5 Comments
User's avatar
Max Clark's avatar

yeah, i've started preferring the term "land rent tax" or "a tax on land's rental value" when first describing the concept to people.

Expand full comment
Warbler's avatar

Yeah, I've noticed it in your writing! It makes sense. Land value is just somewhat disconnected from the underlying issue of who captures the land rent.

What do you think of the idea of a small scale implementation, Max? Can we bootstrap Georgism this way?

Expand full comment
Max Clark's avatar

idk! i mean, startup cities are all the rage. do you have a few million lying around for the inital purchase? haha.

Expand full comment
Max Clark's avatar

re "The oddity of the Land Value Tax is that it is not proportional to the land rent, but proportional to the landowner’s definition of land value. "

would argue that lvt is still proportiona to the land rent

a = x

or

a = b * x

or

a = b * x + c

in all cases, a is proportional to x. meaning that if x goes up, a goes up. in this case, linear porportionality.

Expand full comment
Warbler's avatar

Ok yes, you're right. The LVT is linearly proportional to the land rent. I'll update the wording to better reflect the point I meant to make, which is that the LVT is not just proportional to the land rent, but also dependent non-linearly on the landowner's time horizon and the tax rate: RP = RL * xT / (1 + xT). For the LRT it's much more straight forward: RP = x*RL, with simple linear dependence on the tax rate and the land rent. (Definitions from https://peoplesrent.substack.com/p/investigating-land-value-tax-rates.)

Expand full comment