Ownership of Real Estate

Among many of the topics I stumble through I find this one more amusing than some.

I own, in the modern vernacular, a farm house & barns sw of a2, and a lake cottage around Gaylord.

However, what does that mean?

Well if I don't pay the taxes the state will revoke my ownership, so do I really own it, or does the state?

Studied this question a while back and found there are no real cases of absolute ownership in this country for individuals.  The governments, either State or Federal, have absolute ownership of all real estate.

In England it may be different, as a Lord, or Lady, may have absolute ownership of their land.

The good news is that the 6% real estate commissions to sell property you may or may not own have been dealt a major blow.

Floyd Robertson wrote:The good news is that the 6% real estate commissions to sell property you may or may not own have been dealt a major blow.

Well there is that, though one property was inherited and the other bought a long time ago.

When I said own, I meant without mortgages, since neither has any outstanding liens on it.

Really sort of surprised with the internets that real estate brokers are still in business.

Trapper Gus wrote:Among many of the topics I stumble through I find this one more amusing than some.

I own, in the modern vernacular, a farm house & barns sw of a2, and a lake cottage around Gaylord.

However, what does that mean?

Well if I don't pay the taxes the state will revoke my ownership, so do I really own it, or does the state?

Studied this question a while back and found there are no real cases of absolute ownership in this country for individuals.  The governments, either State or Federal, have absolute ownership of all real estate.

In England it may be different, as a Lord, or Lady, may have absolute ownership of their land.

And yet you want wealth taxes and 90% tax brackets.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:Among many of the topics I stumble through I find this one more amusing than some.

I own, in the modern vernacular, a farm house & barns sw of a2, and a lake cottage around Gaylord.

However, what does that mean?

Well if I don't pay the taxes the state will revoke my ownership, so do I really own it, or does the state?

Studied this question a while back and found there are no real cases of absolute ownership in this country for individuals.  The governments, either State or Federal, have absolute ownership of all real estate.

In England it may be different, as a Lord, or Lady, may have absolute ownership of their land.

And yet you want wealth taxes and 90% tax brackets.  

Absolutely.

As noted, there are already wealthy taxes on real estate, plus as sorts of other laws that show that the government, not the individual, has absolute ownership, which in any sane society, is how it should be.  We are not living in a feudal society, though some very wealthy people would like to change that.

As for high taxes on "income" no one person's input is worth the income some of these people receive, they are just being paid for the value other people are creating because of how the economic system is set up.  I'm saying we should have a sane system, not the insane one we have right now.

So Trapper Gus is a communist. Does that surprise anyone? I suspected as much when he admitted enjoying eating steak amongst the nomenklatura of Ann Arbor.

Zurn wrote:So Trapper Gus is a communist.   Does that surprise anyone?  I suspected as much when he admitted enjoying eating steak amongst the nomenklatura of Ann Arbor.  

Wrong again birdbrain.

As I have been saying on TOB and this board since I started posting on them, back in the 1990's, and which anyone who has a memory would know, I support a rational set of rules for the economy which create the Enlightenment's ideal, promoted by Adam Smith and almost every other real economists who were not shills for the very wealthy, of The Greatest Economic Good for the Greatest Number.

A system where the power of the wealthy to amass wealth via having the power to do so is offset by controls such as high taxes on high profits to force the wealth to be used for the Greater Good instead of being in the hands of the very few, where it has diminished marginal returns.  

This is the ideal which this country was founded upon and anyone who doesn't like it should move to somewhere else, like Russia, which is following the ideal of amassing wealthy for the few at the top, one of the reasons so many of our very wealthy people are supporting Trump and his Putin love over Biden.

Depends on if you’re in an HOA or not

Trapper Gus wrote:at the government, not the individual, has absolute ownership, which in any sane society, is how it should be.  

That's exactly what a communist would say!

Zurn wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:at the government, not the individual, has absolute ownership, which in any sane society, is how it should be.  

That's exactly what a communist would say!

It is just reality for western governments. Society with absolute real-estate ownership, which would be what existed in Europe before the revolution to semi-democratic rule, are pretty much gone, and have been for a couple of centuries.

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

And yet you want wealth taxes and 90% tax brackets.  

Absolutely.

As noted, there are already wealthy taxes on real estate, plus as sorts of other laws that show that the government, not the individual, has absolute ownership, which in any sane society, is how it should be.  We are not living in a feudal society, though some very wealthy people would like to change that.

As for high taxes on "income" no one person's input is worth the income some of these people receive, they are just being paid for the value other people are creating because of how the economic system is set up.  I'm saying we should have a sane system, not the insane one we have right now.

Trapper talking rubbish about government control and worker value again. Yawn…

Democratic socialism is the way forward.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:Democratic socialism is the way forward.

That’ll be perfect for those that don’t work hard.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Absolutely.

As noted, there are already wealthy taxes on real estate, plus as sorts of other laws that show that the government, not the individual, has absolute ownership, which in any sane society, is how it should be.  We are not living in a feudal society, though some very wealthy people would like to change that.

