Re: From the rich. To the rich?

Dan in Philly wrote:
<royls@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message =..


Simple concept really: the people who create value should be justly
compensated.


And it's a very good concept. I'm just not clear on how you think it
is related to your proposal to give landowners value that they do not
create.


I don't want to give _landowners_ value that they don't create. I want to give _capital-owners_ value that they _do_ create.

Consider a typical city. If there were no buildings or factories, then all you have is farmland in the middle of nowhere.

Buildings and factories are not there because of buildings and factories. That is circular reasoning. Buildings and factories are there to use. The location is advantageous because of the proximity of people.
Average land value, about 1
k$ per acre. But in a city with lots of capital, typical land value is maybe 500 k$ per acre. That extra 499 k$ is due to the presence of productive enterprises nearby.
When the LVT takes away the 500 k$, I want to return it to the people who created it, the nearby capital owners.

You have to look at who consumes the building if you want to recover value that is lost. You can't charge somebody for looking at your building. Looking doesn't consume it. The people who occupy the building consume it. Those people pay to use the building. The people who live across the street don't consume it so you can't charge them.

Mark M.
.