Land for the Many Report

[newhome]

1 hour ago, ProDave said:

Surprise Surprise, the increased tax revenue was less than predicted.  Could that be because it is a disincentive to work harder, and those that can, have "moved" their income to England?

 

I chuck wads of mine into my pension tax free, or as much as the annual allowance allows me to. Yes I will need to worry about the lifetime allowance as already up to that pretty much, but given that I intend to retire early and the lifetime allowance increases year on year at present I'm not worrying about that too much. I will most likely move back to England when I draw my pension anyway and benefit from the lower tax there. It's apparently anathema up here to earn a half decent wage even if you work hard for it. This comment I read this morning is typical of the type of thing spouted about people earning a mid range income here "millionaires, trust-fund educated double barrelled name fox hunters". A salary was mentioned in that comment and it's completely laughable that someone earning that salary would be in the category stated. The reality is that the middle earners are the ones who pay the most relative to their overall wealth. The very wealthy can hide vast amounts and not blink, whereas those who are in the middle seem to be the ones who get caned here. 

 

[K78]

35 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

 

 

It's beyond me, too. 

 

I saw a report on the BBC earlier by a woman that nearly died from liver failure, because she was in the habit of drinking large quantities of wine every day.  She didn't seem to think she was at fault, and wanted the law changed so that the amount of alcohol in a bottle of wine was clearer (what could be clearer that the ABV that's already on the label I don't really know).

 

The really big problem with having maintained a ban on cannabis for so long is that it's stimulated the development of very strong strains.  If it had been made legal 40 odd years ago I doubt this would have happened, as it could have been regulated and taxed like alcohol and tobacco.

 

Even worse it has not been prescribed once since it was legalised. Yet they are happy to hand out morphine patches and tremadol. 

 

The strong strains are ok, and don’t send you crazy like the media says.

[Onoff]

14 minutes ago, K78 said:

The strong strains are ok, and don’t send you crazy like the media says.

 

Really? I know some users with problems from depression to bat sh!t off their head crazy through it's use.

[K78]

1 hour ago, Onoff said:

 

Really? I know some users with problems from depression to bat sh!t off their head crazy through it's use.

 

Some people are predisposed to things like that. If you abuse anything it is likely to cause problems. 

 

Alcohol is by far the most antisocial and damaging drug. 

[Jeremy Harris]

9 minutes ago, K78 said:

 

Alcohol is by far the most antisocial and damaging drug. 

 

Without a shadow of doubt.  Even out here in the sticks I only need to walk a few hundred yards later this evening to be sure of seeing someone totally off their face.

[eandg]

6 hours ago, ProDave said:

Re taxing the "Rich" more:

 

In Scotland, Higher earners already pay more than in other parts of the UK, as the Scottish have at last started using their tax raising powers, and when England raised the higher tax rate threshold, Scotland did not.

 

Surprise Surprise, the increased tax revenue was less than predicted.  Could that be because it is a disincentive to work harder, and those that can, have "moved" their income to England?

It's mostly because predicting who gets which share of tax revenues after a split is actually pretty difficult. BBC Scotland covered it fairly well recently. 

Edited June 10, 2019 by eandg

[SteamyTea]

13 hours ago, K78 said:

Alcohol is by far the most antisocial and damaging drug. 

Yes, I have seen what it has done to my best mate (though he asked me for 50 quid the other day, I refused, and not heard from him since).

If we legalised drugs, I am sure we would see the same problems that alcohol causes.  Legalisation does not mean safe.  Most car incidents happen below the speed limit.

[K78]

5 hours ago, SteamyTea said:

Yes, I have seen what it has done to my best mate (though he asked me for 50 quid the other day, I refused, and not heard from him since).

If we legalised drugs, I am sure we would see the same problems that alcohol causes.  Legalisation does not mean safe.  Most car incidents happen below the speed limit.

 

Would be safer though. You would know what you are buying and it would be clean. The stuff they mix with class A’s is worse for you than the drugs themselves. 

 

Look at the Rolling Stones. Mick just fathered another kid at 70. The heroin they take isn’t the same poison smack heads on the street take.  

 

It would reduce drug related crime too. Guns, prostitution etc. 

 

Not a perfect solution but better than the current mess. The tax raised would help pay for rehab too. 

[Ferdinand]

On 10/06/2019 at 06:04, Ferdinand said:

Incidentally I tweeted pretty much the whole team to ask about what happens when the market value of the property is less than the rebuild cost, which gives a negative value to the piece of land on their example calculation.

 

(Land Rent being the the theoretical rent you pay instead of Council Tax for the site your building stands on. The theory being that there is some sort of cedible process which separates the land value from the building value.) From page 42:

 

 

This is the query:

 

@georgemonbiot, @L__Macfarlane, @guyshrubsole, @beth_stratford, what happens to land rent when the Rebuild Cost is more than the value of the House?

 

No replies so far.

 

eg in the North and Midlands there are significant numbers of properties where this is the case.

 

Ferdinand

"

 

I had a reply to this. The delay is all mine:

 

 

[AliG]

What an idiot - blighted by crime etc.

 

Under this system the value of houses would fall considerably.

 

As build costs would not change, the value of land would collapse.

 

I am sure a lot of us would be in the situation where the land effectively became worthless. I figured this out when they first mooted the plan, I have all the costs of my build and reckon there is a good chance the value of the house wouldn't be that different.

 

Perhaps they are seeing it from a London centric view of the world where the starting value of land is very high.

 

You could easily get yourself in a situation where house building collapses because of this, in the USA after the financial crisis new home starts halved, I calculated that in the area where my inlaws live, the price of houses fell below the rebuild cost. (I guess this would eventually bring down build costs due to out of work tradespeople)

Edited June 22, 2019 by AliG

[ProDave]

It's not just blighted by crime etc.  We have none of that.  But because we live in a remote, sparsely populated region, with plentiful land supply, land prices are low.

 

I am near certain the rebuild cost of my house would exceed it's market value, so I can look forward to £0 land tax.  Perhaps it should be like wholesale electricity prices, and we should have a negative land tax, i,e they pay me for living in such a deprived area?

 

My house is only viable in financial terms because of all the uncosted labour I have put into it.  If it had been built as a turnkey build, it would be very marginal if it was financially viable.  Add on the demolition cost if rebuillding I am certain a rebuild would cost more than the house is worth.

 

The only houses you see built for sale round here are estate houses in the towns, where they build small houses on cheap plots and with the economy of scale can probably turn them out for a small profit.  It is a long time up here since I have seen an individual detached house built for speculative sale.

 

 

 

[recoveringbuilder]

A bit like when I was an estate agent there was an area that I worked in that there was no stamp duty on the houses bought in that area.