We're probably 95% on the same page here. Politicians suck and don't represent us and are not responsive.
Calling out those you believe/know are scamming the tax code is a zero-sum game that you won't win. To them, you don't even exist.
People do respond to shame. We are the culture we build, and if it is culturally taboo to be corrupt or selfish, that will tend to discourage that behavior. It's not 100% and perfect, but it does make a difference. In places where corruption is absolutely pervasive, revelations of corruption are not shocking, and everybody is saying "I don't blame them, if I had the power I'd do it too." In places with functioning society, it is universally condemned and everyone is on the lookout. Even if you do some corruption, your wealth would make you a pariah, so what is the point? You're right that it doesn't directly stop corruption, but it really does matter. Experience the cultural difference regarding corruption between Sweden and Egypt, for example. All of us have the responsibility to do the right thing to dissuade bad behavior and build a healthy society.
Land-owning gentry. Owning land doesn't mean you're infected with that liberal BS or that you came from money.
There is a real problem here with landowners, even those from modest backgrounds like yourself. The problem is restrictive zoning and making it impossible for new development to happen. I don't have any problem with people owning homes. I favor it. What I deplore is crony government intervention in the property market. This includes everything from zoning restrictions, parking requirements, set backs, tax incentives, etc that all are a government handout for landowners. People supporting these policies are a problem, and yes that does include even average people that are house rich who bought a house there 30 years ago and now support the policies because it props up their net worth while denying the same opportunities to those younger than them.
This is primarily a NIMBY phenomenon in high cost of living big cities (California, Washington, London, etc), so people who don't live there may not get what I'm saying and say "what is he, some kind of communist? A new suburb just got built in my midwestern medium size city. It was no big deal." That's great. That's exactly how it should work. But it's not at all how it works in these big, mega global cities. Those places need to fix their property market and zoning because it really is turning into neo-feudalism. Your story of starting from the bottom and buying property is just not possible there for middle class people.
It should be possible for a teacher or firefighter to buy. Houses are $1 million. It's a different world, and it's the same of government capture, but in this case there are millions of completely normal people in on the scam rather than just a few hundred thousand wealthy elite with offshore bank accounts. It's not pretty to hear, but the damage is just as real.
I believe we're in agreement issues caused by politicians that want a new pool and land developers.
I didn't say that we started from the bottom. I said we started with only the love of our parents and determination. What a person does to earn enough income to do something meaningful with it requires sacrifice. The working 3-4 distasteful jobs while taking a full course load. The living in a walk-up studio apartment for 12 years to save enough to fund a business venture sort of sacrifice.
When a person is dissatisfied with their living/working situation, they need to begin looking for a way away from that situation, not a way to dig in deeper.
But I'm not exactly sure, even what you're griping about.
Are you mad because the cities got so large that everyone can't afford a home in the middle of it?
Are you wanting to allow people to build homes right up to the curbs to make room for everyone?
Are you upset that there are not many more low income high-rises in the middle of the city?
Are you upset because someone needs to commute long distances between their homes and job because housing is crazy expensive near their employment?
I really do want to know. I read your post and it seems like a rant to increase overcrowding urban in areas and remove the zoning regulations.
Are you mad because the cities got so large that everyone can't afford a home in the middle of it?
No, cities should grows as necessary. I'm bothered that the tax incentives and zoning laws prevent the productive use of land to support economic growth and prosperity.
Are you mad because the cities got so large that everyone can't afford a home in the middle of it?
Obviously highly-central/luxury/beachfront/etc property will be out of reach for most people. But those aren't the $1 million shacks I'm describing in LA or San Francisco.
Are you wanting to allow people to build homes right up to the curbs to make room for everyone?
I'm wanting the government to stop NIMBY policies that effectively prevent new development and redevelopment. There are plenty of lots that could be redeveloped, but government policies effectively make it impossible to put this land to better use.
Are you upset that there are not many more low income high-rises in the middle of the city?
It doesn't have to be an either-or scenario between single family homes and high rises. There are medium density options that make cities very livable. Currently zoning restrictions make these quite difficult to develop. This government interference needs to stop.
Are you upset because someone needs to commute long distances between their homes and job because housing is crazy expensive near their employment?
Urban sprawl and long commutes definitely are a problem and have to do with this, but zoning isn't the sole cause.
Here's a pretty good summary of the ideas of Georgism. I don't agree with all policy suggestions, but it is definitely a fresh perspective that many people aren't familiar with. And it addresses many of these issues of more productive use of land, a fairer tax code, etc.
I hate the tax situation. We donate to politicians who still have morals and do what's right. We write real paper letters to them. You have to make your voice heard or you'll be ignored. Politicians ignore the "silent majority" (their very own anonymous, "They" or "My Constituents") except as a imaginary straw man to justify why they didn't vote to fix anything. If you let the politicians do anything they want, they'll never do anything that you want. Hold them publicly accountable.
Calling out those you believe/know are scamming the tax code is a zero-sum game that you won't win. To them, you don't even exist.
You have to nail the politicians responsible for letting it happen or you're only raising your blood pressure to no good end.
Land-owning gentry. Owning land doesn't mean you're infected with that liberal BS or that you came from money. Neither of us had anything growing up beside loving parents. Owning property doesn't make us gentry except in some twisted sort of anne of greene gables way. I find that term derogatory and use it as a pejorative to describe some of our neighbors and many others who infect low-income areas by squeezing out those who struggle to get by so that they can stuff their "oh so cute" boutiques and yuppie sidewalk bistros into the neighborhood.
As for the A's, I hope they suffer from severe IBS forever.