Land-value tax: Why Henry George had a point

Re:Land-value tax: Why Henry George had a point by biehl on Saturday October 24, 2015 @04:16PM (#10444713)

[if no densification]...then adding taxes isn't an incentive to better using the land. Which was the point of this tax.

You seem to equate "densification" and "better using the land". That is a narrow definition of "better using the land".

In strictly utilitarian terms any change that increases total utility would be "better using the land", so if a tax increase on land makes some current residents reprioritise their money and decide to move, giving space to other people who value the location more, then that is "better using the land".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Land-value tax: Why Henry George had a point by cm2187 on Sunday October 25, 2015 @04:52AM (#10446385)

Because substituting people does nothing to the housing supply. The only thing that will increase the supply is increasing the density or expanding. The later being very challenged by the TFL infrastructures.

[ Parent | on HN ]