[QUOTE=Peter McGurk;400038]Well this may be true for Wales but it certainly isnít a common tradition in England, much as anyone may wish it otherwise.
In England at least there is a rather more rounded view of the issue, or rather itís place at the heart of a state run by capital. In Englandís book, wealth creates prosperity and jobs for all. Indeed the creation of wealth is fundamental to the liberal notion of prosperity for all.
If you are anti-capitalist well fine, argue your corner but donít hide behind social(ist) idealism as the only alternative for the common good. Widespread wealth is for the common good.
This city especially needs wealth-creators - we should not be turning them away with a wealth tax cloaked as a Land Value Tax and we donít. Not that it would particularly work as wealth tax in any event.
There was a time when property owners smashed toilets to render empty properties unusable and untaxable. Why? Because there was no market for them. They were empty. No-one keeps property empty where thereís a more economically viable market for it - even Ďarry Hyams (of Centrepoint fame) even as a land-bank. A land-bank simply indicates lack of opportunity, or a lack of potential customers.
Business rates and income tax go in part to fund infrastructure. That is, the money that builds CrossRail is pre-taxed from the rates and taxes of the better off. The beneficiaries are the people in general that that infrastructure serves (in helping create greater wealth, prosperity and employment). Is it reasonable for these wealth creators, the risk takers, be taxed again for taking that risk?
At a real and immediate level, thereís gorgeous period properties in Everton, for example, rotting away - not for want of investment but for want of anyone who can afford to occupy them and pay builders, decorators, plumbers, electricians and shopkeepers ie., the common man to service them. We need wealth.[COLOR="Silver"]
[SIZE=1]---------- Post added at 05:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:03 PM ----------[/SIZE]
Well as an architect, I'm not having that am I?
There's a bizillion buildings with flat roofs and 'zany' shapes that are all perfectly waterproof. There's many that aren't. Some buildings are built well. Others aren't. Some buildings are maintained. Others aren't. There are almost as many reason for building failure as they are building failures.
But one thing is certain. If it's the architect's fault he will pay for it. There's not many architects can go bust at the drop of a hat to avoid litigation and many who carry the can for others involved who do.[/QUOTE]