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

Why a land-value tax is inevitable

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 322 posts

Re: Why a land-value tax is inevitable

#241

Post by AnthonyMouse »

paconbork wrote: post #120
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have an example of where LVT was tried at scale anywhere at all ever? I'm just describing the incentives. Identify the flaw in the logic.

>They abandon their properties, which have already declined in value, because the tax is more than the newly lowered cost of buying space in one of the tall buildings. If we hit the saturation point for tall apartment buildings, the land is less valuable (since you can't extract as much value from it), decreasing the land value taxes (and thus, incentive to leave homes). Lower land value taxes incentivize constructin…

> If we hit the saturation point for tall apartment buildings, the land is less valuable (since you can't extract as much value from it), decreasing the land value taxes (and thus, incentive to leave homes).

The problem here is that you're assuming we can just reduce government revenues that way. That would imply a corresponding reduction in government spending, or else the government would have to increase the rate to account for the reduced land value.

Which is why people would be forced out of single family homes. The amount of government services required by the occupants of a twelve story building would have to be financed by a tax that collects the same money from the owner of a single family home. The latter would be forced out by that amount of tax.

Re: Why a land-value tax is inevitable

#242

Post by AnthonyMouse »

loeg wrote: post #119
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have an example of where LVT was tried at scale anywhere at all ever? I'm just describing the incentives. Identify the flaw in the logic.

You're describing a scenario starting with extreme zoning restrictions and then immediately lifting those restrictions. I don't think your predictions relate to a LVT at all — similar drastic development with varying height would happen in any desirable area with sudden change in zoning restriction. Imagine instead that zoning restrictions were relaxed gradually.

Not really. If you only eliminated the zoning restrictions then the incentive to build much taller than average buildings would be reduced, and the taxes that had to be collected from owners of smaller buildings wouldn't change or could in fact be reduced as the new taller buildings pick up more of the tax burden.

Re: Why a land-value tax is inevitable

#243

Post by meatspaceping »

quotemstr wrote: post #215
Ericson2314 wrote: post #11

1. UBI 2. LVT 3. Environmental externality taxes That's all we need to fix the 21st century. Simple as hell so basically immune to regulatory capture, and will usher in a rate of progress we haven't seen in 100 years, if ever.

> UBI I'm skeptical of UBI. The idea doesn't include any kind of automatic stabilization system to set the UBI at a sustainable level. Because UBI is not market-based, there's little information that flows into the process that sets of level of UBI and other redistribution systems. In a market system, a distributed consensus algorithm governs both wages and prices and adjusts both continuously to account for changes…

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.” ― Alexander Fraser Tytler

Re: Why a land-value tax is inevitable

#244

Post by AnthonyMouse »

mullingitover wrote: post #121
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have an example of where LVT was tried at scale anywhere at all ever? I'm just describing the incentives. Identify the flaw in the logic.

> Do you have an example of where LVT was tried at scale anywhere at all ever? Pennsylvania[1]. > The number of vacant structures in Harrisburg declined from over 4200 in 1982 to under 500 by 2001. The downtown—previously a ghost town—is alive, even at night. The number of businesses on the tax roll has grown from 1,908 to 8,864. > After LVT was adopted by voters in 1996, 70% of residential parcels saw a tax decrease…

So this is basically considering the opposite scenario -- not one in which there is pent up demand but one in which there are many existing abandoned buildings. Moreover, it's a scenario in which the introduction of LVT was not revenue neutral -- you're including in the measurement the economic benefits of a tax cut. It means you're essentially here:

> It seems obvious that this only works if the amount of the land tax isn't large enough to cause these behavioral changes.

Re: Why a land-value tax is inevitable

#245

Post by exabrial »

Ericson2314 wrote: post #11

1. UBI 2. LVT 3. Environmental externality taxes That's all we need to fix the 21st century. Simple as hell so basically immune to regulatory capture, and will usher in a rate of progress we haven't seen in 100 years, if ever.

No we don't. I will never participate in a scheme where we rob someone at gunpoint to "help" another person. The end doesn't justify the means.

Re: Why a land-value tax is inevitable

#246

Post by pbourke »

meatspaceping wrote: post #243
quotemstr wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> UBI I'm skeptical of UBI. The idea doesn't include any kind of automatic stabilization system to set the UBI at a sustainable level. Because UBI is not market-based, there's little information that flows into the process that sets of level of UBI and other redistribution systems. In a market system, a distributed consensus algorithm governs both wages and prices and adjusts both continuously to account for changes…

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of t…

Give me a break. Some of the world’s most stable democracies have both a high level of taxation and a significant social benefit system.

In America, in 2017, there was a group who decided that they could “vote themselves largesse from the public treasury” and it was not “voters”. The end result is referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

Re: Why a land-value tax is inevitable

#247

Post by solidsnack9000 »

fortran77 wrote: post #22
solidsnack9000 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Governments do, indeed, spend significantly more than they used to. The problem in the Bay Area is simply that taxable value assessed only at sale.

That's not true. Every year it can be raised 2%.

Ah, okay -- that I did not know. The effect of the policy over the past decades has still been to allow the value to dramatically increase relative to the taxation.

Re: Why a land-value tax is inevitable

#249

Post by fortran77 »

solidsnack9000 wrote: post #247
fortran77 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not true. Every year it can be raised 2%.

Ah, okay -- that I did not know. The effect of the policy over the past decades has still been to allow the value to dramatically increase relative to the taxation.

> The effect of the policy over the past decades has still been to allow the value to dramatically increase relative to the taxation.

No. The problem is they're not building enough housing. Not that taxes aren't high enough.

Re: Why a land-value tax is inevitable

#250

Post by ropman76 »

Ericson2314 wrote: post #11

1. UBI 2. LVT 3. Environmental externality taxes That's all we need to fix the 21st century. Simple as hell so basically immune to regulatory capture, and will usher in a rate of progress we haven't seen in 100 years, if ever.

"Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken I am not saying that the ideas you have listed are not without merit, however to say they will fix the 21 Century is a bit over reaching.
Post reply on HN