Remix.run Logo
▲ dennis_jeeves2 3 hours ago

>If we view raw nature as a common inheritance of mankind, then paying a tax on land is how the exclusionary use of it

This will have some of the unfortunate effect of collectivism. We don't want the govt to tax you into poverty.

A simpler overall approach (I've left out the nuances) would be to have an equal amount of land per person completely tax free. Individuals can then rent out their land for others to use as needed. Forests/rivers/conservation lands etc. can be seen as truly a common inheritance of mankind and should generally have the least of commercial activity.

p.s - a govt will never agree to such an arrangement because it will not favor them.

▲kraken_cult 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'm curious as to how you think we should divide up who gets what plots, can you explain how that works?

▲ 2 hours ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
▲judge2020 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> p.s - a govt will never agree to such an arrangement because it will not favor them.

IDK, governments tend to align with what results in the most economic activity being created / moved into their country ("growth"). If you were able to convince that overall economic growth would be multiple times higher over a few decades with the system, it might just become appealing.

A problem I see with implementation in the US, though, is that local municipalities are who tax land and property value, so entire rural counties and cities would have their funding stunted. And asking the government to buy into that while subsidizing low-growth areas for a long time (decades / forever, if a rural area never develops) is a really hard sell.

▲malicka an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> This will have some of the unfortunate effect of collectivism. We don't want the govt to tax you into poverty.

Weird framing. In any case, this would lead to less taxes for most folks, at least compared to property taxes.

▲hdgvhicv 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Raise X in land tax and then you spend it evenly amongst the population. Anyone using less than their fair share gets a bonus, anyone uses more has to pay.

If you just allow using X value, but tax free, then those who use less don’t get rewarded.

Effectively one non transferable share, one per citizen, with proceeds as a dividend.