That sounds awful. Imagine being forced to move every few years or giving people with money that much power over you. Seems crazy that this idea is so popular. I'm guessing the people who like this idea are very young and mobile. Imagine telling grandma she has to move and sell her house and have police show up at the door when she doesn't want to. It's basically the abuses of eminent domain except done privately.
I don't even think the author is fully behind it, seemed more like a thought experiment as a reply to grandparent.
Regarding grandma: I don't want to kick her out of the house. But there is a real issue here: young families can't find affordable places, while old families live in places, that are too big for them because the kids left. If they rent, they also pay significantly less than the younger family, since they are on older contracts. Once new people move in, rent is raised to the new level. The older people don't want to move out, because they would have to pay more for their new, smaller place, than the old, bigger place. Meanwhile the young family also has to finance the pensions for that old family.
Noone is being evil here, but ... it sucks. And every idea to work on it is shut down as being unfair to the people who already own houses. Even building new houses is usually opposed by the people who already have houses in the area. If I never get the chance ever to own one, I don't really feel like I have to protect the interest of house owners.
What if grandma lives in a city where there's no jobs for me? Asking people to move in with their relatives is not the answer; the answer is very simple: build more housing. Eliminate zoning rules and start replacing older buildings with new, larger and taller buildings.
Why? Why can’t companies create jobs everywhere? Shouldn’t every American city deserve top notch infrastructure that the states only reserves for high density unaffordable cities where jobs are concentrated.
Maybe this will force the governments to spend some of our accumulated tax dollars to actually improve public transport and efficiently network cities and towns.
Zoning rules exist for a reason. People need infrastructure and water and services and power grids to live well. High density is not desirable nor will it be affordable. It behooves the govt to encourage high density where there are jobs to create artificial scarcity and inflate housing value.
Because higher the home value, more property tax can be extracted. This is the oldest con in the world. This is also why all high density cities are all expensive and housing is unaffordable and everything from water to power is expensive and public services are woefully inadequate.
>This is also why all high density cities are all expensive and housing is unaffordable and everything from water to power is expensive and public services are woefully inadequate.
No, they aren't. I live in Tokyo; it's very high-density, quite affordable compared to anything in America, and public services are all excellent. High density is how you get high efficiency.
>Shouldn’t every American city deserve top notch infrastructure that the states only reserves for high density unaffordable cities where jobs are concentrated.
No, because spreading everyone out means your infrastructure cost per capita balloons, and it's unaffordable for the government. If you want "top notch" infrastructure, you need to live near other people, not out in the boonies.
>Zoning rules exist for a reason.
No, they don't: they just make everything far away from everything else and prevent density. Here in Japan, schools, light industrial, residential, and commercial all coexist in mostly the same spaces. So it's not that hard to live within walking distance of work.
Maybe you should try traveling outside America sometime.
> Eliminate zoning rules and start replacing older buildings with new, larger and taller buildings.
Right now, NIMBY tries to prevent taller buildings.
A land value tax incentivizes more effective land uses-- as opposed to property taxes that include improvements, which reduce the incentive to build high density.
NIMBYism exists because people value their homes and stability. Any society needs stability to thrive. Without NIMBYs, there would be utter chaos and underfunded overcrowded cities.
Housing shortage is due to unions and govts that refuse to establish public infrastructure for everyone. This is done on purpose to create UTism .. Us VS
Them..between property owners and those who don’t own property. Divide and Rule strategy. It has never failed over centuries.
Most LVT proposals usually make concessions to owner occupied housing e.g. tax rebates if it is owner occupied. A citizen's dividend is also effectively a tax exemption for individuals instead of companies.
