Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So you are saying that if your home value rises to say $300,000 from the $200,000 you paid for it, that you should sell it to the new owner for $200,000? You didn't do anything to increase the value other than sit there. The general marketplace and economy caused the value to rise, not you.
Land that govt wants to develop may have similarly risen in value since it was bought. When govt exercises eminent domain they are expected to pay the then existing market value. That value can be established in court if it has to, but in the end they will get paid market value.
Yes, so long as the rules are applied retroactively and there is a massive wealth tax implemented. The benefits of not having ballooning land values would far outweigh any gains I might get on my house. But only if it is applied to everyone past present and future.
The courts are generally the ones who cause obstruction and ultimately will cause entry level entrepreneurship to stagnate or become non existent. So when all that is left is Wal Mart and other mega corps you cant complain because the barriers to entry are already WAY to high in most mature markets for a small entrepreneur to open up shop.
The US is very quickly becoming way to expensive to do business in and land prices dont help.
Another approach is to have outrageous taxes on land and offer very large breaks for owner occupancy and just tax people out of their land that they are speculatively holding .... courts cant challenge the legislator on tax issues very easily. It is unfortunate because not all land is equal and the situation needs to be applied surgically but your right the courts will fight it so everyone will have to be hosed evenly.
then offer tax breaks for actively operating small business and tax the begesus out of everyone else.
So I suppose an area could selectivly offer tax BREAKS to get the sort of behavior the people want while not running afoul of the courts.
Yes, so long as the rules are applied retroactively and there is a massive wealth tax implemented. The benefits of not having ballooning land values would far outweigh any gains I might get on my house. But only if it is applied to everyone past present and future.
The courts are generally the ones who cause obstruction and ultimately will cause entry level entrepreneurship to stagnate or become non existent. So when all that is left is Wal Mart and other mega corps you cant complain because the barriers to entry are already WAY to high in most mature markets for a small entrepreneur to open up shop.
The US is very quickly becoming way to expensive to do business in and land prices dont help.
Another approach is to have outrageous taxes on land and offer very large breaks for owner occupancy and just tax people out of their land that they are speculatively holding .... courts cant challenge the legislator on tax issues very easily.
OK then, I'm not understanding how wealth can be accumulated in this society you envision. If home/land appreciation isn't allowed, would you similarly ban other forms of wealth accumulation? For example, stocks can only be sold for what you paid for them. Artwork can only be sold for what you paid. Antiques can only be sold for what the item cost when new. Etc.
If your answer is no to any of that, what is different about homes and land that they can't be treated as any other investment? Homes and land are just that, a form of investment. Even if inherited, the owner still could have chosen to sell the land and invest elsewhere. That they chose to keep it shouldn't mean that they get penalized later when they do decide to sell and the value has gone up.
If you don't want land values rising, then you need to stop population growth. With 3 million or so more people in the country each year that is a lot of land being gobbled up for housing, schools, stores etc to support that increase. Supply and demand.
I would add that govt. regulation & zoning greatly adds to the cost of land/housing and the ability to start a business.
Any time someone holds (in alot of cases inherits) land that has been sitting idle. Then stuff starts developing around said land .... the owner holds out, sitting on the land .... more little shops and roads are built, pretty soon there are a few 10+ story buildings ..... the owner holds out
Pretty soon the land is worth millions because now it sits in the middle of a thriving area. The owner finally sells, having had to do nothing (or very little) other than hold the land.
So when the govt uses eminite domain to take said property for a cheap price I dont feel bad.
They don't, though. Even with eminent domain, any government must pay "just compensation" for the private property they take for public use. Why? 5th Amendment Takings Clause.
Quote:
But this whole idea of getting a big pay day on raw land just because you sat on it is a bad thing in our society, it stifles development and entrepreneurship because now the cost of entry is to steep so people just don't set up shop.
The remedy? Amend the Constitution. Good luck with that. Until that happens, the 5th Amendment's Takings Clause stands as is.
So you are saying that if your home value rises to say $300,000 from the $200,000 you paid for it, that you should sell it to the new owner for $200,000? You didn't do anything to increase the value other than sit there. The general marketplace and economy caused the value to rise, not you.
Land that govt wants to develop may have similarly risen in value since it was bought. When govt exercises eminent domain they are expected to pay the then existing market value. That value can be established in court if it has to, but in the end they will get paid market value.
OK then, I'm not understanding how wealth can be accumulated in this society you envision. If home/land appreciation isn't allowed, would you similarly ban other forms of wealth accumulation? For example, stocks can only be sold for what you paid for them. Artwork can only be sold for what you paid. Antiques can only be sold for what the item cost when new. Etc.
