12:05:17 am »

Quote
All taxes are in some sense a tax of property, since you can
have property in abstract things such as rights. Henry George
wouldn't take your land but only your (economic) rents:
"For justice to be done between men it is not necessary for the
State to take the land; it is only necessary to take its rent."
.
If you don't get into 'imputed rent', & if you are not engaging in any economic activity, then you don't pay tax on your land. Thus, there would be no compulsion for you to put marginal land into production
maximo, most of this post went over my head, sorry.

My point is that if you buy little in the taxed market (e.g. if you produce your own food or barter for it or buy what you need in a neighboring state that has no sales tax), then nothing bad happens with sales taxes. But if you hold land, just to have it (say it is rough land that has little productive value but you like the wildlife, etc.) then you can lose it just by doing nothing. States do sell land for back taxes that people have failed to pay, for whatever reason.
Quote
.
The quote by Henry George wasn't quite spot on, but
it was trying to say that a state should not be able to sell
off your property to pay taxes. That's using a sledgehammer
to drive in a nail. It should only be able to 'garnishee' the
'rents' that the property earns. Such a system would mean that
if your property earned no revenues, you'd owe no property tax.
In other words, if you had a market gardening business, you'd
pay property tax on the value of the land. This should prevent
marginal land that could not pay the property tax from going
into production, and would help preserve that land for a
better purpose. But if
you did not pay the property tax, you'd still have options that
allow you to stay on your land: give the state up front part of
your revenues; or go out of business--as most people would do
and get an ordinary job elsewhere instead.
.
Quote

Property ownership (and I mean land, not just baubles and vehicles) is one of the anchors of western liberties. Property taxes just seems like a real strike against that anchor and therefore against freedom.

.
But all taxes have property as a basis, in the broad sense of
the word property.
Logged

Robert H.

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1361
  • Jeffersonian
    • Devolution USA
Re:Low Tax Living - Selected States
« Reply #59 on: May 07, 2003, 12:54:02 am »

According to almost all related libertarian thought, the sales tax is better than the property tax for freedom and liberty and related good things.

A major difference here is that you pay a sales tax only once and then the item is your's, as opposed to property taxes which essentially amount to paying rent to the government for the same dwelling and parcel of land year after year (or else lose it all, no matter how long you've had it).
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7   Go Up