Will it include allotments? Telegraph have it as well. ''The Labour manifesto contains plans for a Land Value Tax to replace council tax, which would hit people with gardens the hardest. The manifesto contains no detail of how the tax would be applied, but the Conservatives claim tax on the the average family home would go up from £1,185 to £3,837 per year, an increase of £2,651 or 224 per cent. Opponents of the tax say it would cause house prices to plummet, putting homeowners at risk of negative equity and forcing families to sell off their gardens to developers to lessen their tax burden. Because the tax would also apply to agricultural land, it could have a knock-on effect of driving up food prices. The policy was described as “nonsensical” by Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, who said it would “bring misery to every single family in Britain”. ''
Note its the tories who are bringing this 'small print' out. Just saying that for the benefit of those saying they are having a bad campaign.
Yeah, about in line with others. Lab up, Tory steady, polls either adjusting for not expecting young to turnout as they say they will, or banking on them actually doing it this time.
Labour's advance is at the expense of Greens and SNP (the latter now down to a very low 2%),
The Survation poll is a UK-wide poll, which explains the low SNP figure.
Doesn't quite explain it. That is definitely the SNP down
Edit: which I don't believe
I expect the SNP to win about 40% in Scotland, which is 3.5% overall.
How do opinion polls deal with Don't Knows - ie those that will definitely vote, but don't know yet who for, or won't say?
Very variously. Some ignore them, others try to give them weightings. Don't know usually means won't vote.
The point of LVT is that it's based on the undeveloped value of the land - hence no deadweight loss from disincentivising development.
Council tax is based on the value of the property, particularly the house. Equivalent parcels of land containing a bungalow and six-bedroom mansion are in very different bands. A pure LVT would charge each the same.
The point of LVT is that it's based on the undeveloped value of the land - hence no dead-weight loss from disincentivising development.
Council tax is based on the value of the property, particularly the house. Equivalent parcels of land containing a bungalow and six-bedroom mansion are in very different bands. A pure LVT would charge each the same.
Sounds pretty regressive, unless I am missing something?
Bit of a disconnect. Council tax is a land value tax. All this is is a big rise in Council Tax.
Not at all, Mr Rabbit. Council Tax is levied on the value of the property. Site Value Tax is levied on the value of the site, as if there was no construction on it. The difference is that you can improve your property as much as you like, but the value of the site remains the same.
The later is a long-standing Liberal policy, and is very sensible. If Labour are picking that up now, it is to be welcomed. But I wouldn`t mind betting they do not understand it.
2015 seemed fairly dire at times. Right up until the exit poll in fact..
Has there ever been a Conservative Election campaign that has earned widespread praise (without the benefit of hindsight)? Wasn't it said that Labour ran away with the campaigns in the 80s? Foot won by a country mile.
Conservative manifestos are almost always offering hard choices and handicapped by defending a record in Government. Labour manifestos offer sweeties and are usually going on the offensive against the Government of the day. Miliband's main problem in 2015 was when he found himself having to defend Labour's Govt record.
Yeah, about in line with others. Lab up, Tory steady, polls either adjusting for not expecting young to turnout as they say they will, or banking on them actually doing it this time.
Labour's advance is at the expense of Greens and SNP (the latter now down to a very low 2%),
The Survation poll is a UK-wide poll, which explains the low SNP figure.
Doesn't quite explain it. That is definitely the SNP down
Edit: which I don't believe
I expect the SNP to win about 40% in Scotland, which is 3.5% overall.
How do opinion polls deal with Don't Knows - ie those that will definitely vote, but don't know yet who for, or won't say?
Very variously. Some ignore them, others try to give them weightings. Don't know usually means won't vote.
But DK's don't count towards the total? ie named parties (or other parties) make up the full 100%.
Will it include allotments? Telegraph have it as well. ''The Labour manifesto contains plans for a Land Value Tax to replace council tax, which would hit people with gardens the hardest. The manifesto contains no detail of how the tax would be applied, but the Conservatives claim tax on the the average family home would go up from £1,185 to £3,837 per year, an increase of £2,651 or 224 per cent. Opponents of the tax say it would cause house prices to plummet, putting homeowners at risk of negative equity and forcing families to sell off their gardens to developers to lessen their tax burden. Because the tax would also apply to agricultural land, it could have a knock-on effect of driving up food prices. The policy was described as “nonsensical” by Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, who said it would “bring misery to every single family in Britain”. ''
Note its the tories who are bringing this 'small print' out. Just saying that for the benefit of those saying they are having a bad campaign.
Will it include allotments? Telegraph have it as well. ''The Labour manifesto contains plans for a Land Value Tax to replace council tax, which would hit people with gardens the hardest. The manifesto contains no detail of how the tax would be applied, but the Conservatives claim tax on the the average family home would go up from £1,185 to £3,837 per year, an increase of £2,651 or 224 per cent. Opponents of the tax say it would cause house prices to plummet, putting homeowners at risk of negative equity and forcing families to sell off their gardens to developers to lessen their tax burden. Because the tax would also apply to agricultural land, it could have a knock-on effect of driving up food prices. The policy was described as “nonsensical” by Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, who said it would “bring misery to every single family in Britain”. ''
Note its the tories who are bringing this 'small print' out. Just saying that for the benefit of those saying they are having a bad campaign.
Strikes me as a bombshell.
Attacking people's gardens??? Game over.
Yes - Tories attacking our homes, Labour our gardens, LDs probably after our garden sheds, it's anarchy.
