Does Al Bartell have a shot at mayor? Re: Using land trusts as an alternative to gentrification

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by testa50

Reminds me of the terrible land distribution schemes that help make much of Latin America so uncompetitive economically.

Communal land equals little investment in land, rampant corruption, and worst of all, ridiculous inflation of non-communal land. In Mexico unimproved private land goes for $50k US an acre, no utilities, no roads, nothing. Just the land. Improved land pushes $200k an acre--vastly higher than in America. That's because almost everything is communal and the only way to switch from communal to private is through government patronage. Guess where the $$$ ends up?

No, you can't get past fundamantal laws of land economics, and that's why the decades long trend in development economics has been AWAY from communal land so that people can invest in their own land, borrow against it, and sell it. Communal land breeds subsistence agriculture and lack of asset accumulation. In Atlanta it would breed slums ruled and exploited by the well connected.

And I say all this as a very liberal person.

Originally Posted by bu2

And the economic collapse of the communist countries as well, with similar joint ownership systems. Sounds like the guy doesn't know his history.

To some extent, you could throw in Indian lands where unscrupulous leaders and outsiders took advantage of the mass of people who remained in poverty. Do we really want the reservations as a model?

The least common denominator here is corruption, not necessarily the system in which the corruption came up within. After all, capitalist systems have too shown that corruption can bring them down. Just look back at 2008. Look what good all that private ownership did for people.

I don't have the numbers to show whether or not my version of this plan would work. I don't have the education to begin to accurately examine that. That said, I don't think the historical contexts of the examples being brought up are similar enough here to use as reasons to abandon the idea.

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

Just look back at 2008. Look what good all that private ownership did for people.

Or rather what irresponsible lending practices and lax credit standards sanctioned by government underwriters did for all taxpayers.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by LovinDecatur

Or rather what irresponsible lending practices and lax credit standards sanctioned by government underwriters did for all taxpayers.

Right, because the private banks and lenders were so reluctant to give out toxic mortgages.

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

Right, because the private banks and lenders were so reluctant to give out toxic mortgages.

Not reluctant at all when they're guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Collect your fees and sell your risk. A no-lose for everyone except for those stuck with the bailout.

[ronricks]

Gentrification can't be stopped. Some people just need to accept it and move on. It isn't going away anytime soon.

[cqholt]

No chance of winning.