A Modest House Goes For $1.1 Million

[Geoist]

This may not be a bad idea when in contest with property taxes.

Well, as economist Milton Friedman once stated: "the least bad tax is the property tax on the unimproved value of land, the Henry George argument of many, many years ago."

Btw, another conservative by the name of William F. Buckley Jr. was a major advocate of LVT.

However, do you think it is justifiable to effectively evict poorer landowners because civilization has sprung around them?

Since LVT discourages urban sprawl, such situations would be much less likely to occur.

Merely holding a house of high value does not necessary give one the disposable income to pay taxes on it.

I assume you mean site rather than house? Under LVT, houses would have lower (or no) tax.

Dozens of studies in dozens of cities have shown that most home owners pay less under land value tax than under property tax, and much less than under income taxes. The only exceptions we have seen are where only a small minority of residents can afford home ownership or where businesses have been so overtaxed that demand for business properties has been discouraged.
Land value tax: Saving Communities

It seems that property taxes (and the LVT as I understand it) serve to segregate society by pushing lower income individuals into poorer neighborhoods.

I respectfully disagree. While I do not necessarily think LVT will instantly create multi-socioeconomic/cultural/racial/ethnic communities, I believe strongly that it would help poorer communities by encouraging development (this leads to more jobs in those communities).

A shift to land value tax benefits the African American community in several ways. First of all, homeowners tend to pay less under land value tax than under property tax in black communities. We have documented that this savings is particularly striking in the cities of Clairton and Duquesne. At one time, it was particularly striking in black neighborhoods within Pittsburgh. However, bad assessment practices, which are discussed below, allowed property owners in prominent white neighborhoods to escape their share of the tax burden, while land purchases by the Urban Redevelopment authority propped up land prices, preventing land assessments from falling in certain black neighborhoods.

As a result, homeowners in Pittsburgh's Upper Hill District, who should be saving handsomely with land value tax, are paying about what they would pay with conventional property tax, while homeowners in the 12th Ward are paying an average of $24 more under land value tax than under property tax. Even with these problems, however, homeowners in black neighborhoods still save overall. There are substantial savings to homeowners in Hazelwood, the North Side, Fineview and the 13th ward.

Pittsburgh shifted to land value tax four times between 1978 and 1983, and enjoyed a tremendous surge in construction and renovation following the shift, measured by construction values stated on building permits. In high land-value neighborhoods, like Squirrel Hill, Oakland, Shadyside and the Golden Triangle, there was a great increase in permits for new construction. In poorer neighborhoods, there was primarily an increase in permits for additions and renovations. This effect on neighborhood revitalization might well be more important to members of African-American communities than the savings to homeowners, even if assessments were reformed and the savings were more substantial.
Land Tenure and Race

 

[Geoist]

Have you ever lived in a pure LVT community? Say like Hyattsville, MD or Arden, DE? They are small town communities that rely on other towns for providing basic services.

And every state relies on the federal government for numerous services. Next red herring please.

 

[Geoist]

So LVT which forces people into cities then tax the population the people create in those cities?

How exactly does LVT force anyone into the cities? What it does is encourage revitalization of abandoned sites and discourages urban sprawl.

So you want an agrarian society?

Where do you get the impression I want an agrarian society?

 

[Geoist]

While I don't agree with some of George's ideas (as he wasn't too far from Austrian Economics) but LVT was one of his worse ideas.

Many libertarians including Albert Jay Nock, Frank Chodorov, Leo Tolstoy, and yes one of the main founders of the LP considered George's LVT one of the world's greatest ideas.

The only reformer abroad in the world in my time who interested me in the least was Henry George, because his project did not contemplate prescription, but, on the contrary, would reduce it to almost zero. He was the only one of the lot who believed in freedom, or (as far as I could see) had any approximation to an intelligent idea of what freedom is, and of the economic prerequisites to attaining it....One is immensely tickled to see how things are coming out nowadays with reference to his doctrine, for George was in fact the best friend the capitalist ever had. He built up the most complete and most impregnable defense of the rights of capital that was ever constructed, and if the capitalists of his day had had sense enough to dig in behind it, their successors would not now be squirming under the merciless exactions which collectivism is laying on them, and which George would have no scruples whatever about describing as sheer highwaymanry. —Albert J. Nock "Thoughts on Utopia"
Frank Chodorov

People do not argue with the teachings of George, they simply do not know it. ... He who becomes acquainted with it cannot but agree. - Leo Tolstoy
Tolstoy

And don't forget that prior to Henry George, many of history's great advocates of personal liberty advocated LVT (what many of them called 'ground rent') including Adam Smith, JS Mill, the French Physiocrats, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and so on...

 

[austrianecon]

And every state relies on the federal government for numerous services. Next red herring please.

