So far as land use is concerned, we already have a planning system which restricts use to what is wanted by the whole community (given that the system could be improved). The market value reflects permitted use.

Oops "Residential land in Mayfair is lower value than that in Stoke." Got that a bit wrong!

I don't think I'm making it any more complicated than the current system.

I'm highlighting that the tax system should encourage the desired outcome for land use – for society's benefit overall.

Is the proposed tax a flat rate proportional to land area or to market value of the land?

You are making things too complicated. Taxing land is simple. You value all the land, apply a single rate nationally and send the bill to the owner. Agricultural land is low value relative to residential. Residential land in Mayfair is lower value than that in Stoke. The value depends on permitted use, natural attributes and, mainly public, investment.

All other taxes on land should be abolished, i.e. business rates (which actually collect quite a lot of land rent – hence the commercial property market is not so volatile), Council Tax, stamp duty land tax (why do we want to hobble the land market?), there are a couple of others.

I agree with you that we need a consumption tax and it should apply only to consumption of non renewables. This would leave services untaxed, although any consumables that are used would be taxed.

Income tax should be abolished for those earning the average wage and corporation tax could be reduced to compensate for the increase over business rates (recognising that capital is so very mobile).

However, there should be a hypothecated tax on incomes (NICS?) for health, pensions, care of the elderly to make the link between tax and public services more up front.

Some of this is in the new manifesto of the Labour Land Campaign, see http://www.labourland.org.

Thank you for the excellent phrase:

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance”

Hopefully this site and others provide this, albeit on a small-ish scale.

Judging by the comments on many of the mainstream blogs, BBC / Guardian etc. there are quite a few people who get it, but they don’t represent the majority I’m afraid.

Hardly any of my friends or family share my enlightenment, and I dare not push too far for want of appearing too zaney or preachy!

The ceaseless scrutiny of money & power must continue, and one by one we shall get stronger.

I won’t get too drawn into policy formulation just yet, as I’m mentally still in “diagnosis” stage.

However, I will state that taxing land satisfies that one key criteria is that it is immovable and non-evasive. So therefore it can’t be squirreled off-shore.
I guess it would need to be tied to Land Use. Agricultural land and woodland should have low tax (but tight restrictions) to preserve the ecology. Dense residential areas should have high tax (to deter excessive developments). Business rates should be quite high too.

Also consideration for Taxing consumption – with tax rate proportion to the extent of social good – so food, clothes and necessities 5%, non essential consumables 10%, higher order capital goods 15-20%, and out and out luxuries, high powered cars, yachts etc. 40%). No exceptions, no loopholes.

It seems a bit complicated, but it needn’t be. And might well be simpler than current reams of tax code policy!

Ultimately, taxation policy should be arranged to incentivise the desired behaviours for broader social benefit.

I’m not that familiar with this whole area, but I would like to know how close your proposals (and my tentative efforts) are to the Scandinavian model, which one would summarise as: High tax but high productivity, high wages, high living standards and high social welfare.

This seems the most appropriate model to adopt in the near term as it is up and running and proven to be effective.

– Hawkeye

Yes, your caricature of the Daily Mail is correct, so it is a surprise – unless Diamond is getting softened up to be hung out to dry just like Fred Goodwin – or the paper might just revert back to type the next day.

The Tottenham rioting could lead to copy cat events – all looking worryingly like the UK's first bout of the US inspired "Flash Rob" phenomena.

An interesting week ahead indeed.

– Hawkeye

I think uncle Hester is worried, as he should be, he has been forced to stick his head over the parapet to defend the indefensible. A PR exercise in damage limitation to prepare for another infusion of blood from the British taxpayer.

I would be worried if I was him. The fact that the Torygraph has published articles that seem to doubt, what has been the accepted rationale to deal with the present crisis, should have him adopting the current fashion amongst the other practioners of feral finance, brown tailoring.

& Lo & behold, I have just found this, an article from "The Mail", which, although I am not that familiar with British newspapers, I assume is a right wing tabloid usually occupied with the pursuit of single parent mothers & immigrants etc as the cause of all that is evil in the world. If my assumption is correct then I am right in my delight that such a publication could present such an article.

It contains a great pic of a smug Bob Diamond & it quotes his earnings. The man who last week congratulated Osbourne on his AUSTERITY measures. Maybe it's just me, but was't that an unfortunate use of language. I wasn't aware that the UK was undergoing austerity, I thought it was necessary cuts to balance the defecit, which were left over from the previous Labour government. Could it be that this souless prick has gotten to sure of himself ?

Here's the article :-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2022993/Capitalism-crisis-80-years-ago-banking-collapse-devastated-Europe-triggering-war.html

I think this sort of thing should worry Uncle Hester.

Just my imagination probably, but I think there is something deeper going on as regards these Tottenham riots. I get a strong sense of early 1980's deja vu. I was part of some of those riots, there were then labels attached to the why of it, poll tax, sus, etc. But I actually think they stemmed from an underlying anxiety, a feeling that someting just wasn't right, a feeling of repression.

Promises to be yet another interesting week.

Sorry for the delay. Fruit picking, jam making and general spending time with the children.

I read the peice. Very interesting to see those charts. The US bail out of European banks is one of those long running sores as I'm sure you know. People have been shoating about it since the first evidence cane to light a year or more ago. But the close correlation is new – to me at least.

The only thing I found struck a false note for me was the slight jingoistic tone of 'us American's bailing out those Europeans'. Not that it isn't true. It's the tone that worries me.

It's actualy poor people and general tax payers in every country bailing out teh financial class of every country.

Neither the US Treasury nor teh European central banks bail anytone out our of generosity. The Americans were bailing out Dexia and others because they had and have huge Dollar denominated loans and liabilities for which they need dollars.

I think the surges of money are in part due to the on-going war between Berlin and Washington about bailing out. I wrote about this a long while ago – about how Berlin is against bailing out and I think what you are seeing is Washington feeling forced to bail our banks it wants bailed out which Berlin and Europe were not so keen on bailing.

The other thing to remember is it is not just the Americans bailng out Europe, European money has been flowing the other way. Consider the hundreds of Billion of Dollar debt the BoE has purchased over the last year.

Thye BoE buying US debt whiel we are being told we much make savage cuts because our borrowing is too high. I see this as a reciprochal bail out.

Something which I think we are about to see a great deal more of in teh last ditch attempt to head off melt down in Europe.

Mainstream will always triumph. Therefore we have to hope that mainstream self transforms.