3 ms·

The entire point of the LVT is that the land value includes things that your neighbors (or society in general) does to make your lot more valuable.

by jabl 3y ago

MichaelZuo 3y ago
Did you get confused with a different comment chain? In response to the parent comments, my comment indicates that it's impossible to determine the 'unimproved value', because there are no records of land values during the times of pre-human habitation of the north american continent. Hence why I said 'So this part of Georgism never made sense to me.' It's supposed to be based on literally impossible to obtain information.
- afiori 3y ago
  Under this lens "unimproved value" might be a red herring, the concept is "the market value of the lot after a complete demolition of everithing on it" or equivalently "the market price of the exclusive priviledge of being able to build things on a piece of land".
  - MichaelZuo 3y ago
    Maybe you should take it up with the proponents of Georgism who use that term? And offer these reasons to switch. But just at a quick glance: "the market value of the lot after a complete demolition of everithing on it" doesn't make sense, because even a single disused subway tunnel could easily double the value of the land.
    - afiori 3y ago
      There are things "on" the lot and things "around" the lot. An empty lot the right size to build a condo in front of a subway station is significantly more valuable than an otherwise identical lot 5km away from the closest subway station. A consequence is that what is built around you becomes the main factor in how many taxes you pay. Which is ok since what is build around you is also the main factor of how much value you can extract from the land you own. > Maybe you should take it up with the proponents of Georgism who use that term? the term is perfectly adeguate, for a given piece of land (like a lot you can build a condo on) you consider its value before any improvement ON it. The main conflict seems to be about either considering gigantic pieces of land or considering improvement that are not ON the piece of land but around it. For context[1]: > A land value tax (LVT) is a levy on the value of land without regard to buildings, personal property and other improvements upon it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax
      - MichaelZuo 3y ago
        I don't really see what's preventing people in the future from simply ignoring this interpretation?
- jabl 3y ago
  > Did you get confused with a different comment chain? Nope. > my comment indicates that it's impossible to determine the 'unimproved value', because there are no records of land values during the times of pre-human habitation of the north american continent. My point was that this definition of 'unimproved value' is a strawman. Nobody except you is claiming that this is the definition of 'unimproved value' that is used in discussions about a land value tax. In the context of LVT, 'unimproved value' pretty much means the value of a lot minus any buildings on it (in jurisdictions that have a LVT, I'm sure they have a much more specific definition of it, so the government doesn't have to spend endless time in court with nitpickers). So it definitely includes things like a bustling city around the lot, with roads, sewers and other infrastructure, shops, apartments, and whatnot. Nobody is trying to figure out the value of a plot of land in pre-human times for tax purposes.
  - MichaelZuo 3y ago
    Assuming that's true, then who gets to choose the cutoff date or set the cutoff criteria? City council, voters, etc.? If so, what's stopping them from changing the definition every election cycle to score political points?
    - afiori 3y ago
      > In the context of LVT, 'unimproved value' pretty much means the value of a lot minus any buildings on it no cutoff necessary, the distinction is between thins on the lot of land and things not on the lot of land today.
      - MichaelZuo 3y ago
        But the 'value of a lot minus any buildings on it' is a subjective definition that can be changed? It clearly's possible one election year for that definition to be expanded to included remediation of any underground improvements for example, or a penalty if it uses certain undesirable materials, etc...

The entire point of the LVT is that the land value includes things that your neighbors (or society in general) does to make your lot more valuable.

by jabl 3y ago

The entire point of the LVT is that the land value includes things that your neighbors (or society in general) does to make your lot more valuable.

MichaelZuo 3y ago

Did you get confused with a different comment chain? In response to the parent comments, my comment indicates that it's impossible to determine the 'unimproved value', because there are no records of land values during the times of pre-human habitation of the north american continent. Hence why I said 'So this part of Georgism never made sense to me.' It's supposed to be based on literally impossible to obtain information.

afiori 3y ago
Under this lens "unimproved value" might be a red herring, the concept is "the market value of the lot after a complete demolition of everithing on it" or equivalently "the market price of the exclusive priviledge of being able to build things on a piece of land".
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  Maybe you should take it up with the proponents of Georgism who use that term? And offer these reasons to switch. But just at a quick glance: "the market value of the lot after a complete demolition of everithing on it" doesn't make sense, because even a single disused subway tunnel could easily double the value of the land.
  - afiori 3y ago
    There are things "on" the lot and things "around" the lot. An empty lot the right size to build a condo in front of a subway station is significantly more valuable than an otherwise identical lot 5km away from the closest subway station. A consequence is that what is built around you becomes the main factor in how many taxes you pay. Which is ok since what is build around you is also the main factor of how much value you can extract from the land you own. > Maybe you should take it up with the proponents of Georgism who use that term? the term is perfectly adeguate, for a given piece of land (like a lot you can build a condo on) you consider its value before any improvement ON it. The main conflict seems to be about either considering gigantic pieces of land or considering improvement that are not ON the piece of land but around it. For context[1]: > A land value tax (LVT) is a levy on the value of land without regard to buildings, personal property and other improvements upon it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax
    - MichaelZuo 3y ago
      I don't really see what's preventing people in the future from simply ignoring this interpretation?
jabl 3y ago
> Did you get confused with a different comment chain? Nope. > my comment indicates that it's impossible to determine the 'unimproved value', because there are no records of land values during the times of pre-human habitation of the north american continent. My point was that this definition of 'unimproved value' is a strawman. Nobody except you is claiming that this is the definition of 'unimproved value' that is used in discussions about a land value tax. In the context of LVT, 'unimproved value' pretty much means the value of a lot minus any buildings on it (in jurisdictions that have a LVT, I'm sure they have a much more specific definition of it, so the government doesn't have to spend endless time in court with nitpickers). So it definitely includes things like a bustling city around the lot, with roads, sewers and other infrastructure, shops, apartments, and whatnot. Nobody is trying to figure out the value of a plot of land in pre-human times for tax purposes.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  Assuming that's true, then who gets to choose the cutoff date or set the cutoff criteria? City council, voters, etc.? If so, what's stopping them from changing the definition every election cycle to score political points?
  - afiori 3y ago
    > In the context of LVT, 'unimproved value' pretty much means the value of a lot minus any buildings on it no cutoff necessary, the distinction is between thins on the lot of land and things not on the lot of land today.
    - MichaelZuo 3y ago
      But the 'value of a lot minus any buildings on it' is a subjective definition that can be changed? It clearly's possible one election year for that definition to be expanded to included remediation of any underground improvements for example, or a penalty if it uses certain undesirable materials, etc...