订阅以下载
Land Value Tax

Ancap georgist unity.

Once I implemented it, the revenue from it rapidly decreased in a linear fashion. I tried to see if the revenue was modified by the amount of private housing by abolishing state housing, but no dice

GEORGIST GANG

For those who read "This is a really bad idea. It basically forces the urbanization of land makes it harder to live in a rural/suburban area" - urban land is more costly than rural land. Rural land is actually very, very cheap. A LVT replacing other forms of taxation (like income) can actually make it far more affordable to live in rural areas.

Similarly for the comment "Eh? A land value tax without any effect on farmers?" Farm land by itself isn't actually that valuable either. A small patch of land in downtown Manhattan may sell for literally millions of dollars. A small patch of land in a paddock out in the country side is worth a handful of dollars.

It is important to remember that LVT is not a tax on the *area* of land, but its *unimproved value* which is normally a product of the infrastructure built up around it - things like roads, electricity, schools, police, shops, libraries, public transport etc.

Or it would be if worked :(

Delicious

LVT should have an effect on several more things: reduce motorist (membership), reduce ghettos, increase commuters membership and income, etc.

An LVT reduces the price of land, not the value. Murray Rothbard made the same mistake when critiquing it.

Eh? A land value tax without any effect on farmers?

This is a really bad idea. It basically forces the urbanization of land makes it harder to live in a rural/suburban area.