I thought Corbyn came over as affable and very engaged but very slippery on his past. In voting for him it seems to me that we are being asked to vote for the political equivalent of Eddie the Eagle.Enthusiastic and clearly enjoying himself but frankly we all know that he couldn't actually do the job as PM. With May we are being asked to vote for somebody who could do the job but frankly the more one sees of her the less one warms to her.
Yeah, about in line with others. Lab up, Tory steady, polls either adjusting for not expecting young to turnout as they say they will, or banking on them actually doing it this time.
Labour's advance is at the expense of Greens and SNP (the latter now down to a very low 2%),
The Survation poll is a UK-wide poll, which explains the low SNP figure.
And it adds ~1% to each of the two main parties to get the GB figure to compare with other polls.
Which in turn makes the two-party share look improbably high...
The point of LVT is that it's based on the undeveloped value of the land - hence no dead-weight loss from disincentivising development.
Council tax is based on the value of the property, particularly the house. Equivalent parcels of land containing a bungalow and six-bedroom mansion are in very different bands. A pure LVT would charge each the same.
Sounds pretty regressive, unless I am missing something?
Indeed you're not. But a basic result from economics is that lump-sum taxes are more efficient than a proportionate or unit tax, because their unavoidable nature reduces economic distortion, since there is no incentive to reduce production/consumption to avoid it.
Regressive, hence inequitable, and therefore not necessarily welfare-maximising, but efficient.
The point of LVT in particular is that it's levied on the value of land if it were unimproved - hence incentivising people to make best use of the land they own, and not penalising them for improving/developing it.
(The effect on agricultural land would be pretty small - the value of agricultural land without planning permission is low.)
Well tomorrow night we got Huw Edwards doing the BBC Wales leaders debate Wednesday its Mishal Husain with the BBC Leaders debate Friday David Dimbleby with May v Corbyn round 2
Not sure this has been posted in a while.... Corbyn IRA ad now on 3.5 million views.
Are people watching repeats ?
Yes, a lot of those viewings are me, it's like crack cocaine. The structure is masterly: 3 acts - jezza solo speeches with transcripts in act 1, dialogue with beautiful woman in act 2, and then fade to black with the telephone dial tone at the end, as good as Brighton Rock.
Bit of a disconnect. Council tax is a land value tax. All this is is a big rise in Council Tax.
No it's not council tax is a land occupation tax as it's paid by the occupier not the owner.
Eh ?
In my case that's the same person. But surely Labour should tax the OWNERS - this stinks to high heaven if it is on the occupiers ! More taxes for generation rent - is this right ?
Yeah, about in line with others. Lab up, Tory steady, polls either adjusting for not expecting young to turnout as they say they will, or banking on them actually doing it this time.
Labour's advance is at the expense of Greens and SNP (the latter now down to a very low 2%),
Not sure this has been posted in a while.... Corbyn IRA ad now on 3.5 million views.
Are people watching repeats ?
Yes, a lot of those viewings are me, it's like crack cocaine. The structure is masterly: 3 acts - jezza solo speeches with transcripts in act 1, dialogue with beautiful woman in act 2, and then fade to black with the telephone dial tone at the end, as good as Brighton Rock.
I don't think many of the genuine swing voters believe Corbyn will be PM. It's case of how many of them will vote for him because they actually don't want a "strong and stable" Theresa May and will vote for the party that would most plausibly chip away at May's majority, or if they quite like Corbyn as long as he doesn't become PM. How that plays out determines whether May's majority is very comfortable or massive.
TORY GAINS FROM LABOUR (18) Halifax, Wirral West, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Barrow & Furness, Wolverhampton South West, Dewsbury, North East Derbyshire, Middlesbrough South, Walsall North, Wrexham, Wakefield, (Copeland), Stoke South, Clwyd South, Darlington, Scunthorpe, Dudley North, Great Grimsby
TORY GAINS FROM SNP (5) Berwickshire, East Renfrewshire, Dumfries & Galloway, Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine, Aberdeen South
TORY GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (2) Southport, North Norfolk, (Richmond Park)
TORY GAIN FROM UKIP (1) Clacton
LABOUR GAINS FROM TORIES (4) Bury North, Brighton Kemptown, Cardiff North, Bristol North West
LABOUR GAINS FROM SNP (2) Edinburgh North & Leith, East Lothian
LABOUR GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (1) Leeds North West
LABOUR GAINS FROM GREENS (1) Brighton Pavilion
LIB DEM GAINS FROM TORIES (3) Twickenham, Kingston & Surbiton, Bath
LIB DEM GAINS FROM SNP (2) East Dunbartonshire, Edinburgh West
Bristol NW has a majority of nearly 10%.
You'd be better replacing it with Croydon Central.
Nor will Labour gain Bury North if there is a swing to the Conservatives in northern England.
I don’t see Cardiff North falling. Once Julie Morgan lost that seat, it was always going to need a truly exceptional candidate for Labour to take it back.
The local elections left the Tories solidly in control of the wards making up Cardiff North.
Gower is more likely to fall than Cardiff North.
(Although I think the Tories will hang on to them both, and will take some seats in the North East of Wales).
The point of LVT is that it's based on the undeveloped value of the land - hence no dead-weight loss from disincentivising development.
Council tax is based on the value of the property, particularly the house. Equivalent parcels of land containing a bungalow and six-bedroom mansion are in very different bands. A pure LVT would charge each the same.
