Re: 'Waterhole' and land rents

<royls@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message ...

The rent is the most someone else would have paid for access to the
unimproved resource. If he's the ony one who knows the resource is
there, he can get it cheap or free.

So he buys land (that everyone thinks is worthless) for $1 per acre, then
installs wells, and its worth $1000 per acre. And the LVT doesn't apply to
him. You're OK with that?

Even worse: suppose the guy wasn't clever; maybe he had inside knowledge
that there was water under there. If the LVT doesn't apply to him, that's a
pretty good return for being deceitful.

Dan in Philly


.