You mean Federal MANDATED services and programs.. huge difference. Btw, if you can't afford services in the first place that seems like a big down side.

 

[Geoist]

You mean Federal MANDATED services and programs.. huge difference. Btw, if you can't afford services in the first place that seems like a big down side.

People in Arden are not exempt from Delaware's taxes.

 

[austrianecon]

First you say this:

How exactly does LVT force anyone into the cities?

Then you say this:

What it does is encourage revitalization of abandoned sites and discourages urban sprawl.

Do you know what urban sprawl is? In case you don't it's all those communities (housing areas) built after WW2 that we call the suburbs. Suburbs are areas that surround cities. So if the point is to discourage urban sprawl then the point is to force people into cities or existing communities thus raising the density of the communities.

Where do you get the impression I want an agrarian society?

You want to tax pollution (carbon tax). That means taxing industry, power, fuel and everything else we use today which produces pollution.

 

[Geoist]

FiDo you know what urban sprawl is?

Yes, I do.

In case you don't it's all those communities (housing areas) built after WW2 that we call the suburbs. Suburbs are areas that surround cities. So if the point is to discourage urban sprawl then the point is to force people into cities or existing communities thus raising the density of the communities.

There are numerous advantages to decreasing urban sprawl:

Less pollution
Less commute time
More efficient infrastructure
Fewer farmers being pushed out of farmland
Less 'dead space'
Fewer ecosystems ruined

etc.

You want to tax pollution (carbon tax). That means taxing industry, power, fuel and everything else we use today which produces pollution.

You are fine with current property taxes but you have a problem with taxing pollution?

So on the one hand I am accused of forcing everyone to live in the city but on the other hand I am being accused of forcing everyone into agriculture. :lol:

 

[austrianecon]

Many libertarians including Albert Jay Nock, Frank Chodorov, Leo Tolstoy, and yes one of the main founders of the LP considered George's LVT one of the world's greatest ideas.

Yeah.. that bunch tends to be really close to the line of Anarchist, rather then Libertarian.

And don't forget that prior to Henry George, many of history's great advocates of personal liberty advocated LVT (what many of them called 'ground rent') including Adam Smith, JS Mill, the French Physiocrats, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and so on...

And they are wrong because LVT is the antithesis to personal liberty. LVT is about forcing people to do something with property they "own" or taxing them so much they lose that property for not creating something economically viable to keep the property (pay taxes). If you own the deed, you choose what you should do with that property not be forced to do something or lose it.

 

[Geoist]

Yeah.. that bunch tends to be really close to the line of Anarchist, rather then Libertarian.

You speak as if anarchism and libertarianism are exclusive. You realize the first people to call themselves libertarians were anarchists?

Btw, many of your Austrian friends claim to be anarchists.

And they are wrong because LVT is the antithesis to personal liberty. LVT is about forcing people to do something with property they "own" or taxing them so much they lose that property for not creating something economically viable to keep the property (pay taxes).

You would be hard-pressed to find any libertarian who opposes all force. Force in of itself is not necessarily bad. Aggression is bad and anti-libertarian. LVT is not aggression as it seeks to eliminate it.

If you own the deed, you choose what you should do with that property not be forced to do something or lose it.

When it comes to property in land, I don't deal in such absolutes. Land/space exists without us. We all have to live on it. We all have to share it. Something doesn't magically become my "property" because I placed my foot on it or I killed an Indian for it.

 

[austrianecon]

There are numerous advantages to decreasing urban sprawl:

Less pollution
Less commute time
More efficient infrastructure
Fewer farmers being pushed out of farmland
Less 'dead space'
Fewer ecosystems ruined

etc.

Less pollution? Every lived in a city?
Every traveled in a city?
Detroit?
Farmers aren't pushed out of farm land, they sell their farm land because Big Corporations out produce them (which LVT wouldn't help the little farmer)!
'dead space'? You mean places people don't want to live because of crime and horrible service in the first place?
You mean ecosystems won't be ruined when Southern California has to find more water or any city will have to find places for trash and sewer waste?

How about you live in a major city (NYC, Chicago or any of the other top 13 population areas in the US) for 6 months and then tell me you really want to live there 24/7, 365 days, for decades..and tell me you don't crave to own your own home instead of renting, you love walking through a "bad" neighborhood, think the cops arrive in a timely manner and the mass transit is just super. Because outside of NYC and Chicago no major cities has been able to do it.

NYC and Chicago have been around for a better part of 200 hundred years or more. They've been doing it for a long time. But cities like San Fran, LA, Atlanta and the lowest of the 15.. Columbus (city I lived in for the last 8 years) are pretty young and don't have the bells and whistles. Atlanta is a sprawling mess because nobody wanted to live in Atlanta after MART was built. Columbus doesn't even have real mass transit (Buses only). LA? Ha! Even to think about it, DC has mass transit that rivals NYC and yet NOBODY willing moves to DC proper.