Sounds pretty regressive, unless I am missing something?
Indeed you're not. But a basic result from economics is that lump-sum taxes are more efficient than a proportionate or unit tax, because their unavoidable nature reduces economic distortion, since there is no incentive to reduce production/consumption to avoid it.
Regressive, hence inequitable, and therefore not necessarily welfare-maximising, but efficient.
The point of LVT in particular is that it's levied on the value of land if it were unimproved - hence incentivising people to make best use of the land they own, and not penalising them for improving/developing it.
(The effect on agricultural land would be pretty small - the value of agricultural land without planning permission is low.)
I am making the best use of my property. By living in it with my family. A big rise in tax will disincentivise me from spending any of my remaining money elsewhere.
Still, now we know. The Tories will steal my house after I've died of dementia. Labour will steal it while I'm still alive and compos mentis
Incidentally, has anyone heard from the Lib Dems? They seem to have vanished.........
TORY GAINS FROM LABOUR (18) Halifax, Wirral West, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Barrow & Furness, Wolverhampton South West, Dewsbury, North East Derbyshire, Middlesbrough South, Walsall North, Wrexham, Wakefield, (Copeland), Stoke South, Clwyd South, Darlington, Scunthorpe, Dudley North, Great Grimsby
TORY GAINS FROM SNP (5) Berwickshire, East Renfrewshire, Dumfries & Galloway, Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine, Aberdeen South
TORY GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (2) Southport, North Norfolk, (Richmond Park)
TORY GAIN FROM UKIP (1) Clacton
LABOUR GAINS FROM TORIES (4) Bury North, Brighton Kemptown, Cardiff North, Bristol North West
LABOUR GAINS FROM SNP (2) Edinburgh North & Leith, East Lothian
LABOUR GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (1) Leeds North West
LABOUR GAINS FROM GREENS (1) Brighton Pavilion
LIB DEM GAINS FROM TORIES (3) Twickenham, Kingston & Surbiton, Bath
LIB DEM GAINS FROM SNP (2) East Dunbartonshire, Edinburgh West
Bristol NW has a majority of nearly 10%.
You'd be better replacing it with Croydon Central.
Nor will Labour gain Bury North if there is a swing to the Conservatives in northern England.
I've had a strong feeling about Bristol NW for a while. It was VERY pro-Remain (I think either that or Bath was the most Remain Tory seat outside of London), and there is some demographic change going on there, albeit not as fast demographic change as a true "inner city" seat.
Bury North is a bit more of a stretch, but Labour's results in the Greater Manchester mayoral election really were RIP-ROARINGLY good -- I'm not sure all of that was a personal vote for Burnham.
Will it include allotments? Telegraph have it as well. ''The Labour manifesto contains plans for a Land Value Tax to replace council tax, which would hit people with gardens the hardest. The manifesto contains no detail of how the tax would be applied, but the Conservatives claim tax on the the average family home would go up from £1,185 to £3,837 per year, an increase of £2,651 or 224 per cent. Opponents of the tax say it would cause house prices to plummet, putting homeowners at risk of negative equity and forcing families to sell off their gardens to developers to lessen their tax burden. Because the tax would also apply to agricultural land, it could have a knock-on effect of driving up food prices. The policy was described as “nonsensical” by Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, who said it would “bring misery to every single family in Britain”. ''
Note its the tories who are bringing this 'small print' out. Just saying that for the benefit of those saying they are having a bad campaign.
Strikes me as a bombshell.
Attacking people's gardens??? Game over.
I used to joke that the most effective political party in British politics would be the Garden Party, headed by Alan Titchmarsh.
Seems the nation may yet call upon him in their hour of need....
I don't think many of the genuine swing voters believe Corbyn will be PM. It's case of how many of them will vote for him because they actually don't want a "strong and stable" Theresa May and will vote for the party that would most plausibly chip away at May's majority, or if they quite like Corbyn as long as he doesn't become PM. How that plays out determines whether May's majority is very comfortable or massive.
There were at least a few people who voted Leave not expecting Leave to win and might have reconsidered otherwise (though I don't think the Bregreters were a large bunch), so in this the Tories probably have it right for once - if they have doubts of him people shouldn't risk it, just because they think he cannot win. Stay home, vote LD, but if they should vote him only if they want him to win, or think the most opposition to the Tories overrides other considerations.
The free-market think tanks the Adam Smith Institute and the Institute of Economic Affairs have both advocated a land value tax - see here and here for some arguments. Not the kind of cheerleaders Corbyn would have had in mind ...
The point of LVT is that it's based on the undeveloped value of the land - hence no dead-weight loss from disincentivising development.
Council tax is based on the value of the property, particularly the house. Equivalent parcels of land containing a bungalow and six-bedroom mansion are in very different bands. A pure LVT would charge each the same.
Sounds pretty regressive, unless I am missing something?
Indeed you're not. But a basic result from economics is that lump-sum taxes are more efficient than a proportionate or unit tax, because their unavoidable nature reduces economic distortion, since there is no incentive to reduce production/consumption to avoid it.
Regressive, hence inequitable, and therefore not necessarily welfare-maximising, but efficient.
The point of LVT in particular is that it's levied on the value of land if it were unimproved - hence incentivising people to make best use of the land they own, and not penalising them for improving/developing it.
(The effect on agricultural land would be pretty small - the value of agricultural land without planning permission is low.)
I am making the best use of my property. By living in it with my family. A big rise in tax will disincentivise me from spending any of my remaining money elsewhere.
