Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [LandCafe] Re: Detroit Land Grab

Expand Messages
  • David Reed
    If they re walking away ,they re not going to make any improvements.LVT won t always work:it is posited on the supposition of a rising population. HG P&P
    Message 1 of 395 , Aug 7, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      If they're walking away ,they 're not going to make any improvements.
      LVT won't always work:it is posited on the supposition of a rising population. HG P&P " Like a flash it came upon me that there was the reason of advancing poverty with advancing wealth. With the growth of population land grows in value and the men who work it must pay for the privilege" 
       

      To: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com
      From: roy_langston@...
      Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 18:01:59 +0000
      Subject: [LandCafe] Re: Detroit Land Grab

       
      --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, David Reed <dbcreed@...> wrote:

      > If Detroit land is so valueless that people are a just walking away and abandoning it, what good will LVT do on its own?

      It will take the burden off improvements. As improvement value is the great majority of property value in Detroit, that makes a huge difference in the economics of improvement. They're in a vicious circle: the more people leave, the lower land value goes, the higher the property tax rate on improvements, the less economic rationale there is for improvement, the less economic activity occurs, the higher the unemployment, and the more people leave.

      > LVT can surely only work when there is a lot of money around and land price inflation kicks in,whereupon it keeps the money circulating in those parts of the economy where supply can expand .

      Wrong. LVT will always work, no matter what the starting conditions.

      -- Roy Langston


    • roy_langston
      ... Which might be why I haven t done so. Citizenship self-evidently isn t a question of natural law, and I ve explained why residence defined as six months +
      Message 395 of 395 , Sep 12, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "walto" <calhorn@...> wrote:

        > The main point of resorting to natural law pronoucements of the kind you have bellowed is that they are supposed to help us determine what the various human-made laws SHOULD say. That is, if we have a question about know how some law should be constructed with respect to, e.g., who should receive various benefits and for how long or which protections of person or property must be enforced, or whatever, natural law claims are sometimes made--just as you have confidently made them in this context. It is, thus plainly circular to respond, when asked to specify the characteristics of some claimed natural law, "You'll have to consult the local legislature and courts--they'll tell us."

        Which might be why I haven't done so. Citizenship self-evidently isn't a question of natural law, and I've explained why residence defined as six months + reflects the relevant natural law principles.

        -- Roy Langston
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.