> "Land Value Taxes apply pressure to make the highest capital return on every piece of land, which is not the same thing as the best use of the land, and would

> "Land Value Taxes apply pressure to make the highest capital return on every piece of land, which is not the same thing as the best use of the land, and would hurt many good uses of land that are not profitable." (highest and) best use [0] is generally understood as maximizing economic return, so you're essentially arguing semantics here. with that said, i agree with the underlying sentiment that it's not the only "return" we should consider. maximizing economic return fails to capture the richness of the human experience in often obvious but not easily quantifiable ways, which is why we let economists get away with such unrealistic models. but your position on suburbs (vs. urbs) is baffling (and idealistic). suburbs externalize their costs to achieve that cheap living. implementing an LVT would (presumably) take that advantage away. [0] https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Highest_and_best_use https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Highest_and_best_use