Still, now we know. The Tories will steal my house after I've died of dementia. Labour will steal it while I'm still alive and compos mentis
Incidentally, has anyone heard from the Lib Dems? They seem to have vanished.........
LD have vanished which is why they are heading for ONE seat
Not sure this has been posted in a while.... Corbyn IRA ad now on 3.5 million views.
Are people watching repeats ?
Yes, a lot of those viewings are me, it's like crack cocaine. The structure is masterly: 3 acts - jezza solo speeches with transcripts in act 1, dialogue with beautiful woman in act 2, and then fade to black with the telephone dial tone at the end, as good as Brighton Rock.
Bit of a disconnect. Council tax is a land value tax. All this is is a big rise in Council Tax.
No it's not council tax is a land occupation tax as it's paid by the occupier not the owner.
Eh ?
In my case that's the same person. But surely Labour should tax the OWNERS - this stinks to high heaven if it is on the occupiers ! More taxes for generation rent - is this right ?
As far as I can tell the Labour manifesto doesn't give the details of how the tax would be levied.
But the phrase "land value tax" wasn't coined in the Labour manifesto. And "land value tax" is generally understood to be a form of wealth tax - and wealth taxes are levied on the owners of assets not the users.
My point was that calling council tax a land value tax is misleading as it is paid by occupiers.
Yeah, about in line with others. Lab up, Tory steady, polls either adjusting for not expecting young to turnout as they say they will, or banking on them actually doing it this time.
Labour's advance is at the expense of Greens and SNP (the latter now down to a very low 2%),
The smell of desperation thickens the air. Yesterday, a Sunday newspaper which functions as the Murrell Family Round Robin splashed across its front page Miss Sturgeon’s dire warning: ‘Just ten days to save Scotland from the Tories’. Save us from what? Are they going to make Jackson Carlaw Sings the Best of Gilbert and Sullivan a mandatory unit in the Curriculum for Excellence? Or send Murdo Fraser round to rearrange everyone’s flower bed into the pattern of a Union Jack?
TORY GAINS FROM LABOUR (18) Halifax, Wirral West, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Barrow & Furness, Wolverhampton South West, Dewsbury, North East Derbyshire, Middlesbrough South, Walsall North, Wrexham, Wakefield, (Copeland), Stoke South, Clwyd South, Darlington, Scunthorpe, Dudley North, Great Grimsby
TORY GAINS FROM SNP (5) Berwickshire, East Renfrewshire, Dumfries & Galloway, Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine, Aberdeen South
TORY GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (2) Southport, North Norfolk, (Richmond Park)
TORY GAIN FROM UKIP (1) Clacton
LABOUR GAINS FROM TORIES (4) Bury North, Brighton Kemptown, Cardiff North, Bristol North West
LABOUR GAINS FROM SNP (2) Edinburgh North & Leith, East Lothian
LABOUR GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (1) Leeds North West
LABOUR GAINS FROM GREENS (1) Brighton Pavilion
LIB DEM GAINS FROM TORIES (3) Twickenham, Kingston & Surbiton, Bath
LIB DEM GAINS FROM SNP (2) East Dunbartonshire, Edinburgh West
Bristol NW has a majority of nearly 10%.
You'd be better replacing it with Croydon Central.
Nor will Labour gain Bury North if there is a swing to the Conservatives in northern England.
I've had a strong feeling about Bristol NW for a while. It was VERY pro-Remain (I think either that or Bath was the most Remain Tory seat outside of London), and there is some demographic change going on there, albeit not as fast demographic change as a true "inner city" seat.
Bury North is a bit more of a stretch, but Labour's results in the Greater Manchester mayoral election really were RIP-ROARINGLY good -- I'm not sure all of that was a personal vote for Burnham.
Obviously you won't get it perfectly correct but fair play for putting a projection out there
'Jeremy Paxman is such an oafish, boorish barker of pointless questions, like that drunk angry uncle who ruins the barbecue by yelling "BALLS" at anyone who disagrees with him. Who seriously thinks this is good journalism? If Corbyn or May tell him to fuck off they'll instantly win tens of thousands of new voters, possibly including me.'
Bit of a disconnect. Council tax is a land value tax. All this is is a big rise in Council Tax.
No it's not council tax is a land occupation tax as it's paid by the occupier not the owner.
Eh ?
In my case that's the same person. But surely Labour should tax the OWNERS - this stinks to high heaven if it is on the occupiers ! More taxes for generation rent - is this right ?
If it's a proper Land Value Tax it should be on the owners, not the occupiers, because it's a tax on the potential fully exploited value of the land. ie you would pay the same tax on an undeveloped piece of land as on one with houses built on it, assuming the first has planning permission. The benefit claimed for LVT is that unlike other taxes its incentives are beneficial, not perverse. By contrast income tax discourages employment; rates discourage development.
I could have swung one of three ways, but ultimately I can't condone either the tories or labour leaderships and manifestos.
I'm going to be voting for Tim (not a sin).
Wow, that's two votes the LDs have got, Pong! Both are for different reasons, I'm sure, but it's two more than some thought they might get.
Yeah.
The frustrating thing is this was the IDEAL election for the Lib dems.
They had the chance to present themselves as a serious and competent alternative government, pursuing a super-soft brexit. They could have got ~40%.
Sadly, Tim (not a sin) ain't no Trudeau.
IDK, maybe Farron also has a rocking set of abs (I am given to understand).