As for high taxes on "income" no one person's input is worth the income some of these people receive, they are just being paid for the value other people are creating because of how the economic system is set up.  I'm saying we should have a sane system, not the insane one we have right now.

Trapper talking rubbish about government control and worker value again.  Yawn…

Just remembering the 19050's. 60's & 70's, when workers were valued, due to the economic structures in place, instead of having you shit upon them.

TravelinMan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:Democratic socialism is the way forward.

That’ll be perfect for those that don’t work hard.

heck yeah.

"Hard work" is a myth The Man uses to get rich on the back of the working class.

TravelinMan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:Democratic socialism is the way forward.

That’ll be perfect for those that don’t work hard.

TM shitting on workers again.

Senator Warren has the start of a good idea...

[tw]1770178578589622683[/tw]

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

That’ll be perfect for those that don’t work hard.

TM shitting on workers again.

Senator Warren has the start of a good idea...

[tw]1770178578589622683[/tw]

If at first you can’t succeed, have someone else pay your way.

Wonder what genocidal regime my tax money wil go to support?

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

TM shitting on workers again.

Senator Warren has the start of a good idea...

[tw]1770178578589622683[/tw]

If at first you can’t succeed, have someone else pay your way.

Wonder what genocidal regime my tax money wil go to support?

Putin is number one. He is the one pulling the strings in Israel.

Citation needed.

https://www.icct.nl/publication/how-russia-uses-israel-gaza-crisis-its-disinformation-campaign-against-west

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-is-russias-role-in-the-israel-gaza-crisis/

https://www.reuters.com/world/russias-putin-sees-political-economic-upside-israels-war-with-hamas-2023-11-17/



https://time.com/6329850/hamas-gaza-russia-putin-israel/

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

TM shitting on workers again.

Senator Warren has the start of a good idea...

[tw]1770178578589622683[/tw]

If at first you can’t succeed, have someone else pay your way.

Wonder what genocidal regime my tax money wil go to support?

I cant comprehend why any dipshit would defend the wealth of people they never could even dream about being.
Also, I pay my share, they don't ... and that's the problem.

https://fortune.com/2024/03/18/gilded-age-layoffs-ceos-shareholders-corporate-profits-inequality/

https://www.vox.com/money/2024/3/13/24086102/billionaires-wealthy-tax-avoidance-loopholes

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/3/5/2227463/-Trump-s-tax-cut-came-up-very-short-of-promised-benefits

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/8/5/2185321/-Walras-on-Economic-Optima-and-How-to-Get-There

AvgMSUJoe wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

If at first you can’t succeed, have someone else pay your way.

Wonder what genocidal regime my tax money wil go to support?

I cant comprehend why any dipshit would defend the wealth of people they never could even dream about being.
Also, I pay my share, they don't ... and that's the problem.

I can’t understand why any dipshit would openly support socialism just because a bunch of people he doesn’t even know are wildly more successful than he’ll ever be. Oh. Wait. Maybe that IS the reason? LOL!!

TravelinMan wrote:

AvgMSUJoe wrote:
I cant comprehend why any dipshit would defend the wealth of people they never could even dream about being.
Also, I pay my share, they don't ... and that's the problem.

I can’t understand why any dipshit would openly support socialism just because a bunch of people he doesn’t even know are wildly more successful than he’ll ever be. Oh. Wait. Maybe that IS the reason? LOL!!

Bezos/Musk pays an effective rate of 15% im good.

Projecting your feelings of inadequacy based on income says more about you than me.

TravelinMan wrote:

AvgMSUJoe wrote:
I cant comprehend why any dipshit would defend the wealth of people they never could even dream about being.
Also, I pay my share, they don't ... and that's the problem.

I can’t understand why any dipshit would openly support socialism just because a bunch of people he doesn’t even know are wildly more successful than he’ll ever be. Oh. Wait. Maybe that IS the reason? LOL!!

You realize that since i am paying more of a percentage of my income then they are, one could argue that they are the socialists wrecking the roads i pay for with their trucks, paying the welfare on their employees, etc. pay your fair share.

AvgMSUJoe wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

I can’t understand why any dipshit would openly support socialism just because a bunch of people he doesn’t even know are wildly more successful than he’ll ever be. Oh. Wait. Maybe that IS the reason? LOL!!

You realize that since i am paying more of a percentage of my income then they are, one could argue that they are the socialists wrecking the roads i pay for with their trucks, paying the welfare on their employees, etc. pay your fair share.

It always comes back to roads and sewers with you guys, doesn’t it? LOL

If the Forbes 400 collectively gave away $4 trillion in net worth, they could all still comfortably be billionaires. We are reaching the point where it is a moral imperative to take their money.

Cameron wrote:If the Forbes 400 collectively gave away $4 trillion in net worth, they could all still comfortably be billionaires. We are reaching the point where it is a moral imperative to take their money.

I could give you a million dollars and not materially affect my life style. Does that mean I have a moral imperative to write you a check?

Do better.

