6 ms·

Localities can fight back by reforming zoning laws & applying land value taxes instead of property taxes. In many areas of the country it is illegal to build a

Localities can fight back by reforming zoning laws & applying land value taxes instead of property taxes. In many areas of the country it is illegal to build anything but a single-family home. To people familiar with supply & demand this should be an obvious problem.

mike_d 6y ago
In almost every part of the US anything except a single family home should be illegal to build. Land is in extreme abundance and multi-tenant properties are almost always built and owned by corporations.
- goda90 6y ago
  Third alternative. Multi-family homes owned by co-ops of all the residents.
  - em-bee 6y ago
    another alternative is to give more legal protection for tennants so that corporations can't exploit them anymore
  - webmaven 6y ago
    > Third alternative. Multi-family homes owned by co-ops of all the residents. In theory, a manufactured home community could also be a co-op, and setting one up would be less capital-intensive than building multi-family homes. It is worth noting that so far as land-use is concerned, MHCs are significantly denser than typical single-family home neighborhoods (even older, denser ones) due to the small lot and home size, absence of two-vehicle garages, etc. They are comparable to the lower end of multi-family housing density due to the parking lots those are typically surrounded with, though of course multi-family housing that has good access to public transit can be much denser.
- Ericson2314 6y ago
  And yes let's make TTL computers too because we're not about to run out of space. The density is good because it's valuable to be near other things, and density is the only thing that allows more proximity? Maybe it would help to realize Japan, Korea, and California are all mountainous and prosperous. Mountains helped force good land use (though lately stupidity in California has been beating it).
- knowaveragejoe 6y ago
  Do you like suburban sprawl & all of the negatives that brings? Because that's how you get it.
djbebs 6y ago
Whats the difference in thise taxes? Whats to stop those added costs from being passed to consumers?
- ScottBurson 6y ago
  A Land Value Tax applies, as the name suggests, only to the value of land, not that of any structures built on it. Most real property taxes apply to both. Thus, the latter somewhat discourage construction for higher density. (Though in practice, zoning laws are a much bigger barrier.) The intuition behind the LVT is that increases in the value of land, in urban areas, are mostly driven by a growing local economy; therefore the community should benefit from them. Increases in the value of structures, OTOH, mostly come from investments by the property owner. There's a fascinating book (well, if you have any interest in economics) about the LVT, from 1879, by Henry George: http://www.henrygeorge.org/pcontents.htm http://www.henrygeorge.org/pcontents.htm

mike_d 6y ago

In almost every part of the US anything except a single family home should be illegal to build. Land is in extreme abundance and multi-tenant properties are almost always built and owned by corporations.

goda90 6y ago
Third alternative. Multi-family homes owned by co-ops of all the residents.
- em-bee 6y ago
  another alternative is to give more legal protection for tennants so that corporations can't exploit them anymore
- webmaven 6y ago
  > Third alternative. Multi-family homes owned by co-ops of all the residents. In theory, a manufactured home community could also be a co-op, and setting one up would be less capital-intensive than building multi-family homes. It is worth noting that so far as land-use is concerned, MHCs are significantly denser than typical single-family home neighborhoods (even older, denser ones) due to the small lot and home size, absence of two-vehicle garages, etc. They are comparable to the lower end of multi-family housing density due to the parking lots those are typically surrounded with, though of course multi-family housing that has good access to public transit can be much denser.
Ericson2314 6y ago
And yes let's make TTL computers too because we're not about to run out of space. The density is good because it's valuable to be near other things, and density is the only thing that allows more proximity? Maybe it would help to realize Japan, Korea, and California are all mountainous and prosperous. Mountains helped force good land use (though lately stupidity in California has been beating it).
knowaveragejoe 6y ago
Do you like suburban sprawl & all of the negatives that brings? Because that's how you get it.

djbebs 6y ago

Whats the difference in thise taxes? Whats to stop those added costs from being passed to consumers?

ScottBurson 6y ago
A Land Value Tax applies, as the name suggests, only to the value of land, not that of any structures built on it. Most real property taxes apply to both. Thus, the latter somewhat discourage construction for higher density. (Though in practice, zoning laws are a much bigger barrier.) The intuition behind the LVT is that increases in the value of land, in urban areas, are mostly driven by a growing local economy; therefore the community should benefit from them. Increases in the value of structures, OTOH, mostly come from investments by the property owner. There's a fascinating book (well, if you have any interest in economics) about the LVT, from 1879, by Henry George: http://www.henrygeorge.org/pcontents.htm http://www.henrygeorge.org/pcontents.htm