If your answer is no to any of that, what is different about homes and land that they can't be treated as any other investment? Homes and land are just that, a form of investment. Even if inherited, the owner still could have chosen to sell the land and invest elsewhere. That they chose to keep it shouldn't shouldn't mean that they get penalized later when they do decide to sell and the value has gone up.
If you don't want land values rising, then you need to stop population growth. With 3 million or so more people in the country each year that is a lot of land being gobbled up for housing, schools, stores etc to support that increase. Supply and demand.
I would add that govt. regulation & zoning greatly adds to the cost of land/housing and the ability to start a business.
Nope, land is special in that it is a ZERO sum game and there is an even smaller subset of land that is desirable for building, forming markets, etc. IF this very limited resource is allowed to be chewed up privately then we are all screwed (just as we are seeing now with more people living in vans, go back home to mom and dad, etc etc, whole books could be writen on the recent phenomena we are seeing that is directly tied to the extreme divergence between the value of labor and the value of land).
It is roughly equivalent to if we just let all the most wealthy buy up all the water rights and then the rest of the unwashed masses just had to pay what ever prices they made up (because we need the water to live). Kind of like companies selling air in China, the cabal (I say cabal because its probably not the same companies selling the air that are discharging pollutants but they are sure capitalizing on what their factory buddies created) that poisoned the air in the first place lol.
Zoning, regulation and tax structures is the state legislatures way around the courts. Judges are VERY hard to fire and at least in my state are VERY BIG business friendly. They could care less about john Q public or small enterpenuers, they just get rail roaded.
Nope, land is special in that it is a ZERO sum game and there is an even smaller subset of land that is desirable for building, forming markets, etc. IF this very limited resource is allowed to be chewed up privately then we are all screwed (just as we are seeing now with more people living in vans, go back home to mom and dad, etc etc, whole books could be writen on the recent phenomena we are seeing that is directly tied to the extreme divergence between the value of labor and the value of land).
It is roughly equivalent to if we just let all the most wealthy buy up all the water rights and then the rest of the unwashed masses just had to pay what ever prices they made up (because we need the water to live). Kind of like companies selling air in China, the cabal (I say cabal because its probably not the same companies selling the air that are discharging pollutants but they are sure capitalizing on what their factory buddies created) that poisoned the air in the first place lol.
Zoning, regulation and tax structures is the state legislatures way around the courts. Judges are VERY hard to fire and at least in my state are VERY BIG business friendly. They could care less about john Q public or small enterpenuers, they just get rail roaded.
You realize "air rights" are sold and bought in NYC, no?
The owner of the air rights reaps the financial reward, not the public.
The owners of Grand Central Station have 1.35 million square feet of air rights, and will be selling 700,000 of those to JPMorgan Chase for its new headquarters on Park Avenue.
The Archdiocese of New York owns 1.2 million square feet of air rights and is in negotiations to sell 30,000 of those to the owners of another East Midtown building.
Greatest victory of the propaganda ministry : convincing millions that voluntary socialism was mandatory, as part of being a voluntary citizen at birth (oxymoron).
Generations have no knowledge of endowed rights abolished “by consent of the governed.”
It's no surprise that absolute ownership of land ('private property') sounds bizarre to the new socialist serfs.
Nope, land is special in that it is a ZERO sum game and there is an even smaller subset of land that is desirable for building, forming markets, etc. IF this very limited resource is allowed to be chewed up privately then we are all screwed (just as we are seeing now with more people living in vans, go back home to mom and dad, etc etc, whole books could be writen on the recent phenomena we are seeing that is directly tied to the extreme divergence between the value of labor and the value of land).
It is roughly equivalent to if we just let all the most wealthy buy up all the water rights and then the rest of the unwashed masses just had to pay what ever prices they made up (because we need the water to live). Kind of like companies selling air in China, the cabal (I say cabal because its probably not the same companies selling the air that are discharging pollutants but they are sure capitalizing on what their factory buddies created) that poisoned the air in the first place lol.
Zoning, regulation and tax structures is the state legislatures way around the courts. Judges are VERY hard to fire and at least in my state are VERY BIG business friendly. They could care less about john Q public or small enterpenuers, they just get rail roaded.
Land is not special and is not a zero sum game. There is no shortage of affordable land but rather a shortage where you want it to be. The fact that you might want to pay or can only afford to pay a minimal amount per acre for a good downtown or upscale neighborhood location doesn't mean that society needs to provide cheap land where you want it to be.
You want to start a business? Great. Come to my town and we'll be thrilled to have you. There is no shortage of affordable land here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Until that happens, the 5th Amendment's Takings Clause stands as is.
