[EM] decision process design: wealth tax

[mrouse1 at mrouse.com]

>From Dave Ketchum <davek at clarityconnect.com>
>>Agreed that the bare land should be taxed, mostly for consuming roadside
frontage.

>>But, the five-star hotel owes more because it requires access to a major
highway.

Land with access to a major highway would be worth more, and thus would
pay higher "land rent." Combine with fuel taxes to pay for pollution and
wear and tear on the highway (thus having the extra traffic generated by
the hotel pay for the use of the road), and you would have a relatively
fair method of taxation. Since a five-star hotel increases the value of
the surrounding land more than a tenement building, the neighbors that
benefit would also pay a bit more, equal to the amount of increased value.

>>In other words, whatever activity imposes a load on a government budget
should be paying for the services it consumes.  Pick on water as a
service, and that can be charged by measuring consumption.  Try police
services and that fits more into people living.


I agree, user fees are a good way to fund government activities that do
not benefit everyone. Fees for things like licenses, permits, waste
removal, and possibly even national park access, are reasonable, as long
as the money is used for that service, or for functions of government that
benefit everyone. In addition, services that are for the general welfare,
like the police, fire department, military, courts, and many local
government functions, can be funded by a land value tax.

Michael Rouse

BTW, sorry about going off on a tangent not related to voting methods. :)