3 ms·

To be fair, just because the marginal house sells for more doesn't mean that providing local services is commensurately more expensive.

• carbocation 8y ago
  Sure, but Churchill's point above is, "... he contributes nothing to the process from which his own enrichment is derived." The more out of step taxation is with wealth creation, more accurate that point becomes. Whether or not that's a bad thing can be reasonably debated, I think.
• heavenlyblue 8y ago
  Really? What about heavily contributing to the devaluation of the money paid to keep said services running?
• pjc50 8y ago
  It does however mean that house prices for staff are more expensive, so they need to be paid correspondingly more, and staff costs are a very large fraction of the cost of services.
• landryraccoon 8y ago
  In the case of expensive urban areas it kind of does. High housing costs mean that literally everything in an area is more expensive. All services and all goods require human labor - people to load and unload trucks, stock shelves, stand behind registers, prepare goods and services etc.. High rents are a massive transfer of wealth over time from everyone else to landlords. So yes, increased housing costs do make all local services cost more, at the expense of the general public and for the benefit of landlords.