2 ms·
upvoted then realized you are promoting LVT. this is why i think LVT is a terrible idea: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44532444 https://news.ycombinator.
by greenie_beans 1y ago
upvoted then realized you are promoting LVT. this is why i think LVT is a terrible idea: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44532444 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44532444
land value is only a small part of housing costs.
- sorcerer-mar 1y agoI don't think you understand LVT based on this "not to mention the political debates/decisions over what constitutes "fully utilized"." LVT doesn't require any such determination. Anyway, I'm not opposed to the solution you mention as well. We should subsidize supply of housing, and supply at any price will serve the same purpose of driving prices down, so yes I agree we should build public housing for higher price points.
- greenie_beans 1y ago[dead]