The playing field of specuvestors vs FTBers isn't level in the first place, its grossly weighted in favour of the specuvestors.
What? Your posts are becoming increasingly schizophrenic... This is even on the same page. My head hurts from speed of the u-turn.
Mate the house will probably be sold in the end for a figure in the high 200K. A house on that street went for 500K (I viewed it) but it was done up smartly. These, yes, are due a severe correction.
Yes, thats why only the rich get decent healthcare in Ireland, the scoundrels. Oh no wait, they don't. Unlike in America, where they do. You're attitude is that the strong should win regardless. In matters of profit and loss, I agree. Home ownership shouldn't be a vehicle for profit, its a social requirement the very same as healthcare. Treating it as such encourages profiteering. And yet again, I am repeating myself.How so? They don't necessarily have more money and even if they do, is that a reason for the government to intervene? Every market favours the wealthy, it's impossible not too. I don't go beating down the door of my local politician if I get outbid on ebay by someone I suspect has more wealth than me.
I just can't track what this has to do with anything. Are you investing in apartments or something? Because if you are, then land tax will be perfect, along with any other high density housing. This is not what I would call an optimal solution.Land tax is about the only tax that doesn't interfere with or distort the free market. If you tax labour then you create an incentive not to work, if you tax wealth then you disincentivise the creation of the same, if you tax goods and services you discourage their consumption. However, if you tax the land (not the houses) that people own then little interference results. It is also proportionally fair - if the government builds rail services with public money that increases the worth of your land then you pay a correspondingly increased tax.
I would say that supporting land tax is very much in line with my "laissez-faire" beliefs would you not?
Bwaahahah!Cribs: Irish Style
If any Irish in America are reading and considering a return to Ireland....
This is the dream that a million hard-earned dollars can buy you and your family in a South Dublin Suburb...
[broken link removed]=
Why does it cost so much ? Well, the celtic tiger economy is just boomin'.. and you can be part of it
(covers mouth to suppress laughter).
Hurry now, auction's on soon.
Yes, thats why only the rich get decent healthcare in Ireland, the scoundrels. Oh no wait, they don't. Unlike in America, where they do. You're attitude is that the strong should win regardless. In matters of profit and loss, I agree. Home ownership shouldn't be a vehicle for profit, its a social requirement the very same as healthcare. Treating it as such encourages profiteering. And yet again, I am repeating myself.
Where exactly did I say that? Its no good putting words in my mouth. I've already said several times what I think should happen, which is higher property taxes for houses after the first, to make it uneconomical to even bid in the first place for speculators. Why am I repeating myself?
With rental yields what they are, there is zero chance of making a profit by letting the house out, so that idea goes out the window.
Yes, but only on properties after the first, with higher taxes annually for every subsequent property.
Splendid I'm very happy for you. You might consider passing on some of that wisdom to the rest of the country, however.
Making the most important financial decision of their lives in ignorance is not something that should be advised, unless you are trying to pull a fast one.
What information have I provided that is misleading/wrong?You have repeatedly provided information that is both misleading and flat out wrong throughout this discussion to support your own points, asking questions that have already been answered, and have a habit of waiting until after a discussion has died down to come flying in from the wings with your knickers around your ankles, trying to score the odd parting shot. Perhaps someone else would like to field that.
I really don't see much point in discussing anything with you, either.
Good luck with those old hands, though.
The idea of a yearly property tax is to cover local authority costs. This way areas with higher LA costs could have higher taxes. I don't see why this tax should change dependent on the number of houses you own or why someone who only owns one house should be exempt.
Yes, thats why only the rich get decent healthcare in Ireland, the scoundrels. Oh no wait, they don't. Unlike in America, where they do. You're attitude is that the strong should win regardless. In matters of profit and loss, I agree. Home ownership shouldn't be a vehicle for profit, its a social requirement the very same as healthcare. Treating it as such encourages profiteering. And yet again, I am repeating myself.
I just can't track what this has to do with anything. Are you investing in apartments or something? Because if you are, then land tax will be perfect, along with any other high density housing. This is not what I would call an optimal solution.
A whole lot of what hes saying makes little sense to me, what with endless redundancy and schizophrenic points being made one in opposition to the other. At this point I wash my hands of it, himslef and glenbhoy. Life is too short.Your claims of little interference make no sense whatsoever to me, because the ability to actually pay a land tax is still income dependent.
I'm pretty sure you suggested that ALL taxation should be replaced by a land tax. Currently, we fund a great deal of other things through taxation beyond local authority expenses.
I fail to see why a land tax is more equitable than an income based tax. Maybe you might like to explain. Your claims of little interference make no sense whatsoever to me, because the ability to actually pay a land tax is still income dependent. How you plan to assess a landtax liability I imagine must be value dependent, and if there is a land tax, there is no incentive to own land at all which means no incentive to develop it either. I'm not entirely sure that is healthy either.
Well thats a fair question. First of all there is a distinction between speculators for profit and buy to let landlords. The way to approach it is first of all to deal with the speculators by putting prohibitive taxes on the PURCHASE of second and subsequent properties, graded higher with each property. This prevents this endless tail chasing up the tower of price rises which we have today. Not to make it so prohibitive that its impossible to own a second or even a third house, but enough to take the profits out of flipping, and general speculation.tententwenty
Please could you tell me what provision that you will make to ensure that renters like me will still have a place to live when you tax investors out of the market.
Oh, and the immigrants, students, school-leavers, job-movers, lower-incomes etc.
Maybe the pro/anti-speculators/Commie-vs-Capitalist/Govt intervention-vs-freemarket argument could be continued in a separate thread?At this point I wash my hands of it, himslef and glenbhoy. Life is too short.
Since the tax is based on the value of the land, there is plenty of incentive to develop. If own land worth €1M and pay 10% tax, then I pay the government €100k a year even if the land lies idle. If I build a hotel on the land, the land is still worth €1M and I still pay the government €10k, regardless of what I make from the hotel.
Well thats a fair question. First of all there is a distinction between speculators for profit and buy to let landlords. The way to approach it is first of all to deal with the speculators by putting prohibitive taxes on the PURCHASE of second and subsequent properties, graded higher with each property. This prevents this endless tail chasing up the tower of price rises which we have today. Not to make it so prohibitive that its impossible to own a second or even a third house, but enough to take the profits out of flipping, and general speculation.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?