Cracking the Mystery of Labor's Falling Share of GDP

Re:Cracking the Mystery of Labor's Falling Share of GDP by CuriouslyC on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @07:39PM (#14199260)

From my perspective, if new tenants are willing to contribute more to society to live somewhere, that should trump who was on the land first. When they sell, the original owners are well compensated by appreciation in property value.

Artificially suppressing property taxes to protect entrenched owners is a lot like taxing the internet to support newspapers and record stores.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cracking the Mystery of Labor's Falling Share of GDP by s73ver on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @12:41PM (#14204619)

So to you, money trumps all? What if those with more money simply wish to buy the house as an investment, so the people who live there not only get chased out, but the house sits idle?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cracking the Mystery of Labor's Falling Share of GDP by bufordsharkley on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @02:08PM (#14205450)

Implementing a tax on the land would remove the tendency to speculate upon it.

Currently, why do people buy real estate as an investment? It's not because they believe the actual building materials will become more valuable, but rather that the land will. We see far more of "land banking" than speculation in commodities, insofar as commodities tend towards marginal cost.

Anyway, if a land value tax is in place, the land value increase won't be captured as profit, and thus all locations will only be used by people who mean to use them.

There is no reason to believe that middle class residents will be "chased out." However, we would see market incentives that would lead to gradual densification in residential areas that are encountering rising demand.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cracking the Mystery of Labor's Falling Share of GDP by wan23 on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @02:23PM (#14205599)

Then clearly the property taxes aren't high enough.

[ Parent | on HN ]