« The BBC's bias against understanding | Main | Worker ownership: threat or promise? »

September 12, 2018

Comments

Don Albertson

25 years ago when our county reassessed property values, it occurred to me that a system similar to what is described here might be effective. My model was a claim race in which every horse entered can be bought by a registered buyer for the claiming price. The idea is to keep the races competitive so that a stakes winner can't pick up a few extra bucks by entering a $5000 claiming race. Every property owner appraises their own property and offers it for sale at the appraised price. Taxes are assessed based on the appraised value. The only downside to that is there is no protection against an unscrupulous person with a lot of money who decides to buy up the entire neighborhood. If I want to continue to live in my house then I have to appraise it highly and pay more taxes.

Hugh Bantin

The article does not recognise there is not free market as there is no perfect knowledge and the biased rules are written for a market of tangible not intangible assets. Provide the proper controls to ensure the market works properly and not as it does in isolation from the Commons, Household and state all of who pick up the mess the market creates.

David Friedman

Two real world examples of the self-assessing system:

In Periclean Athens, the richest citizens had to produce a public good every other year. If you were selected, you could get out of it by showing that there was someone richer than you who hadn't done one last year, wasn't doing one this year.

How do I show you are richer than me? I offer to exchange everything I own for everything you own. If you refuse, you get to produce the public good.

For a more modern example, consider a claiming race. Entering a $5000 claiming race requires you to be willing to sell your horse for $5000.

Mike Berry

Why would wealth assessment 'impose a massive cognitive load onto all of us'?

Much of the population have little in the ways of assets aside from a house, a car and a bit of meager savings? You could also include pension plans but they're relatively straightfoward to value though there's a good case for setting a threshold below which they wouldn't be taxed.

Most of these assets are already insured so I don't see any reason why this kind of assessment should cause any problem at all.

Most

Typo Ted

Typo "I these senses I agree with Diane"

D

Another problem, it would be a tax on sentiment. My folks have lived in the same house for 36 years and raised their family there, it's worth more to them than it is to someone of similar wealth.

On the othe other hand, this might be seen as correcting for the bias towards what we have already. Forget what it's called.

I guess raising the question: is that really a bias at all?

The comments to this entry are closed.

blogs I like

Why S&M?

Blog powered by Typepad