3 ms·

> My gripe with all schools of economics i Then you don't know much about mainstream economics. Don't learn economics from news, pundits or other shallow sourc

by nabla9 6y ago

> My gripe with all schools of economics i Then you don't know much about mainstream economics. Don't learn economics from news, pundits or other shallow sources. (1) Mainstream Economists strongly agree with you with large consensus. Yes there is consensus among mainstream economists about land/property. (2) They have a solution and they agree even on that. Property tax is considered the least harmful tax because it taxes rentier. Adam Smith would also strongly agree. He made this tax proposal to solve the issue already in 1776. (3) Urban economics has even more nuanced view. When mainstream economists agree on something, there is little talk about it. The real issue is the people. Either they own property and don't accept tax, or they can't understand simple reasoning with 2 or 3 steps. If the first step is to increase property/land tax they stop thinking and react with statements like: "It would increase rents" or "Price of food would increase."

imtringued 6y ago
Yes, those pesky people. They love their counterproductive systems, they love it when things are unfair. Americans deny climate change for the benefit of special interests, after all, investing into fighting climate change would raise the total investment rate and help every single citizen and this isn't even counting the economic damage that climate change causes, just the macroeconomic benefits of having an intact economy. You don't even need an ideological reason. Republicans are against Biden's infrastructure bill, even though it would raise the total investment rate and thus help every American citizen, including Republican voters. Californians introduced Prop 13 statewide meaning every Californian city will become dysfunctional over decades. It's a government mandated prisoners dilemma. Rent control also has a prisoners dilemma effect. Rent control favors existing residents that don't move over existing and future residents that do move. People leave tier 1 cities because market rate housing is now market rate + lost revenue from rent control. Some immigrant families don't mind living in tiny apartments, highly skilled workers don't mind sharing an apartment with room mates so they keep coming anyway. What happens is that everyone goes to tier 2 cities, who then promptly instate rent control and then the whole thing repeats with tier 3, tier 4, etc until the entire state is expensive. The truth is that if you had let the tier 1 cities become expensive and let them build high rises everywhere they could have absorbed all the rich people. Yes, tier 1 city might be considered "undesirable" by former residents, but tier 2 city would still be affordable. Over time things would have fixed themselves. As it is right now, people who are being kicked out of tier 1 cities don't even have a tier 2 city to go to anymore, they just leave California for good.

by nabla9 6y ago

imtringued 6y ago

Yes, those pesky people. They love their counterproductive systems, they love it when things are unfair. Americans deny climate change for the benefit of special interests, after all, investing into fighting climate change would raise the total investment rate and help every single citizen and this isn't even counting the economic damage that climate change causes, just the macroeconomic benefits of having an intact economy. You don't even need an ideological reason. Republicans are against Biden's infrastructure bill, even though it would raise the total investment rate and thus help every American citizen, including Republican voters. Californians introduced Prop 13 statewide meaning every Californian city will become dysfunctional over decades. It's a government mandated prisoners dilemma. Rent control also has a prisoners dilemma effect. Rent control favors existing residents that don't move over existing and future residents that do move. People leave tier 1 cities because market rate housing is now market rate + lost revenue from rent control. Some immigrant families don't mind living in tiny apartments, highly skilled workers don't mind sharing an apartment with room mates so they keep coming anyway. What happens is that everyone goes to tier 2 cities, who then promptly instate rent control and then the whole thing repeats with tier 3, tier 4, etc until the entire state is expensive. The truth is that if you had let the tier 1 cities become expensive and let them build high rises everywhere they could have absorbed all the rich people. Yes, tier 1 city might be considered "undesirable" by former residents, but tier 2 city would still be affordable. Over time things would have fixed themselves. As it is right now, people who are being kicked out of tier 1 cities don't even have a tier 2 city to go to anymore, they just leave California for good.