Why are there suddenly so many car washes?

Post by VirusNewbie » Mon, Mar 18, 2024, 3:32 PM UTC

dinp wrote: post #340

KingMachiavelli wrote: post #181

I really hate sounding like a broken record but this is just another instance of how low property taxes and the absence of land value taxes massively benefits low-value businesses. The real business of car washes is real estate, it's profitable enough to get 3-4x leverage with a low interest loan. TBH I think real estate used to have high information asymmetry between local residents and large investors; low property…

Somehow the idea of perpetually paying property taxes and land value taxes doesn't sound appealing to me, especially since businesses already pay taxes. I don't understand the argument of designing a system to hurt a specific business type such as low value businesses. If there's a loophole such as lack of sales tax for car washes, fix that, but let the playing field remain even. If desirable high value businesses ar…

Post by frumper » Mon, Mar 18, 2024, 3:48 PM UTC

BirdieNZ wrote: post #330

sytelus wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't make sense. There are tons of other business which will have higher day to day return and property appreciation. I don't think anyone was craving for car wash subscription and I don't know of anyone having car wash in their checklist monthly item. Those people exist for sure but not in that kind of demand that a town needs even two of them. I think this is just another instance where private equity is cr…

It's hard to think of many businesses that require lower capital investment and maintenance than a car wash. The ones I see in my city that look like land banking are a big plot with asphalt covering it (don't even need to mow lawns), a few awnings with some plumbing for hoses and soap and other gear, and nothing else. Even a laundromat would cost more to set up.

Post by itishappy » Mon, Mar 18, 2024, 4:08 PM UTC

ufocia wrote: post #465

chongli wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The value of the land is not solely based on the "raw land." As they say in real estate, it's all about location, location, location! A half-acre beachfront plot in Malibu is worth orders of magnitude more than a half-acre of grassland in Montana. A lot of the value comes from the beachfront itself, yes, but a lot more of the value comes from all the development around it. This is the whole basis for the business mod…

There is that, of course. But good courses also permit real estate companies to hold land for future development at a reduced cost, maybe even a profit, no?

Post by itishappy » Mon, Mar 18, 2024, 4:15 PM UTC

ejb999 wrote: post #469

GeneralMayhem wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The land would be taxed whether it has improvements or not, and in fact would be taxed the same amount whether improved or not. That's how such a tax incentivizes improvement - if you're paying the tax either way, you want to do as much as possible with it to get your money's worth.

So where do the animals pay their taxes so they have some place to live after we make it economically un-feasible to keep land undeveloped by taxing raw land out of existence?

Post by cassianoleal » Mon, Mar 18, 2024, 4:26 PM UTC

bluGill wrote: post #78

cassianoleal wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both public transport and taxi/cab/uber are alternatives to car ownership.

Unless you are rich taxi/uber is not an alternative to car ownership. (rich call it a limo). Those are alternatives for when something else covers most of your needs but once in a while it is lacking. If you own a car you need a 'i'm drunk' option. If you take transit you need a 'i'm going where transit doesn't or is too slow' option.