• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

You should be forced to sell your house and rent

I think it's generally targeting gen xyz
Nah, it’s a boomer thing. They’re hyper competitive and would sell their own children for a nickel.
 
Old people complaining about the debt and arguing we need to raise the retirement age when you tell them they need to go back to work
View attachment 67501234

I like how every plan to raise the age you get SS always includes a grace period where the people currently on it still get it and only Millennials and Gen Z will have to work longer 🤡
2 schools of thought on that...
1-Debt is not a result of people working or people retiring...it is a result of excessive spending
2-Retirement age for SS should be recalculated because our life expectancy is different than when SS timelines were initially constructed. And if that recalculation is decided on then they should grandfather people within a certain time frame and then the rest should still have time to plan accordingly.

But one has nothing to do with the other and you are still making stupid "If this, then that" comparisons. You arent doing yourself any favors.
 
Imagine getting all emotional, or at least pretending to for affect, over something so stupid

You're projecting.
 
If it is correct that property taxes are a major source of revenue at the state and local levels, how does anyone propose to make up for the shortfall the policy proposed in this thread would cause?
I cannot speak for @Nomad4Ever , but I'd imagine people would still be paying a site rent. And those living in more 'desirable' locations would pay a higher rent based on the value of the location. Just instead of a landlord, the money goes directly to government coffers. Why do we need a middleman?
First of all @medi I feel like I need to clarify I don't actually think all home owners should be forced to rent their homes and threatened with homelessness.

But I do support the government owning all land even under a capitalist system. Like @Geoist I believe that land is a finite resource and should be owned collectively by society. Under a capitalist system this would take form of renting the land from the government basically. So property taxes would be replaced by a tax on the land instead of what you develop on it. In theory this is supposed to encourage optimal land use as you are incentivized to improve the land as much as possible since you aren't paying tax on the property and only on the land.

But the proposal in the OP isn't serious. I want housing to be free and guaranteed. Even setting aside more radical changes like a land value tax or heaven forbid...socialism :eek:...countries in Europe have generally funded free/subsidized government housing with high income taxes.
 
Or maybe not, since it's a common refrain
Maybe common among bigots--as I'm not one to hang around with them, I'm from the North, and I've never heard it either.

Now I know NEVER to use it. You should eliminate it from your lexicon too, just to portray yourself correctly in debates. Just an FYI :)
 
The government would own all the land and facilitate housing. If people got too lazy it would just raise rents since apparently the threat of homelessness is what makes people productive workers.

Therefore under my plan we would have a much more productive workforce.
Joe Biden should immediately make you HUD secretary and run on your plan
 
Maybe common among bigots--as I'm not one to hang around with them, I'm from the North, and I've never heard it either.

Now I know NEVER to use it. You should eliminate it from your lexicon too, just to portray yourself correctly in debates. Just an FYI :)
Thank you so much for your sincere concern with my reputation.
 
Housing is a right.

One day we will understand this.

Just like it took us centuries to understand slavery was evil.

One day we will understand how evil it is to allow homelessness.
 
Certainly does,

My son when his grandparents die, and my wife and I die will likely have an inheritance of $ 2.5 million in today's Canadian dollars in various assets. Of course that likely will be 40 years into the future
Yep
 
Please allow me to take this slowly. Even though you wrote that you are not serious, I am.

So this part of your answer (And thank you for the response, by the way.) - - - this:

So property taxes would be replaced by a tax on the land . . .

Who would be paying the tax on the land, if the land is owned by the government? And which governing body would own the land?
 
There are millions upon millions of Americans who will inherit nothing, and in fact, will be financially burdened by their parents.

Especially today when seniors are expected to use all their assets to pay for their medical needs in their golden years and are preyed upon for reverse mortgages to cover living expenses and the upkeep of their homes.
 
Thank you. Renters have been opposed by the home owning elite for too long. Renters of the world unite.
Yes.

What better way for Biden to regain lost polling in the Midwest swing states then by promising socialization of all housing stock and making the whole country renters. Drumpf will be smashed in November
 
Please allow me to take this slowly. Even though you wrote that you are not serious, I am.

Sorry, I am serious, but the proposal in my OP isn't. My argument is that people who own their homes and are secure in their housing obviously still work. I think there should be universal free or very cheap housing provided by the government and I don't think that would cause people to not work.

So this part of your answer (And thank you for the response, by the way.) - - - this:


Who would be paying the tax on the land, if the land is owned by the government? And which governing body would own the land?
The government is the governing body that would own the land. Individuals or private organizations would be paying the tax/rent to the government for the land.
 
Back
Top Bottom