3 ms·

I'm not entirely sure how this makes much sense if one can't generate any revenue from land and lots are limited to a single tenant - which seems to be the norm

I'm not entirely sure how this makes much sense if one can't generate any revenue from land and lots are limited to a single tenant - which seems to be the norm. If the land can't really be used any more efficiently, outside of repossessing unused plots owned by absentee players, then all this does is ensure the wealthiest players are the only ones who can afford the most in-demand lots (assuming the valuation varies). And if the whole goal is simply to repossess undeveloped/unused lots, there are simpler ways of going about it.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
larsiusprime 2y ago
Simpler ways of going about it are indeed possible and are discussed in detail in the article; a simple regular leasing of land accomplishes all the benefits of an LVT without any of the more complicated bits. Also -- you can just make a game where land isn't fundamentally scarce, that's an even simpler option too. > I'm not entirely sure how this makes much sense if one can't generate any revenue from land and lots are limited to a single tenant - which seems to be the norm. It's important to remember that just because something doesn't generate "monetary" income, doesn't mean it isn't providing value, and players will pay for value -- either in "hard" currencies like real money or in-game gold, or "soft" currencies like time, effort, and putting up with pain-in-the-butt. Housing in MMOs is typically a vanity item, but consider that social status, vanity, and the like are real genuine utility for human beings. > If the land can't really be used any more efficiently, outside of repossessing unused plots owned by absentee players, then all this does is ensure the wealthiest players are the only ones who can afford the most in-demand lots (assuming the valuation varies). If something can't be used any more efficiently (which suggests that it either is already being put to its highest and best use already, or that its potential use is severely restricted, akin to real-world municipal zoning restrictions), then there are several ways to look at that: 1. This is fine, actually; the asset is actually being used for its intended purpose and not simply hoarded 2. The developers could remove restrictions on the use of the thing so that there is a higher and better use for it than currently exists 3. The developers might reconsider their underlying assumptions for making the asset scarce in the first place Did you have a concrete example of this scenario? That might make it easier to discuss if you provided an illustration from a particular game (or one you could imagine).
- bboygravity 2y ago
  A nuclear power plant owned by a private company.
EdwardDiego 2y ago
Having a sweet hangout to display your cool shit in was probably the second Morrowind mod I ever installed. The first may have been boob related, I was 14. It is what it is. But yeah, there's a real value to players in having a sweet pad brah, I mean, people still pay real money for people to build them sweet houses on land they bought in Second Life for real money also.
sapling-ginger 2y ago
If the owner cannot generate any revenue from owning the plot, then it is not a "land-like asset" and it just doesn't factor into this discussion. A "land" in LVT is not necessarily literally land, although the way most virtual worlds are programmed, the "land" in the game often has functions similar to real-world land, which makes it LVT "land".
- lupire 2y ago
  Revenue is a representation of utility. Utility hoarding has similar problems and solutions ad revenue hoarding.
adverbly 2y ago
> one can't generate any revenue from land and lots are limited to a single tenant - which seems to be the norm. Just because a system is at equilibrium does not mean that a better equilibrium is impossible. There are significant advantages beyond unused plots. Incentives in general will change. The goal is not simply to repossess unused lots. Although you are correct that as a side effect, it does make for a much more efficient resource allocation. The other massive advantage is that because the supply of land is fixed, a land value tax has a unique property of having zero deadweight loss. This makes it the most efficient tax possible. Milton Friedman was in favor of it for this reason.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

larsiusprime 2y ago

Simpler ways of going about it are indeed possible and are discussed in detail in the article; a simple regular leasing of land accomplishes all the benefits of an LVT without any of the more complicated bits. Also -- you can just make a game where land isn't fundamentally scarce, that's an even simpler option too. > I'm not entirely sure how this makes much sense if one can't generate any revenue from land and lots are limited to a single tenant - which seems to be the norm. It's important to remember that just because something doesn't generate "monetary" income, doesn't mean it isn't providing value, and players will pay for value -- either in "hard" currencies like real money or in-game gold, or "soft" currencies like time, effort, and putting up with pain-in-the-butt. Housing in MMOs is typically a vanity item, but consider that social status, vanity, and the like are real genuine utility for human beings. > If the land can't really be used any more efficiently, outside of repossessing unused plots owned by absentee players, then all this does is ensure the wealthiest players are the only ones who can afford the most in-demand lots (assuming the valuation varies). If something can't be used any more efficiently (which suggests that it either is already being put to its highest and best use already, or that its potential use is severely restricted, akin to real-world municipal zoning restrictions), then there are several ways to look at that: 1. This is fine, actually; the asset is actually being used for its intended purpose and not simply hoarded 2. The developers could remove restrictions on the use of the thing so that there is a higher and better use for it than currently exists 3. The developers might reconsider their underlying assumptions for making the asset scarce in the first place Did you have a concrete example of this scenario? That might make it easier to discuss if you provided an illustration from a particular game (or one you could imagine).

bboygravity 2y ago
A nuclear power plant owned by a private company.

EdwardDiego 2y ago

Having a sweet hangout to display your cool shit in was probably the second Morrowind mod I ever installed. The first may have been boob related, I was 14. It is what it is. But yeah, there's a real value to players in having a sweet pad brah, I mean, people still pay real money for people to build them sweet houses on land they bought in Second Life for real money also.

sapling-ginger 2y ago

If the owner cannot generate any revenue from owning the plot, then it is not a "land-like asset" and it just doesn't factor into this discussion. A "land" in LVT is not necessarily literally land, although the way most virtual worlds are programmed, the "land" in the game often has functions similar to real-world land, which makes it LVT "land".

lupire 2y ago
Revenue is a representation of utility. Utility hoarding has similar problems and solutions ad revenue hoarding.

adverbly 2y ago

> one can't generate any revenue from land and lots are limited to a single tenant - which seems to be the norm. Just because a system is at equilibrium does not mean that a better equilibrium is impossible. There are significant advantages beyond unused plots. Incentives in general will change. The goal is not simply to repossess unused lots. Although you are correct that as a side effect, it does make for a much more efficient resource allocation. The other massive advantage is that because the supply of land is fixed, a land value tax has a unique property of having zero deadweight loss. This makes it the most efficient tax possible. Milton Friedman was in favor of it for this reason.