3 ms·

If we don't change this you can forget it. Land is the issue, it's been the issue for hundreds of years. The ability to expand into free land was what made the

If we don't change this you can forget it. Land is the issue, it's been the issue for hundreds of years. The ability to expand into free land was what made the USA different. You could take a job for the man on subsistence wages or set up yourself. That's why you had to have slavery. In the UK with land enclosure the prison is the country. We should tax land and stop the exploitation of workers by rentiers.

sliverstorm 11y ago
How does LVT achieve your goals while property tax, which we already have, does not?
- branchless 11y ago
  Property tax doesn't go nearly far enough. LVT would replace income tax for the majority of workers. Right now tax on capital gain is far less than income tax.
Tsagadai 11y ago
Except that like everywhere else on the globe that isn't Antarctica there were already people there that needed to be displaced. Someone else's asset was stolen and sold (for very little initially, but sold nonetheless). Land (in absolute terms) has little to do with property prices compared to where the land is geographically, politically and socially. Land tax will help marginally with inequity but the majority of the cost will just be passed on to renters (like what happens now). Taxing vacant buildings higher will increase supply which should depress rents slightly. None of that stops housing becoming an investment and a financial asset though which is the root cause of unaffordability.
- branchless 11y ago
  LVT is set by location. Property prices are set by location. LVT can't be passed onto renters. It does stop land speculation. It's the opposite of what you say. If LVT could be passed onto renters then why, given the market can apparently bear higher prices, are our genius landlords not charging us more already? That's how prices are set my friend, they don't sum up the input costs and add 5% profit.

sliverstorm 11y ago

How does LVT achieve your goals while property tax, which we already have, does not?

branchless 11y ago
Property tax doesn't go nearly far enough. LVT would replace income tax for the majority of workers. Right now tax on capital gain is far less than income tax.

Tsagadai 11y ago

Except that like everywhere else on the globe that isn't Antarctica there were already people there that needed to be displaced. Someone else's asset was stolen and sold (for very little initially, but sold nonetheless). Land (in absolute terms) has little to do with property prices compared to where the land is geographically, politically and socially. Land tax will help marginally with inequity but the majority of the cost will just be passed on to renters (like what happens now). Taxing vacant buildings higher will increase supply which should depress rents slightly. None of that stops housing becoming an investment and a financial asset though which is the root cause of unaffordability.

branchless 11y ago
LVT is set by location. Property prices are set by location. LVT can't be passed onto renters. It does stop land speculation. It's the opposite of what you say. If LVT could be passed onto renters then why, given the market can apparently bear higher prices, are our genius landlords not charging us more already? That's how prices are set my friend, they don't sum up the input costs and add 5% profit.