I think 40 is pushing it, but I thought they could at least push toward 20 seats if things went well. Now 5 is more likely than that.
I'm still undecided on that front. I like enough of the Tory pitch, in terms of I think it realistic, and dislike Corbyn enough to the point I should vote for them, but May is not very good. Farron isn't good either, but there are some decent LD ideas, and I feel bad for them and want third parties to do well and know the local candidate. As it doesn't matter in a safe seat its about going with my gut, and usually I'd consider local effort, but there's been nothing so far from anyone (LDs probably off fighting in Bath anyway), but my gut is uncertain.
Bit of a disconnect. Council tax is a land value tax. All this is is a big rise in Council Tax.
Not in the traditional, Georgist, sense, no. The point of LVT is that it's based on the undeveloped value of the land - hence no dead-weight loss from disincentivising development. Council tax is based on the value of the property, particularly the house. Equivalent parcels of land containing a bungalow and six-bedroom mansion are in very different bands. A pure LVT would charge each the same.
Sounds pretty regressive, unless I am missing something?
Indeed you're not. But a basic result from economics is that lump-sum taxes are more efficient than a proportionate or unit tax, because their unavoidable nature reduces economic distortion, since there is no incentive to reduce production/consumption to avoid it. Regressive, hence inequitable, and therefore not necessarily welfare-maximising, but efficient. The point of LVT in particular is that it's levied on the value of land if it were unimproved - hence incentivising people to make best use of the land they own, and not penalising them for improving/developing it. (The effect on agricultural land would be pretty small - the value of agricultural land without planning permission is low.)
I am making the best use of my property. By living in it with my family. A big rise in tax will disincentivise me from spending any of my remaining money elsewhere. Still, now we know. The Tories will steal my house after I've died of dementia. Labour will steal it while I'm still alive and compos mentis Incidentally, has anyone heard from the Lib Dems? They seem to have vanished.........
Not vanished at all, Mrs Cyclefree - but certainly a bit cheesed off by all the hardline Tory cheerleading on PB.
Mr Ears seems to have a very good understanding of SVT, if I may say so without appearing to condescend. It is a tax on the value of the land, as if it had not been developed. It makes no difference if you have one house built on it, no houses, or ten houses.
The moral case is that you yourself have not increased the value of the land (in all probability), instead its increase arises from the infrastructure that has been put in round it, such as road access and drainage, and the increased value placed upon it by the granting of planning permission - by the local council on behalf of society.
Not sure this has been posted in a while.... Corbyn IRA ad now on 3.5 million views.
Are people watching repeats ?
Yes, a lot of those viewings are me, it's like crack cocaine. The structure is masterly: 3 acts - jezza solo speeches with transcripts in act 1, dialogue with beautiful woman in act 2, and then fade to black with the telephone dial tone at the end, as good as Brighton Rock.
Bit of a disconnect. Council tax is a land value tax. All this is is a big rise in Council Tax.
No it's not council tax is a land occupation tax as it's paid by the occupier not the owner.
Eh ?
In my case that's the same person. But surely Labour should tax the OWNERS - this stinks to high heaven if it is on the occupiers ! More taxes for generation rent - is this right ?
As far as I can tell the Labour manifesto doesn't give the details of how the tax would be levied.
But the phrase "land value tax" wasn't coined in the Labour manifesto. And "land value tax" is generally understood to be a form of wealth tax - and wealth taxes are levied on the owners of assets not the users.
My point was that calling council tax a land value tax is misleading as it is paid by occupiers.
We will initiate a review into reforming council tax and business rates and consider new options such as a land value tax, to ensure local government has sustainable funding for the long term
Not much in that, unless there's more hidden away-seems like the detail is from 'Labour blueprint for the tax from 2015' according to the story?
I do like how the story refers to as 'small print', a phrase designed to make us suspicious.
Bit of a disconnect. Council tax is a land value tax. All this is is a big rise in Council Tax.
Not in the traditional, Georgist, sense, no. The point of LVT is that it's based on the undeveloped value of the land - hence no dead-weight loss from disincentivising development. Council tax is based on the value of the property, particularly the house. Equivalent parcels of land containing a bungalow and six-bedroom mansion are in very different bands. A pure LVT would charge each the same.
Sounds pretty regressive, unless I am missing something?
Indeed you're not. But a basic result from economics is that lump-sum taxes are more efficient than a proportionate or unit tax, because their unavoidable nature reduces economic distortion, since there is no incentive to reduce production/consumption to avoid it. Regressive, hence inequitable, and therefore not necessarily welfare-maximising, but efficient. The point of LVT in particular is that it's levied on the value of land if it were unimproved - hence incentivising people to make best use of the land they own, and not penalising them for improving/developing it. (The effect on agricultural land would be pretty small - the value of agricultural land without planning permission is low.)
I am making the best use of my property. By living in it with my family. A big rise in tax will disincentivise me from spending any of my remaining money elsewhere. Still, now we know. The Tories will steal my house after I've died of dementia. Labour will steal it while I'm still alive and compos mentis Incidentally, has anyone heard from the Lib Dems? They seem to have vanished.........
Not vanished at all, Mrs Cyclefree - but certainly a bit cheesed off by all the hardline Tory cheerleading on PB.
I could have swung one of three ways, but ultimately I can't condone either the tories or labour leaderships and manifestos.
I'm going to be voting for Tim (not a sin).
