Development of surrounding land increases land value yes, but the idea is that since the landowner didn't do that development themselves, they shouldn't be able to profit from it through increased value of their own land. "Land value" is kind of an amorphous though, another way to think about it is that we want to incentivize the most economically optimal use of land in high demand areas, thus we should tax all land proportional to demand (measured via price) to encourage those landowners who have undeveloped or under-utilized land relative to demand to use it.
(note this is counter-intuitively pro-environmental because it applies most to land with high demand, e.g. cities, not forest or farmland, and if cities can be successfully densified to satisfy housing demand, pressure to sprawl can be reduced, increasing those lands left to nature)
Harmful tech such as inefficient forms of taxation like sales, income, and capital tax that reduce prosperity or exacerbate inequality (land value taxes are better)
Land value taxes funding direct stimulus via UBI are a wayyy better way to control inflation and unemployment imo than interest rates and monetary inflation...
no chargebacks is a problem tho. that and everyone's past transaction history being public record and not just available to well-accoutable investigative authorities. first mover advantage with crypto is also kinda terrible...
Capitalism while replacing taxes on productive activities with taxes on unjustified monopoly power such as land value taxes to fund a UBI would be better than many past status quos.
The solution, as always, is a land value tax and UBI. Don't need to fret over needing an education to live comfortably if you can already afford and place to live and food.
hello yes liberal here. netanyahu sucks, georgism rules, and the state should ideally be replaced with some kind of peer-to-peer distributed coordination system.
Development of surrounding land increases land value yes, but the idea is that since the landowner didn't do that development themselves, they shouldn't be able to profit from it through increased value of their own land. "Land value" is kind of an amorphous though, another way to think about it is that we want to incentivize the most economically optimal use of land in high demand areas, thus we should tax all land proportional to demand (measured via price) to encourage those landowners who have undeveloped or under-utilized land relative to demand to use it.
(note this is counter-intuitively pro-environmental because it applies most to land with high demand, e.g. cities, not forest or farmland, and if cities can be successfully densified to satisfy housing demand, pressure to sprawl can be reduced, increasing those lands left to nature)