4 ms·
The limited nature of land is precisely why possession should be costly. Efficient use of land will produce an economic surplus adequate to pay a reasonable lan
by istjohn 8y ago
The limited nature of land is precisely why possession should be costly. Efficient use of land will produce an economic surplus adequate to pay a reasonable land tax and then some. But if someone squanders their land and insists on letting it sit fallow, so to speak, they will pay for the privilege. If it is sufficiently important to the land owner that the land be unproductive, they will be happy to pay the price in the form of the land tax; otherwise, they will sell the land to someone who can put the land to better use.
There is nothing natural about land ownership. The government creates the artificial construct of land as property to avoid the tragedy of the commons, where no one has an incentive to invest in making land productive--for example, by building a home, factory, or farm. A land tax prevents a land owner from squandering the privileges of land ownership.
- jelliclesfarm 8y agoMy point was only for primary homes. I agree that land left undeveloped must be put to use but with incentive, not as punishment.