Wow, that's two votes the LDs have got, Pong! Both are for different reasons, I'm sure, but it's two more than some thought they might get.
Yeah.
The frustrating thing is this was the IDEAL election for the Lib dems.
They had the chance to present themselves as a serious and competent alternative government, pursuing a super-soft brexit. They could have got ~40%.
Sadly, Tim (not a sin) ain't no Trudeau.
IDK, maybe Farron also has a rocking set of abs (I am given to understand).
I think 40 is pushing it, but I thought they could at least push toward 20 seats if things went well. Now 5 is more likely than that.
I'm still undecided on that front. I like enough of the Tory pitch, in terms of I think it realistic, and dislike Corbyn enough to the point I should vote for them, but May is not very good. Farron isn't good either, but there are some decent LD ideas, and I feel bad for them and want third parties to do well and know the local candidate. As it doesn't matter in a safe seat its about going with my gut, and usually I'd consider local effort, but there's been nothing so far from anyone (LDs probably off fighting in Bath anyway), but my gut is uncertain.
I think the proposal of a cap has somewhat detoxified the dementia tax issue.
After all a cap was what was proposed under the coalition.
Anyway, I'll find a pdf of Labour's manifesto to see whether this Garden tax stuff is true.
I could have swung one of three ways, but ultimately I can't condone either the tories or labour leaderships and manifestos.
I'm going to be voting for Tim (not a sin).
Wow, that's two votes the LDs have got, Pong! Both are for different reasons, I'm sure, but it's two more than some thought they might get.
Yeah.
The frustrating thing is this was the IDEAL election for the Lib dems.
They had the chance to present themselves as a serious and competent alternative government, pursuing a super-soft brexit. They could have got ~40%.
Sadly, Tim (not a sin) ain't no Trudeau.
IDK, maybe Farron also has a rocking set of abs (I am given to understand).
I think 40 is pushing it, but I thought they could at least push toward 20 seats if things went well. Now 5 is more likely than that.
I'm still undecided on that front. I like enough of the Tory pitch, in terms of I think it realistic, and dislike Corbyn enough to the point I should vote for them, but May is not very good. Farron isn't good either, but there are some decent LD ideas, and I feel bad for them and want third parties to do well and know the local candidate. As it doesn't matter in a safe seat its about going with my gut, and usually I'd consider local effort, but there's been nothing so far from anyone (LDs probably off fighting in Bath anyway), but my gut is uncertain.
Bimey, kle, even your gut is indecisive? So your thumb hovering over the fire button for the remote drone would remain hovering, much like Mr Corbyn's, while our erstwhile terrorist gives you the finger and buggars off?
I could have swung one of three ways, but ultimately I can't condone either the tories or labour leaderships and manifestos.
I'm going to be voting for Tim (not a sin).
Wow, that's two votes the LDs have got, Pong! Both are for different reasons, I'm sure, but it's two more than some thought they might get.
Yeah.
The frustrating thing is this was the IDEAL election for the Lib dems.
They had the chance to present themselves as a serious and competent alternative government, pursuing a super-soft brexit. They could have got ~40%.
Sadly, Tim (not a sin) ain't no Trudeau.
IDK, maybe Farron also has a rocking set of abs (I am given to understand).
I think 40 is pushing it, but I thought they could at least push toward 20 seats if things went well. Now 5 is more likely than that.
I'm still undecided on that front. I like enough of the Tory pitch, in terms of I think it realistic, and dislike Corbyn enough to the point I should vote for them, but May is not very good. Farron isn't good either, but there are some decent LD ideas, and I feel bad for them and want third parties to do well and know the local candidate. As it doesn't matter in a safe seat its about going with my gut, and usually I'd consider local effort, but there's been nothing so far from anyone (LDs probably off fighting in Bath anyway), but my gut is uncertain.
I think the proposal of a cap has somewhat detoxified the dementia tax issue.
After all a cap was what was proposed under the coalition.
Anyway, I'll find a pdf of Labour's manifesto to see whether this Garden tax stuff is true.
It just says there will be a review into reforming council tax and consider options such as a land value tax - the drama of the detail seems to come from an old 'blueprint' of how such an option would work.
Bit of a disconnect. Council tax is a land value tax. All this is is a big rise in Council Tax.
No it's not council tax is a land occupation tax as it's paid by the occupier not the owner.
Eh ?
In my case that's the same person. But surely Labour should tax the OWNERS - this stinks to high heaven if it is on the occupiers ! More taxes for generation rent - is this right ?
If it's a proper Land Value Tax it should be on the owners, not the occupiers, because it's a tax on the potential fully exploited value of the land. ie you would pay the same tax on an undeveloped piece of land as on one with houses built on it, assuming the first has planning permission. The benefit claimed for LVT is that unlike other taxes its incentives are beneficial, not perverse. By contrast income tax discourages employment; rates discourage development.
Winston Churchill was in favour of one. No reason why it will cost more than Council Tax for ordinates. Supposed to be more progressive than CT and it's on owners don't believe Sun lies
Bit of a disconnect. Council tax is a land value tax. All this is is a big rise in Council Tax.
No it's not council tax is a land occupation tax as it's paid by the occupier not the owner.
Eh ?
In my case that's the same person. But surely Labour should tax the OWNERS - this stinks to high heaven if it is on the occupiers ! More taxes for generation rent - is this right ?
