14284Re: [LandCafe] Re:Total land rent?
- Nov 12, 2012By the Henry George Theorem:Total Aggregate Rent for a particular domain = Total Governmental (at all levels) Expeditures for the particular domain.I personally believe it should beTotal Aggregate Rent for a particular domain = Total Aggregate Governmental (at all levels) Expeditures for the particular domain PLUS aggregate charitible expenditures for the particular domain.I don't get where the whole question about where a CD might come from even makes sense. First, I don't think a CD is necessary, nor wise, nor even a sellable proposition. (The Alaska CD is not really a rent funded CD. Royalties get paid into a trust and the trust invests in the securities market and pays out of interest. And that is quite a different mechanism than collecting rent from home-owners and then paying it back to them - which I suppose why I'm in agreement with concept of UIE or UPE. If you think about it George W. Bush gave out a CDs with his 2001 surplus rebate checks and his 2008 stimulus checks, those were funded by rent collection.)But if a CD happens then it is a governmental expenditure and therefore by HGT it could be "collected rent".For the record, in 2011, the total governmental spending in US at all levels (local, state, federal) was about 6.4 trillion. That's what the "rent" of the US give or take was. I rather think that Ed's estimate of US total land value of 12 trillion. (I'm still not sure I understand how he get's the number.) According to Fed Reserve, for Q2 2012 there was 13,216,356 in mortgage debt. Most of which was residential. http://www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/releases/mortoutstand/current.htm (There is a good amount of land value that is owned without mortgage.) Obviously some of that reflects land value and some reflects improvement value. If your Roy, you believe that generally specially 60%+ is land. If your me, maybe at most 30-40% is land. This paper says 38%. http://www.federalreserve.gov/Pubs/FEDS/2004/200437/200437pap.pdf between 1970 and 2000 and is, in essence, predicting the coming bubble. "In the third, quarter of 2003, we estimate land's share to be 46%, its highest recorded value." The conclusions are pretty interesting, among them: "For 2003:Q3, we estimate that the nominal value of the entire stock of residential land is approximately the same as nominal annual GDP."But the aggregate value of non-residential land and goverment land is substantial. (I'd say way more than the aggregate value of residential land).According to MD 2004 data (1.9 mill parcels), there was 117,744,944,474 (117 billion) in taxable LAND value. (note that this excludes governmental land and other non-profit owned and thus non-taxable land value, and that 1/3 of the data is 3 years old and 1/3 is two years old and 1/3 is a year old.)But, this paper suggest a figure even lower than Ed's "At the end of 2009:Q3, this estimate of land value in the United States was roughly $4½ trillion." http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2010/201016/201016pap.pdf See footnote 2.For thoughts on farm land value, see http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/land-use,-land-value-tenure.aspx and http://www.wellesley.edu/Economics/case/PDFs/Land%20Value%20in%20US.pdfThis paper suggest 10.8 trillion in land value for 2005. Roy might want to note the land as perctange figures for owner occupied housing from 1975-2005, Table 6.5.http://www.wellesley.edu/Economics/case/PDFs/Land%20Value%20in%20US.pdfJDK
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>