TravelinMan wrote:

Cameron wrote:If the Forbes 400 collectively gave away $4 trillion in net worth, they could all still comfortably be billionaires. We are reaching the point where it is a moral imperative to take their money.

I could give you a million dollars and not materially affect my life style.  Does that mean I have a moral imperative to write you a check?

Do better.

We could end world hunger and provide clean drinking water to every human on the planet (plus SO much more) at the cost of making the Forbes 400 "only" $1.25 billionaires. Millions of lives could be saved, and the 400 rich cunts can still retain more wealth than they could reasonably ever spend. They only really have to die if they resist .

This is not about you, unless you have roughly $3 billion in net worth, in which case I will dm you my bank details for you to transfer that million.

TravelinMan wrote:

AvgMSUJoe wrote:
I cant comprehend why any dipshit would defend the wealth of people they never could even dream about being.
Also, I pay my share, they don't ... and that's the problem.

I can’t understand why any dipshit would openly support socialism just because a bunch of people he doesn’t even know are wildly more successful than he’ll ever be. Oh. Wait. Maybe that IS the reason? LOL!!

i suspect you and I have a different definition of the word 'success'.

TravelinMan wrote:

Cameron wrote:If the Forbes 400 collectively gave away $4 trillion in net worth, they could all still comfortably be billionaires. We are reaching the point where it is a moral imperative to take their money.

I could give you a million dollars and not materially affect my life style. Does that mean I have a moral imperative to write you a check?

Do better.

I love when “rich” folks (like TravelinMan level rich) defend the taxing of “real rich” folks.

Dude, you’re not part of the conversation, not even close. Congrats on your success, well earned, I’m sure.

If we had a 1% level poster on this bitch, id hope we could at least see pictures on mobile.
Lol

Motown Spartan wrote:I love when “rich” folks (like TravelinMan level rich) defend the taxing of “real rich” folks.

Dude, you’re not part of the conversation, not even close. Congrats on your success, well earned, I’m sure.

he worked hard to get to where he is.

TravelinMan wrote:

Cameron wrote:If the Forbes 400 collectively gave away $4 trillion in net worth, they could all still comfortably be billionaires. We are reaching the point where it is a moral imperative to take their money.

I could give you a million dollars and not materially affect my life style. Does that mean I have a moral imperative to write you a check?

Do better.

Yes, next question

And frankly, these days, i would bet many of us could give away a million dollars and not materially change our lifestyle.

(until we try to retire)....

For what it’s worth, no the initial conversation actually doesn’t make any sense. Similar to how a bank having a lien against your home doesn’t mean that they own it. They don’t and the government charging taxes doesn’t own it either.

You’re getting something in return for your taxes, which is literally ownership of the land. If you don’t pay taxes into a system, then there is no longer anyone to protect your ownership claim other than yourself. Picture a system without a government to say “yes trapper owns that land no matter what anyone else does or says”. What would your claim even mean? If I show up, kick you out of the house, and say it’s mine now, who is to say I’m wrong? No one. It’d actually be kind of akin to what happens if you don’t pay taxes. The government strips you of your protections and takes it.

So no, you definitely own that land, and you’re paying into a system that a land owner is the beneficiary of.

Republicans who think that one day they too will be that wealthy have no concept in their heads for just how much more money a billion is than anything they could ever sniff. It’s pretty pathetic

TravelinMan wrote:

AvgMSUJoe wrote:
I cant comprehend why any dipshit would defend the wealth of people they never could even dream about being.
Also, I pay my share, they don't ... and that's the problem.

I can’t understand why any dipshit would openly support socialism just because a bunch of people he doesn’t even know are wildly more successful than he’ll ever be.  Oh.  Wait.  Maybe that IS the reason?  LOL!!

Come on man, you are better than that.

Supporting socialism, not even close.

When people start demanding that all the corporation's ownership is nationalized then we are talking socialism.

Requiring that people pay an amount propositional to the benefits that they are gaining because this country exists is called fairness.

It is sad that whenever someone proposes going back to the taxation we used to have, which caused the middle class to have a nice lifestyle where one person in the family could work and the family could have nice stuff and a nice lifestyle with there being money to send all 12 kids to universities without massive federal deficits, some people start stupidly shouting "socialism".

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

I can’t understand why any dipshit would openly support socialism just because a bunch of people he doesn’t even know are wildly more successful than he’ll ever be.  Oh.  Wait.  Maybe that IS the reason?  LOL!!

Come on man, you are better than that.

Supporting socialism, not even close.

When people start demanding that all the corporation's ownership is nationalized then we are talking socialism.

Requiring that people pay an amount propositional to the benefits that they are gaining because this country exists is called fairness.

It is sad that whenever someone proposes going back to the taxation we used to have, which caused the middle class to have a nice lifestyle where one person in the family could work and the family could have nice stuff and a nice lifestyle with there being money to send all 12 kids to universities without massive federal deficits, some people start stupidly shouting "socialism".

It’s not sad, it’s stupid. And people who say those things should be told as such. Stop pretending it’s a legitimate position to have, it isn’t. It’s stupid and in service only to his oligarch heroes he wishes to be one day but never will.