If it's a proper Land Value Tax it should be on the owners, not the occupiers, because it's a tax on the potential fully exploited value of the land. ie you would pay the same tax on an undeveloped piece of land as on one with houses built on it, assuming the first has planning permission. The benefit claimed for LVT is that unlike other taxes its incentives are beneficial, not perverse. By contrast income tax discourages employment; rates discourage development.
How do you stop landlords passing it on to their tenants through increased rent?
I could have swung one of three ways, but ultimately I can't condone either the tories or labour leaderships and manifestos.
I'm going to be voting for Tim (not a sin).
Wow, that's two votes the LDs have got, Pong! Both are for different reasons, I'm sure, but it's two more than some thought they might get.
Yeah.
The frustrating thing is this was the IDEAL election for the Lib dems.
They had the chance to present themselves as a serious and competent alternative government, pursuing a super-soft brexit. They could have got ~40%.
Sadly, Tim (not a sin) ain't no Trudeau.
IDK, maybe Farron also has a rocking set of abs (I am given to understand).
I think 40 is pushing it, but I thought they could at least push toward 20 seats if things went well. Now 5 is more likely than that.
I'm still undecided on that front. I like enough of the Tory pitch, in terms of I think it realistic, and dislike Corbyn enough to the point I should vote for them, but May is not very good. Farron isn't good either, but there are some decent LD ideas, and I feel bad for them and want third parties to do well and know the local candidate. As it doesn't matter in a safe seat its about going with my gut, and usually I'd consider local effort, but there's been nothing so far from anyone (LDs probably off fighting in Bath anyway), but my gut is uncertain.
Bimey, kle, even your gut is indecisive? So your thumb hovering over the fire button for the remote drone would remain hovering, much like Mr Corbyn's, while our erstwhile terrorist gives you the finger and buggars off?
My thumb would be decisive, it's one of the few parts of me that is decisive.
There are only a few things in life I am truly firm on though.
Skimmed milk is, in the words of Ron Swanson, water that is lying about being milk. And Coffee is the devil's drink.
Groan.... only if you (the Labour Party) want to increase the tax take. If you decide that the Land Tax has to raise the same amount as the Council Tax does now, the total will be exactly the same - surprise, surprise! But it will be more fairly and broadly based, so Tory land-speculators will be hit by it. But that is not a bad thing, is it? After all, they have done nothing to bring about its increase in value.
Why am I defending something in the Labour Party manifesto? Probably because of the long association of this policy with the Liberal Party; and also because I don`t believe the Labour Party will really do anything as sensible and reasonable as this. Two general elections, they were fully in favour of AV voting.
And then scuppered it when they had the chance to bring it into being.
What will the Sun and Mail run with - Labour garden tax bombshell or Corbyn Falklands gaffe ?
The Falklands gaffe (although it's not really a gaffe because he meant it) will repulse most right minded people of a certain age, but I doubt it will change much VI.
The garden tax, on the other hand, has the potential to be fatal.
Comments
Telegraph have it as well.
''The Labour manifesto contains plans for a Land Value Tax to replace council tax, which would hit people with gardens the hardest.
The manifesto contains no detail of how the tax would be applied, but the Conservatives claim tax on the the average family home would go up from £1,185 to £3,837 per year, an increase of £2,651 or 224 per cent.
Opponents of the tax say it would cause house prices to plummet, putting homeowners at risk of negative equity and forcing families to sell off their gardens to developers to lessen their tax burden.
Because the tax would also apply to agricultural land, it could have a knock-on effect of driving up food prices.
The policy was described as “nonsensical” by Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, who said it would “bring misery to every single family in Britain”. ''
Note its the tories who are bringing this 'small print' out. Just saying that for the benefit of those saying they are having a bad campaign.
Strikes me as a bombshell.
PREDICTION
Seats
Conservatives 350 (+19)
Labour 221 (-10)
SNP 47 (-9)
Lib Dems 10 (+2)
Others 22 (-2)
TORY MAJORITY 50
Vote Shares
Conservatives 43% +6%
Labour 33% +3%
Lib Dems 10% +2%
UKIP 3% -9%
TORY GAINS FROM LABOUR (18)
Halifax, Wirral West, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Barrow & Furness, Wolverhampton South West, Dewsbury, North East Derbyshire, Middlesbrough South, Walsall North, Wrexham, Wakefield, (Copeland), Stoke South, Clwyd South, Darlington, Scunthorpe, Dudley North, Great Grimsby
TORY GAINS FROM SNP (5)
Berwickshire, East Renfrewshire, Dumfries & Galloway, Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine, Aberdeen South
TORY GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (2)
Southport, North Norfolk, (Richmond Park)
TORY GAIN FROM UKIP (1)
Clacton
LABOUR GAINS FROM TORIES (4)
Bury North, Brighton Kemptown, Cardiff North, Bristol North West
LABOUR GAINS FROM SNP (2)
Edinburgh North & Leith, East Lothian
LABOUR GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (1)
Leeds North West
LABOUR GAINS FROM GREENS (1)
Brighton Pavilion
LIB DEM GAINS FROM TORIES (3)
Twickenham, Kingston & Surbiton, Bath
LIB DEM GAINS FROM SNP (2)
East Dunbartonshire, Edinburgh West
The point of LVT is that it's based on the undeveloped value of the land - hence no deadweight loss from disincentivising development.
Council tax is based on the value of the property, particularly the house. Equivalent parcels of land containing a bungalow and six-bedroom mansion are in very different bands. A pure LVT would charge each the same.