You are fine with current property taxes but you have a problem with taxing pollution?

Yep. I don't feel what I exhale (carbon dioxide) is a bad thing. :lol:

So on the one hand I am accused of forcing everyone to live in the city but on the other hand I am being accused of forcing everyone into agriculture. :lol:

Cities can exist in an agrarian society. London, Seville, Vienna and so on are prime examples of this. For example in 1665-1666, 100,000 Londoners died due to the Bubonic plague. Same with in (1647–1652) Seville, who lost 150,000 and in 1679 Vienna lost 79,000. These weren't even the big one of the Bubonic plague. The big one (1346-1353) wiped out 30 to 60% of all the cities populations. So you can live in a city and still be an agrarian society.

 

[austrianecon]

You speak as if anarchism and libertarianism are exclusive. You realize the first people to call themselves libertarians were anarchists?

Btw, many of your Austrian friends claim to be anarchists.

Um... no. William Belsham first used the word to describe free will and in opposition to necessitarian view in 1789. Just cause Joseph Déjacque use the word to distinguish his views from Pierre-Joseph Proudhon doesn't make it true. Both wanted the same thing, communism. It's the ugly fact many of the left choose to rewrite.


They can claim whatever the want.. Doesn't mean it's true.. take Joseph Déjacque for example.

You would be hard-pressed to find any libertarian who opposes all force. Force in of itself is not necessarily bad. Aggression is bad and anti-libertarian. LVT is not aggression as it seeks to eliminate it.

wow.. where to start. Force is the manner of the state. Aggression = Force. If I act aggressively towards you I am forcing you to make a choice. If I am forcing you to make a choice I have acted aggressively towards you. Can't have one without the other.

When it comes to property in land, I don't deal in such absolutes. Land/space exists without us. We all have to live on it. We all have to share it. Something doesn't magically become my "property" because I placed my foot on it or I killed an Indian for it.

Let me introduce you to John Locke. "Whatsoever then he removes out of the state of nature… he hath mixed his labour with, and joined it with something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property."

 

[austrianecon]

People in Arden are not exempt from Delaware's taxes.

And Delaware doesn't provide Fire and Police for Arden, either.. So how are they paid for? A community of 475ish can't afford it.

 

[FederalRepublic]

Is this the price of progress?

Not really. It's the price of wanting to live in that neighborhood. People spend their money on all kinds of things that I think are dumb, and I'm quite certain that I own many things that most people have no interest in....

 

[Kushinator]

Perhaps it should be the community rather than a small minority benefiting from site values?

Now the municipality is receiving more than $20,000 in property taxes, with the state receiving between $33,000 and $65,000 in real estate withholding.

 

[TheGirlNextDoor]

...because it is located nearby Google's headquarters.

View attachment 67150912



Perhaps it should be the community rather than a small minority benefiting from site values?

And they say people from the Midwest are stupid.... lmao!

4 bedrooms, 3 baths, double car garage, 2200sqft... nowhere NEAR that price.

Glad to be where I am.

 

[ocean515]

The community recovers a small percent of the value it creates. But not nearly enough to discourage speculation which hurts economies.



No argument here.

The key will be for the community to do something very unCalifornia like; not commit to any long term spending or compensation plan that banks on the increased property tax revenue.

Enough cities are going bankrupt in California as a result of a lack of fiscal discipline by those commiting other peoples money to things.

 

[OscarB63]

There are 6 vacant houses for every 1 homeless person in the USA.

there are ~78,000 abandoned house in Detroit

 

[Dittohead not!]

there are ~78,000 abandoned house in Detroit

There you go, let's just round up all of the homeless and move them to Detroit.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

In other news, the theory of supply and demand is still being debated.

 

[grip]

there are ~78,000 abandoned house in Detroit

Without water and electricity those houses are basically infested ratholes.

 

[TheGirlNextDoor]

There you go, let's just round up all of the homeless and move them to Detroit.

Too late.

 

[OscarB63]

Without water and electricity those houses are basically infested ratholes.

still better than sleeping in a cardboard box.

 

[grip]

still better than sleeping in a cardboard box.

It can be if the place hasn't be filled with garbage and other decaying material or defecation.

 

[specklebang]

Silicon Valley is the most valuable real estate in the world (sort of). The largest concentration of millionaires have offices there. That house, asuming those trees come with the deal, is a steal at 1.1 million.

If you were worth 100 million, would you want to commute to work or walk to work?

What's good for Silicon Valley is good for the country. May I remind you that the prosperous 90s were headquartered there? If Silicon Valley is on the move, it means American inventiveness is on the move.

Try not to let your dismay with Obama cause you to wish ill on the nation. We're stuck with him for another 3.5 years and he can't be re-elected. We're not going to recover by building toy factories in this country.