The solution to the housing crisis is extremely simple
1–10 of 60 posts
Re: The solution to the housing crisis is extremely simple
#2I may not be understanding his proposal fully, so please bear with me. If I'm making a complete jackass of myself through misunderstanding, let me know.
> It’s worth noting that more tax on land doesn’t mean higher housing costs! For those living in enormous houses in very expensive neighbourhoods, it certainly will: but that’s by design. But shifting the tax burden onto rich folks like this, means that the average person pays less.
I'm confused - what exactly is going to stop the company that owns the 50-unit apartment building that I live in from passing that tax directly onto me and the other tenants via rent?
And how does this help my parents, who own land and have completely paid off their house? Should they, age 60 and 80, start working the land to produce a profit to offset the tax? Should I come back and start having more kids to work the farm?
Re: The solution to the housing crisis is extremely simple
#3>Income from land is thus completely unearned and thus any income gained from land ownership should be completely taxed at 100%.
That pretty much sums up the article. This is a horrible idea and will never happen.
Re: The solution to the housing crisis is extremely simple
#4I feel like I'm failing an IQ test here. I assumed he meant 100% tax on rent, but then there's this line:
>Owners of valuable land would be forced to make maximum use of land with higher density rentals in order to make sufficient rental income to pay the land tax.
What would the 100% be on exactly?
Re: The solution to the housing crisis is extremely simple
#5I can't tell whether this is satire, like "A Modest Proposal".
Re: The solution to the housing crisis is extremely simple
#6>Income from land is thus completely unearned and thus any income gained from land ownership should be completely taxed at 100%. That pretty much sums up the article. This is a horrible idea and will never happen.
Could you explain why it's a horrible idea?
Merely asserting it isn't the same as refuting the article (which lays out some arguments) and doesn't really add anything to the discussion.
Re: The solution to the housing crisis is extremely simple
#7> Rural land and average suburban land would be taxed at low rates because that land is comparatively cheap.
How would we know what the value of that land is? Does some assessor come around and place an "expert opinion" sticker price on that land?
Re: The solution to the housing crisis is extremely simple
#8I don't think this is a good solution. Where is the incentive for anyone to maintain properties anymore?
"Owners of valuable land would be forced to make maximum use of land with higher density rentals in order to make sufficient rental income to pay the land tax."
I don't see how this follows if all income is taxed at 100%.
The correct solution is to eliminate NIMBYism by eliminating the ability for homeowners to restrict the construction of new buildings so that new housing can be built. Rent control should also be eliminated, allowing demand to match supply.
Re: The solution to the housing crisis is extremely simple
#9I may not be understanding his proposal fully, so please bear with me. If I'm making a complete jackass of myself through misunderstanding, let me know. > It’s worth noting that more tax on land doesn’t mean higher housing costs! For those living in enormous houses in very expensive neighbourhoods, it certainly will: but that’s by design. But shifting the tax burden onto rich folks like this, means that the average p…
My guess (and I´m ok it's not what is in the article) is that taxes should be on benefits and not on land surface. A 100% tax on benefits mean that there are no need to overprice the rent once all maintenance costs are paid.
And then there will be no more interest in renting. Just own your piece of land.
And then all collapse.
Re: The solution to the housing crisis is extremely simple
#10>Income from land is thus completely unearned and thus any income gained from land ownership should be completely taxed at 100%. That pretty much sums up the article. This is a horrible idea and will never happen.
It's not a horrible idea. It's an old idea that's been popular with various economists including (gasp) Adam Smith: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax
(I don't know enough about this subject to have a strong opinion either way, but I feel pretty confident saying that this isn't a terrible idea)