Comments on: Land Rental

By: Ron Khare

Ron Khare — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:08:44 +0000

Again – if you can make that tax income from anything other than land ownership, I'm fine with it. My point is that taxation implies ownership, and therefore no one can actually *own* their land. That's the problem: The US government owns every square inch of land. The best you can do is rent from them, and they can take it back any time they please, for any reason they want.

I don't have to pay income tax if I make no income – both state and federal. How could I? So if I have a plot of land, no money, and barely get by from growing my own food, why should the government have the right to take that from me, and render me homeless (where I have even less chance to survive)?

Now, I also believe that participation in society should be optional, not required – like a club, you pay membership fees and get the benefits. If you don't, no one cares. A lot of people would want to be a part of the club, but it being optional leaves the door open to those who wish to live a different lifestyle. But that's a whole other post.

By: Will Merydith

Will Merydith — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:00:01 +0000

I agree – a large aspect of the tax system is acceptance of a social contract. I believe in the existence/requirement of a social contract, even though I have issues with large portions of tax law.

By: Saffi

Saffi — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:05:28 +0000

I understand what you are saying. However (elderly folks or disabled persons aside), citizenship – being a member of a larger society – means that we do have a relationship, and therefore, responsibility to one another. Making enough money to pay your property taxes each year, should not be too burdensome to the type of lifestyle you describe.

If you don't want to earn enough money to pay taxes and your house is burning, as a society, we cannot let your house burn. In this case, it presents a danger to the citizens who do pay taxes. And those who do pay taxes must support the fire department that will extinguish your fire.

This is probably a tired example, but, personally, I don't see how any person can isolate themselves to such a degree where they never touch the aspects of our society that are supported by property tax dollars.

By: Ron Khare

Ron Khare — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 05:44:10 +0000

Nowhere around here, that's for certain. There are cases where, for instance, if land ownership dates back to before Independence (before the USA) then it's not taxed… I think it also varies by state and possibly county. But all the land around here is farmland (developed) and thereby taxed.

By: Ron Khare

Ron Khare — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 05:42:24 +0000

Yup.

Or, a better way would be to find a way to tax people without taking away their land – if you have no income, you should still be able to grow your food and live your way. By taking away land you rob people of the ability to provide for themselves without giving them another option. Basically it means you are required to have money to live… but with true land ownership, you could live your whole life without money.

By: Will Merydith

Will Merydith — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:26:28 +0000

There's a parallel here to our founding fathers . . . they felt similarly about "renting" from Great Britain, however once free from those shackles, they need to implement a tax/rent policy that would pay for all the "services" (what Saffi is pointing out) that serve the common good.

Before I go further, the question I have is do you have to pay property taxes on land in unincorporated areas? In other words are there places you can buy land and not pay tax on that land?