3 ms·
Not sure you are advocating or just explaining the idea, but I have to say something. This is how we lose natural land to sprawl. A large chunk is bought by a
by turtle-san 6y ago
Not sure you are advocating or just explaining the idea, but I have to say something.
This is how we lose natural land to sprawl. A large chunk is bought by a developer, clear cut, split into many small chunks, and sold to private individuals.
This splitting of the land into many new owners makes conservation of an area in the future to be much harder.
LVT makes sense for urban areas, but should stop where the city line is.
From there out I could see LVT leeding to increasing deforestation, sprawl, and destruction of the natural environment.
In certain areas I would even argue doing the opposite of LVT and be giving people tax incentives to leave land undeveloped and natural, better yet join parcels of adjoining land together in conservation projects while still allowing people to live on it, just where they cannot develop most of it, maybe even allow public access in the form of hiking trails using the "Freedom to Roam" principle.
- ikeboy 6y agoAnd why is "sprawl" bad?
- snidane 6y ago> This is how we lose natural land to sprawl. A large chunk is bought by a developer, clear cut, split into many small chunks, and sold to private individuals. This is Land front-running - somebody has information you want or will want something and buys it for himself and later reselling to you more expensively (eg. concert ticket scalpers, high frequency trading or simply knowong that there will be generations of youngsters moving to cities so why not to buy real estate there and sell it to them later). While this market-making can be a useful service for smoothing out price of goods with price fluctuating up and down, it however becomes immoral for badly auctioned goods - such as desirable concert tickets which are often sold to scalpers in large quantities who front-run every other buyer. Also in real estate and land markets - where all the QE printed money creates asset price inflation, so by buying in those markets you can front run people who don't yet have money for it or are not even born yet. This ceases to be a problem under LVT because you auction land usage fairly to a large degree. No front-running -> no sitting idle on land by developers and deforestation -> optimal allocation to users.