Thread

1. skew-aberration · 1790467422 · focus · HN ↗

   I think LVT does have a history in US, e.g Pittsburgh.

   Also Georgism is 100% LVT -> A land tax alone has been the recommendation of many economists before and after George - From Smith, Riccardo, Mill to Friedman. Across classical, neoclassical, Keynesian, Austrian schools. If there's one thing economists can agree on, it's that land tax is better than income tax.

   1. jdjdndndbd · 1790468024 · focus · HN ↗

      Random thought, would be it be good to extend land tax to use of all common public goods. E.g. radio frequencies, mining, water, CO2 pollution. Things you own, licensed or consume that take from the common good. Obviously this need constant tweaking E.g. as new tech makes different things valuable.

      1. mcdonje · 1790470092 · focus · HN ↗

         Other replies supporting taxing externalities and scarce resources are correct, but it can be generalized as taxing undesirable behavior to disincentivize it.

         1. notatoad · 1790471552 · focus · HN ↗

            The generalization I would use is that governments should tax any scarce resource based on the amount of revenue it should produce if used effectively, rather than the revenue a given consumer can actually produces. Whether that is land, radio spectrum, or clean air.

            “Undesirable behavior” is overly broad to the point of being actively misleading, and gets you into sin taxes. smut or drugs are not the scarce resources anybody is talking about here.

            1. treis · 1790476804 · focus · HN ↗

               But that is what the land tax folks are doing. They want dense cities and transit. They tax the "undesirable behavior" i.e. parking lots and lower density usage.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.