The Economist: WhyDON’T Peoples Recover Natural Rents?
|December 17, 2014||Posted by Staff under Good Press|
This 2014 excerpt of The Economist, Nov 10, is by H.C. Timekeeper.
Throughout history, economists have advocated a tax on the unimproved value of land. Adam Smith said “nothing [could] be more reasonable”. Milton Friedman said it was “least bad tax”.
Yet there are only a handful of real-world examples of land value taxes (LVT). Why?
Politics. LVTs would impose concentrated costs on today’s landowners, who face a new tax bill and a reduced sale price. The benefit, by contrast, is spread equally over today’s population and future generations.
Ed. Notes: People want to earn money from their land, which is understandable. However, the only part that is theirs is the value of the building. The value of the location is not theirs, but is a product of their neighbors and nature — location being the three most valuable things in real estate.
That said, people should not lose the value of their land. What must change is their view of what is theirs. While all of us are entitled to some land to use in privacy, all of us are also entitled to a share of the worth of Earth in our region. It’s OK to get rich in real estate; it’s just something we must do together.
And once residents get a dividend from local natural values, then they won’t object to pay a land tax or land dues.