3 ms·

They get 25% of crown estate profits, but I’m not sure they really ‘own’ that land per se. And in general, the elite own a huge amount of the UK (most notably O

They get 25% of crown estate profits, but I’m not sure they really ‘own’ that land per se. And in general, the elite own a huge amount of the UK (most notably Oxbridge colleges with incredible land ownership). We can make a case to take ‘back’ the Queen’s private or crown estate land, but why just them? IMO, casting judgement on what historic ownership is ‘rightful’ is really hard.

kcartlidge 4y ago
We'd struggle to fairly take it back; probably not even worth trying. And whilst I never said so specifically I presumed it apparent that I never meant just the Queen. I accept I could have been clearer (sorry). The first steps might be: - An end to the honours system (entirely - even though many 'commoners' get them now it perpetuates the class concepts) - Fair and universal application of inheritance tax to reduce the inequalities over the generations - The taxation of assets (beyond a certain point so that people don't need to sell their home) and not just income All those have arguments for/against, but it would be good for them to be honestly discussed and considered by those with the power to effect change.
- barry-cotter 4y ago
  > The taxation of assets (beyond a certain point so that people don't need to sell their home) and not just income. That’s a great way to discourage investment and capital formation and encourage emigration. There’s a reason wealth taxes are not popular in OECD countries. https://taxfoundation.org/wealth-taxes-in-the-oecd/ https://taxfoundation.org/wealth-taxes-in-the-oecd/
  - kcartlidge 4y ago
    That rather assumes that untaxed wealth (as opposed to income) is productive wealth, which is not necessarily the case. And that even if it were, there's an assumption that the (perhaps valid) concerns are the priority and not the introduction of a fairer system.
  - dane-pgp 4y ago
    > There’s a reason wealth taxes are not popular in OECD countries. Well, there are two reasons: the Prisoner's Dilemma, and good old fashioned bribery (or "campaign financing" as we euphemistically call it). Fortunately, however, the recent agreement for a global minimum corporation tax rate[0] shows that major economies can sometimes solve the coordination problem needed to avoid the "race to the bottom" that capitalists try to impose on nation states. A modest proposal would be that the top 1% of wealth holders in the world would have to pay a 1% annual tax to their country of residence. The WTO could be tasked with determining the true wealth of any multi-millionaires who bribe national officials into under-reporting their holdings. Any country that defects from this agreement, and any multi-millionaire who hides in one of those countries, would be met with sanctions and treated like the corrupt oligarch that they are. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_minimum_corporate_tax_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_minimum_corporate_tax_r...

kcartlidge 4y ago

We'd struggle to fairly take it back; probably not even worth trying. And whilst I never said so specifically I presumed it apparent that I never meant just the Queen. I accept I could have been clearer (sorry). The first steps might be: - An end to the honours system (entirely - even though many 'commoners' get them now it perpetuates the class concepts) - Fair and universal application of inheritance tax to reduce the inequalities over the generations - The taxation of assets (beyond a certain point so that people don't need to sell their home) and not just income All those have arguments for/against, but it would be good for them to be honestly discussed and considered by those with the power to effect change.

barry-cotter 4y ago
> The taxation of assets (beyond a certain point so that people don't need to sell their home) and not just income. That’s a great way to discourage investment and capital formation and encourage emigration. There’s a reason wealth taxes are not popular in OECD countries. https://taxfoundation.org/wealth-taxes-in-the-oecd/ https://taxfoundation.org/wealth-taxes-in-the-oecd/
- kcartlidge 4y ago
  That rather assumes that untaxed wealth (as opposed to income) is productive wealth, which is not necessarily the case. And that even if it were, there's an assumption that the (perhaps valid) concerns are the priority and not the introduction of a fairer system.
- dane-pgp 4y ago
  > There’s a reason wealth taxes are not popular in OECD countries. Well, there are two reasons: the Prisoner's Dilemma, and good old fashioned bribery (or "campaign financing" as we euphemistically call it). Fortunately, however, the recent agreement for a global minimum corporation tax rate[0] shows that major economies can sometimes solve the coordination problem needed to avoid the "race to the bottom" that capitalists try to impose on nation states. A modest proposal would be that the top 1% of wealth holders in the world would have to pay a 1% annual tax to their country of residence. The WTO could be tasked with determining the true wealth of any multi-millionaires who bribe national officials into under-reporting their holdings. Any country that defects from this agreement, and any multi-millionaire who hides in one of those countries, would be met with sanctions and treated like the corrupt oligarch that they are. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_minimum_corporate_tax_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_minimum_corporate_tax_r...