3 ms·

If the justification for this is rising housing costs, then giving people free money to pay the high rents is just going to cause housing to be even more expens

by gigs 9y ago

If the justification for this is rising housing costs, then giving people free money to pay the high rents is just going to cause housing to be even more expensive. We've already tried this experiment. It's called financial aid for college. Tuition prices just keep tracking federal aid increases. http://college.usatoday.com/2015/08/20/report-federal-aid-rising-tuition/ http://college.usatoday.com/2015/08/20/report-federal-aid-ri... If they gave the money as credits to developers to build more housing, then they might have a chance at accomplishing their goal.

dredmorbius 9y ago
That's why rent-producing goods are subject to rents taxation. See the land taxes suggested by Smith, Ricardo, and George. Colleges and other shared-expense systems (see also: healthcare, military spending, public spending generally) present and pose other challenges, but they are not the same as the situation as applies to housing, specifically. You don't give builders credits to build houses. You tax them for the potential revenues of a given quantity of land. Since land is nonfungible, the consequence is to both develop undeveloped lots, and to increase the density of utilisation of developed losts.
- rothbardrand 9y ago
  Taxes don't solve the problem, they increase it. If costs are too high, adding taxes only increases the cost more. One can argue that taxation in all its forms, including inflation, is the singular cause of all poverty in the USA-- it is the largest most massive wealth transfer fro the masses to the rich ever. And I don't mean "rich don't pay enough taxes" I mean taxes are stealing from the poor and giving to the rich.
  - dredmorbius 9y ago
    Not in the case of rents. That's a key reason they're so markedly different from other goods. Incidentally, your username and curiosity prompted me to check to see if Hazlitt's infamous little book makes any mention at all of either rents or monopoly. It doesn't. I find that quite interesting. https://www.mises.org/library/economics-one-lesson https://www.mises.org/library/economics-one-lesson

by gigs 9y ago

dredmorbius 9y ago

That's why rent-producing goods are subject to rents taxation. See the land taxes suggested by Smith, Ricardo, and George. Colleges and other shared-expense systems (see also: healthcare, military spending, public spending generally) present and pose other challenges, but they are not the same as the situation as applies to housing, specifically. You don't give builders credits to build houses. You tax them for the potential revenues of a given quantity of land. Since land is nonfungible, the consequence is to both develop undeveloped lots, and to increase the density of utilisation of developed losts.

rothbardrand 9y ago
Taxes don't solve the problem, they increase it. If costs are too high, adding taxes only increases the cost more. One can argue that taxation in all its forms, including inflation, is the singular cause of all poverty in the USA-- it is the largest most massive wealth transfer fro the masses to the rich ever. And I don't mean "rich don't pay enough taxes" I mean taxes are stealing from the poor and giving to the rich.
- dredmorbius 9y ago
  Not in the case of rents. That's a key reason they're so markedly different from other goods. Incidentally, your username and curiosity prompted me to check to see if Hazlitt's infamous little book makes any mention at all of either rents or monopoly. It doesn't. I find that quite interesting. https://www.mises.org/library/economics-one-lesson https://www.mises.org/library/economics-one-lesson