carradjm

Her speaking out against Amazon was her speaking out against something that is not within her sphere of competence or within her elected sphere of influence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5rUPatnXSE

Good video where he discusses these things in terms of political correctness.

I'm not certain I completely understand your argument. Basically every explanation of LVT that I've come across says that it will decrease the amount of blighted land, as a land-value tax increases the incentive for landowners to improve their land.

That quote is the exact reason that land needs to be taxed at a much higher rate than it's currently taxed. Notice I say "land", so that doesn't include anything built on that land.

The value of land is directly tied to the desirability of the land around it. Land in Manhattan is more valuable than land in the middle of South Dakota because of all the network effects of other people (and the government) building things in Manhattan.

Don't mean to boil down your entire well-written post to a single point, but I maintain that Georgism is the only sensible solution to this problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax

We need to implement a land-value tax, if simply because taxing land does nothing to change the supply of land. Unless America decides to invade Mexico anytime soon, the value of land will not change.

I responded to another post in this thread with a link on Georgism as well (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax).

I see Georgism occasionally advocated for on Hacker News but I really wish I would see more discussion on it. IMHO, it is the only sensible tax and the most fair tax that economists have thought up.

This is where we need to eventually transition.

I hope more people will research Georgism and start trying to spread the idea around. It's the only tax-system that comes anywhere close to closing up any of these loopholes.