Thread

1. throwitaway222 · 1790469638 · focus · HN ↗

   I guess here's an issue. I bought 13 acres - mostly because I hate hearing basketballs bouncing, other people's TVs, and "boom cars".

   So if we're going to start taxing me at a million per year, can I start taxing those loud people a million a year so I can live in the city to pay for medical bills for my brain to go through the bouncing basketball.

   Mind you, everyone else in my area has 10 - 15 acres and it's just a dead area. Just people that ran away from the city. There's absolutely no "value" in this land as no one wants to even be here and drive 40 minutes to get to a grocery store.

   1. loeg · 1790469837 · focus · HN ↗

      LVT is assessed on land value. Your 13 rural acres aren't insanely valuable and would not be assessed a million dollars a year under a Georgian model.

      1. throwitaway222 · 1790469928 · focus · HN ↗

         Ok, that makes sense to me then. I thought I was going to be taxed for unused land.

         1. kccqzy · 1790471886 · focus · HN ↗

            The idea here is that unused land in a city should be highly taxed, but unused land in rural areas should not.

            1. loeg · 1790476483 · focus · HN ↗

               I don't even think "unused" is helpful framing. I'd say, property taxes should be assessed on land, not productive imps. If you want to keep your expensive urban downtown land a parking lot, fine, but it shouldn't be subsidized by lower taxes than your neighbor with a high-rise.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.