Overall, I agree with you that Georgist LVT is nonsense, but overall, I think that an LVT would be an efficient way to raise revenue. > Taxing people so they a

Overall, I agree with you that Georgist LVT is nonsense, but overall, I think that an LVT would be an efficient way to raise revenue. > Taxing people so they are forced to sell is forcing them out. That's still very much overstretching the word "force." If the government taxes a cigarette factory out of existence, are they "forcing" the workers to move if they need to do so to find another job? > You’ve yet to explain why the people who do live there have less of a claim to the house than the wealthier people who would buy it from them. I view this as a meaningless philosophical question. There are so many ways that life can be unfair. Being taxed into selling your home at a huge profit is just not a concern I care about. > Like how landlords pass increased taxes and maintenance onto their tenants? This is completely untrue. Rent is solely dependent on supply and demand. Demand is elastic, and supply is very inelastic and even more so in highly desirable cities, so it doesn't get very affected by a tax. If property taxes get passed down to tenants, Prop 13 would have passed the tax savings onto renters, which it clearly has not. > Its not at all clear that property owners benefit disproportionately from social services, and they also pay for those services through taxes. Financially, a renter would be fine if their home burns down, becomes surrounded by used needles, or has a terrible school district. The homeowner reaps the financial benefit from these services, so they should expect to pay a share.