- Joined
- Aug 14, 2012
- Messages
- 35,187
- Reaction score
- 27,041
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Left
One.. sure it does. At the end of the day.. the tax system is the same.. whether its in the suburbs or the city. In both situations.. the more you build on the property or improve it.. you get taxed more.
No, you don't. Under LVT, if I own an empty lot and its market value is $100,000, and the tax rate is 5%, then I will owe the government $5,000. If the next year I decide to build a house on that lot, increasing the market value of the site to $250,000, then I would still only owe $5,000 as 100% of the value of the house will be deducted from the tax.
As far as suburban sprawl? Sure its a continued effect of redlining. So properties that were predominately black in the cities.. were redlined. Which means that it was difficult for folks to get loans in that area.. where there was no problem in the suburbs. So as folks moved to the suburbs, the value of their homes continued to go up. Which then translated into more wealth that was passed to the next generation. Housing prices increased.., which made banks more willing to loan. Suburbs had better income taxes, which helped the local school systems.. which increased home values, and so on.
Meanwhile.. the areas that were redlined.. declined in value since you could not get a loan for a home,, the homes fell into disarray, the city areas become slums and tenement areas.. the "hood".. school declined.. violence and criminality became associated with those areas etc.
You are trying to muddy the waters of land economics. While redlining may further spur the speculation, so could population growth. Increased population or redlining does not mean the speculation does not exist. You ignore, as typical for an American, (99% sure you are American), the rest of the world. Your redlining theory cannot explain the sprawl that takes place in the rest of the world.
Thus increasing the demand for suburban development to "escape" the problems of the inner city. Developers simply followed the demand to the suburbs.
So people living 45 minutes from the city move further out, not because the house is bigger and cheaper and the taxes are lower... but because they are escaping the problems of the city? Your argument is just full of holes, my friend.
Of course it isn't just redlining.. but also our fascination with owning cars.. and the freedom of having a car.. and a lawn.. and property.. all of those things that have led to the culture of what the American dream is about.
Ah okay, let me know when you meet someone who moved from one suburb to another for "the freedom of having a car."
And its not having a "little apartment in the city". Its having that brady bunch home.. in the suburbs.
But the sprawl continues because of "inner city problems." Got it...
Um yes.. I countered your point that the reason for sprawl is because of taxation. And my points are valid.
You have provided no evidence to counter my claim. You have only provided "alternative" reasons, particularly redlining, which does not at all explain suburban sprawl and does not discredit the speculation/sprawl connection.
Especially when you consider there is no difference in the way urban property is taxed versus rural/suburb property is taxed. but you go ahead and provide the actual research from economists that show the suburban sprawl in the US is because of our property tax system. Not opinions.. but actual research. I would love to see it.
Compact development is a key component in reducing the pressure of urban sprawl. Compact development can be achieved by encouraging the development of vacant land parcels in neighborhoods where development already exists. Our objective was to determine if a land value tax would be an effective policy tool in promoting compact development in Nashville, TN. A land development model was used to evaluate the hypothesis that a land value tax increases the probability of land development in neighborhoods where development already exists relative to areas distant from preexisting development. Results show that the marginal effect of a land value tax on the probability of a vacant lot being developed in 2007 is greater for parcels in neighborhoods with preexisting development in 2006 and 2005 than for parcels in neighborhoods without preexisting development in those years. This finding suggests that land value taxation could be used to design compact development strategies to address sprawl in the Nashville area.
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/46760/2/landtax_devlopment_nashville_1_30_09.pdf
sure I have.. you just don't want to think critically. You believe your ideology and that's that.
You think just providing an alternative theory is somehow 'disproving' another theory. That is laughable.