3 ms·
> the value is all about how developed it is If by "developed", you mean "built upon", that's empirically not the case: Here's an empty lot in the heart of Sa
by larsiusprime 5y ago
> the value is all about how developed it is
If by "developed", you mean "built upon", that's empirically not the case:
Here's an empty lot in the heart of San Francisco for $2 million dollars:
https://www.fortressofdoors.com/content/images/2021/08/image-21.png https://www.fortressofdoors.com/content/images/2021/08/image...
Here's a building next door to it on a similar sized lot for $2.3 million dollars:
https://www.fortressofdoors.com/content/images/2021/08/image-22.png https://www.fortressofdoors.com/content/images/2021/08/image...
Location, Location, Location. The vast majority of the value of urban real estate is land (locational) value.
- HPsquared 5y agoThe land value is increased by the nearby development known as "San Francisco". The same land in the same location, with no development nearby, would be worthless.
- BirdieNZ 5y agoThis is why it is sometimes referred to as "location value" rather than land value. The dirt is approximately worthless, but the location is worth a lot due to the surroundings (usually, because of human development of the surroundings). Advocates of a land value tax therefore often call it a location value tax, or a site value tax, because it is the location and the society around the location that has value, not the dirt itself.
- larsiusprime 5y agoYes, that was my point. That is exactly how land appreciation works. The owner of the land gains value from the work of his neighbors, whether he contributes or not.