AIUI: the argument is that high density has less per capita costs. Tax rate should basically be a function of costs and citizen income. You can have lower per

AIUI: the argument is that high density has less per capita costs. Tax rate should basically be a function of costs and citizen income. You can have lower per capita costs and need a higher tax rate if your revenue is not high enough relative to costs. But — if you converted the wealth located in the suburbs, into high density, costs would go down, the revenue base is the same, so taxes could fall. To me the argument seems backwards, people live where they want, they incur certain relative higher or lower costs due to it, but so what. The amount of money we are talking about here is relatively benign, if you were upfront with people about the choices being made with tax revenue, you could easily finance (with people’s own existing tax revenue) their own decisions on where to live. Where’s the fire.