Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Redfin Economist says land value tax will fix the economy

narrativespodcast.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 238 posts

Re: Redfin Economist says land value tax will fix the economy

#11

Post by geocon »

brightly-salty wrote: post #10
stevenalowe wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the link! Here’s an equally wordy refutation of Georgism https://dailyanarchist.com/2012/06/12/what-is-georgism-follo...

I read through it and didn't see any refutation, just a description of the historical movement. At least to my understanding, mutualists like Benjamin Tucker have historically agreed with Georgist philosophy to a great extent, including breaking the monopoly on land.

I think he's talking about the second part, which I found linked wayyyyy at the bottom: https://dailyanarchist.com/2012/06/21/the-single-tax-a-refut...

That said I don't find this to be particularly convincing, given that they have mixed up labor and land, as well as failing to remember that Georgists are concerned with the benefit of land ownership (that is, rents) not the thing itself. The remainder is standard anarchist criticism of the state, which is fine I suppose if you are an anarchist but I don't think will convince anyone else (and I am not an anarchist)

Re: Redfin Economist says land value tax will fix the economy

#12

Post by pyradius »

brightly-salty wrote: post #10
stevenalowe wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the link! Here’s an equally wordy refutation of Georgism https://dailyanarchist.com/2012/06/12/what-is-georgism-follo...

I read through it and didn't see any refutation, just a description of the historical movement. At least to my understanding, mutualists like Benjamin Tucker have historically agreed with Georgist philosophy to a great extent, including breaking the monopoly on land.

Tucker was no friend of George's but the anarchist worldview doesn't really hold up to any serious scrutiny. https://cooperative-individualism.org/andelson-robert_critic...

"The anarchists' vagueness in attempting to define occupancy and use was best exemplified in the correspondence between Tucker and Stephen Byington (who subsequently became a "disciple" of Tucker's).

Byington wanted to know what would happen to occupiers of land or buildings when they would be away from their premises for a period of time.

Tucker, reducing his answer to an absurdity, replied that the very last user and occupier would not only lose his land but his personal property as well."

These are not serious worldviews.

Re: Redfin Economist says land value tax will fix the economy

#13

Post by uberman »

I guess I am skeptical that LVT would do anything for most of non-dense urban America.

I would be happy to swap out my property, school, state, and income taxes for one where I paid what it would cost to lease the land I currently own. It would reduce my tax burden by 99%

I know because my neighbor leases a large parcel (several times my lot size) from the federal government. I would be delighted to swap my current property, school, state and income taxes for what he pays for what he leases.

I fear that if people like me don't pay these taxes, things like public schools and municipal services will simply fail where I live.

It seems great to cash in on high demand until you look at the flip side and consider what happens when there is no demand. From my perspective LVT just looks like an expensive urban cash grab that utterly breaks down when demand softens.

Re: Redfin Economist says land value tax will fix the economy

#14

Post by soSadm4n »

pyradius wrote: post #12
brightly-salty wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read through it and didn't see any refutation, just a description of the historical movement. At least to my understanding, mutualists like Benjamin Tucker have historically agreed with Georgist philosophy to a great extent, including breaking the monopoly on land.

Tucker was no friend of George's but the anarchist worldview doesn't really hold up to any serious scrutiny. https://cooperative-individualism.org/andelson-robert_critic... "The anarchists' vagueness in attempting to define occupancy and use was best exemplified in the correspondence between Tucker and Stephen Byington (who subsequently became a "disciple" of Tucker's). Byington wanted to know what would happen to oc…

> These are not serious worldviews.

Relativity. You have spent years hearing views that are contrary to Tucker.

Of course they seem insincere and worth scoffing at. Making the entire premise unfalsifiable and hewing to hand me down gossip from the past, as if it has a monopoly on “greater good”.

Meat based tape recorders rambling inanity of the dead.

You should look into squatters rights. Tuckers view is alive and well in some forms in our society. It’s hardly resulted in physics inverting.

Vain people defending hand me down story regarding private property on the other hand tends to result in a whole lot of atrocity.

Re: Redfin Economist says land value tax will fix the economy

#16

Post by SilasX »

stevenalowe wrote: post #5

Land and property improvements are already taxed (at least everywhere I’ve lived in the USA); I see no logical cause and effect relationships between the additional tax proposal and the alleged problems (nimby-ism) it is supposed to address.

Improvements are taxed well above the Georgist level (0%), and land well below the Georgist level (80%+ depending on who you ask).

Re: Redfin Economist says land value tax will fix the economy

#17

Post by stevenalowe »

geocon wrote: post #9
stevenalowe wrote: post #5

Land and property improvements are already taxed (at least everywhere I’ve lived in the USA); I see no logical cause and effect relationships between the additional tax proposal and the alleged problems (nimby-ism) it is supposed to address.

Well, land and property taxes are not the same- the notable difference being that property taxes penalize building/remodeling/additional construction and so forth. A big part of addressing NIMBYism is to remove the economic incentives for it, a lot of which is attempting to profit off of increasing land values, which is much harder with an LVT- so shifting the way that people think about housing, away from investment…

The NIMBYism I've noticed - a small subset, to be sure - would not be affected by any tax. People don't want mass housing, prisons, or industries in their neighborhood because of the increased risks (traffic, crime, pollution, etc.) and inconvenience, not just the effects on property values. Adding another tax solves nothing.

Re: Redfin Economist says land value tax will fix the economy

#18

Post by spywaregorilla »

WalterBright wrote: post #15

Want to fix the economy? Stop punishing people for being productive. Stop paying people to fail. Want something to tax? Tax pollution.

Land value tax is, in a sense, punishing people for not being productive. So there's that.

Re: Redfin Economist says land value tax will fix the economy

#19

Post by bitshiftfaced »

uberman wrote: post #13

I guess I am skeptical that LVT would do anything for most of non-dense urban America. I would be happy to swap out my property, school, state, and income taxes for one where I paid what it would cost to lease the land I currently own. It would reduce my tax burden by 99% I know because my neighbor leases a large parcel (several times my lot size) from the federal government. I would be delighted to swap my current p…

The nominal value of each parcel of land doesn't matter when calculating a landowner's tax burden. You just need to compare each piece of land relative to one another and scale the tax burden accordingly.

Re: Redfin Economist says land value tax will fix the economy

#20

Post by throwaway894345 »

spywaregorilla wrote: post #18
WalterBright wrote: post #15

Want to fix the economy? Stop punishing people for being productive. Stop paying people to fail. Want something to tax? Tax pollution.

Land value tax is, in a sense, punishing people for not being productive. So there's that.

It's punishing people for being not productive in a very specific, narrow sense--productivity per unit land. Moreover (for clarity's sake), the parent said "stop punishing people for being productive" not "start punishing people for being unproductive" which sound similar but are very different statements.
Post reply on HN