I'm in total disagreement with this system of taxing the hell out of a successful business so that others can go scot-free. Everyone should have skin in the game. The rest of the country is paying higher gas prices so that some can have a free ride.
Some have more beanie babies than others, should we tax those too? Am I hearing 'acre envy' here?
One of the main purposes of the government is to guard the land against foreign invasion. Land owners should not have a free ride.
You say you won't tax structures, so the owner of a 50 story office tower won't pay any more than the guy in a one bedroom shack with the same acreage?
True. The government is spending less to protect 1 acre than a million acres.
Either you haven't thought this through, or worse, you have.
I most definitely have, down to great detail. Our system is on the verge of failure. When we rebuild we will have to institute changes to avoid another failure. We are failing due to debt, and people voting themselves a free ride. Land reform and voting reform will go a long way in building a more perfect system after the failure. People need to be able to not go into so much debt to own land and build their lives. We need a self-adjusting system and concrete numbers to keep the government in check.
By the way, the land doesn't just sit there--without a long term plan, it won't yield anything but expense for the owner, although wildlife may do pretty well. Timber harvests (and replanting), crop production and rotation, even knowing which portions of the land are most suitable for what are things seldom learned within a couple of years. Some of the best stewards of land have passed it down through fifteen or more generations. Relatives of mine are on land which has been in the family since the mid 1600s and that is still productive land, except where the government won't allow the harvest of timber, timber planted by an ancestor 180 years ago. For the last 350+ years they have been paying taxes on that land. Enough.
Yes, that is the problem...everyone wanting a free ride.
So, if I own a gold vein, that should be paying the same rate per acre as West Texas scrubland? An Acre of Manhattan is worth the same as an acre north of Wamsutter, Wyoming? B.S.
If you don't want it, don't own it. Let someone else pay the taxes.
BUT you would open the door to the Federal Government (again) taking (more) land from those who have paid for it, with the same old tired excuse, so it could be 'more productive' (than the Indians, than the flyover country people, still the same forked tongue), even though the uses the owners can put their land to are often proscribed by the selfsame government you would have tax the land.
Like I said, I would constitutionally limit the government to 1/12 of the land. 11/12 would be private.
You miss who the threat is, here. Government is not the solution, it is the problem.
Since anarchy is not a solution, then we need reform. Land reform would be a big start. Stopping people from voting themselves a free ride would be another good step.
Who is getting the free ride?
Do you understand diddley squat about the oil industry, where crude oil prices come from, the Federal Government's role in increasing the price of fuels, the distribution of or blending of gasoline, tax structures, any of that?
You can own a dozen oil wells, but you fill up at the same pump everyone else does, pay the same price, and the same taxes (Federal and State, at least within the same state).
Funny how no one bitched when car manufacturers raised the price of a vehicle from $3000.00 to $30,000.00, but people will stand next to that vehicle drinking $2/liter ($8.00/gallon) bottled water and gripe about $4 gas.
Considering most of the world's oil is produced in regions which have a different tax structure than the US, it isn't a question of taxes on the oil industry raising prices so someone else can have a free ride, unless you count the Government employees who collect those taxes or the people in other countries who build the world's tallest buildings from the revenue on their oil.