Are you sticking with these predictions, or planning to update? Good on you for laying it all out there.
No chance of those LAB gains except for Brighton Kemptown
We will not lose those seats to LD
Which in turn makes the two-party share look improbably high...
Anyway, given he didn't call May "First Lord of the Treasury" repeatedly, I think he did alright.
You'd be better replacing it with Croydon Central.
Nor will Labour gain Bury North if there is a swing to the Conservatives in northern England.
Paxman next.
Regressive, hence inequitable, and therefore not necessarily welfare-maximising, but efficient.
The point of LVT in particular is that it's levied on the value of land if it were unimproved - hence incentivising people to make best use of the land they own, and not penalising them for improving/developing it.
(The effect on agricultural land would be pretty small - the value of agricultural land without planning permission is low.)
Wednesday its Mishal Husain with the BBC Leaders debate
Friday David Dimbleby with May v Corbyn round 2
We badly need to hold Kemptown for next season, after Huddersfield Town's disastrous win today.
The Premiership still won't be anywhere near representative, mind, but we need to take every possible step in the right direction that we can.
It has put on 525000 views since teatime.
In my case that's the same person. But surely Labour should tax the OWNERS - this stinks to high heaven if it is on the occupiers !
More taxes for generation rent - is this right ?
Stephen Daisley in the Scottish Daily Mail - The SNP is on the attack because it has nothing to defend
'If it wasn’t for their election blunders, the SNP would have no campaign at all.'
That's another reason to be glad Labour won't win the next election. Jesus....
The local elections left the Tories solidly in control of the wards making up Cardiff North.
Gower is more likely to fall than Cardiff North.
(Although I think the Tories will hang on to them both, and will take some seats in the North East of Wales).
Still, now we know. The Tories will steal my house after I've died of dementia. Labour will steal it while I'm still alive and compos mentis
Incidentally, has anyone heard from the Lib Dems? They seem to have vanished.........
Bury North is a bit more of a stretch, but Labour's results in the Greater Manchester mayoral election really were RIP-ROARINGLY good -- I'm not sure all of that was a personal vote for Burnham.
Seems the nation may yet call upon him in their hour of need....
The frustrating thing is this was the IDEAL election for the Lib dems.
They had the chance to present themselves as a serious and competent alternative government, pursuing a super-soft brexit. They could have got ~40%.
Sadly, Tim (not a sin) ain't no Trudeau.
But the phrase "land value tax" wasn't coined in the Labour manifesto. And "land value tax" is generally understood to be a form of wealth tax - and wealth taxes are levied on the owners of assets not the users.
My point was that calling council tax a land value tax is misleading as it is paid by occupiers.
Labour’s manifesto commits the party to a review into “reforming council tax and business rates and consider new options such as a land value tax”.
Don't know where you got those figures or predictions from but they look pretty plausible to me.
Thanks for sharing them.
'Jeremy Paxman is such an oafish, boorish barker of pointless questions, like that drunk angry uncle who ruins the barbecue by yelling "BALLS" at anyone who disagrees with him. Who seriously thinks this is good journalism? If Corbyn or May tell him to fuck off they'll instantly win tens of thousands of new voters, possibly including me.'
I think 40 is pushing it, but I thought they could at least push toward 20 seats if things went well. Now 5 is more likely than that.
I'm still undecided on that front. I like enough of the Tory pitch, in terms of I think it realistic, and dislike Corbyn enough to the point I should vote for them, but May is not very good. Farron isn't good either, but there are some decent LD ideas, and I feel bad for them and want third parties to do well and know the local candidate. As it doesn't matter in a safe seat its about going with my gut, and usually I'd consider local effort, but there's been nothing so far from anyone (LDs probably off fighting in Bath anyway), but my gut is uncertain.
Mr Ears seems to have a very good understanding of SVT, if I may say so without appearing to condescend. It is a tax on the value of the land, as if it had not been developed. It makes no difference if you have one house built on it, no houses, or ten houses.
The moral case is that you yourself have not increased the value of the land (in all probability), instead its increase arises from the infrastructure that has been put in round it, such as road access and drainage, and the increased value placed upon it by the granting of planning permission - by the local council on behalf of society.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/29/tax-homes-treble-labour-plans-land-value-tax/
Not much in that, unless there's more hidden away-seems like the detail is from 'Labour blueprint for the tax from 2015' according to the story?
I do like how the story refers to as 'small print', a phrase designed to make us suspicious.
After all a cap was what was proposed under the coalition.
Anyway, I'll find a pdf of Labour's manifesto to see whether this Garden tax stuff is true.
Corbyn: Wouldn't defend Falkland Gardens, happy to take yours!
Jezza did well with Faisal but struggled with Paxman.
Tezza was hesistent throought but did marginally better with Paxman.
Scores on the doors:
Jezza 6
Tezza 5
Faisal 5 (Nice to see he's calmed the hell down after his post-Brexit breakdown)
Paxman 1 (As puffed up and self-absorbed as ever)
There are only a few things in life I am truly firm on though.
Skimmed milk is, in the words of Ron Swanson, water that is lying about being milk. And
Coffee is the devil's drink.
Why am I defending something in the Labour Party manifesto? Probably because of the long association of this policy with the Liberal Party; and also because I don`t believe the Labour Party will really do anything as sensible and reasonable as this. Two general elections, they were fully in favour of AV voting.
And then scuppered it when they had the chance to bring it into being.
The garden tax, on the other hand, has the potential to be fatal.