You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: 'Til Debt Do You Part - Is Your Future Already Over?
The unimproved value of land is constrained by zoning and whatever improvements exist nearby. Can you tell me more about the topsoil damage in Australia that you mentioned?
Land value tax wouldn't be used on farmland or areas zoned for extraction (mines) as that would incentivise environmental degredation. It makes more sense to collect royalties on whatever was taken from the land.
Indeed, land is not the only economic privilege that contributes to inequality growth, but its significance shouldn't be downplayed. I recommend taking a look at this list of total resource rents by Prosper Australia to give an idea of what could be taxed instead of incomes.
Basically, Australia's spent the last couple centuries stripping their topsoil for sheep, cattle, and short term (1-generation or less) farms. They have the most garbage soil management program of any major industrial nation on the planet- and there are some bad ones. (The world's total topsoil loss in arable land over the 20th century amounts to over a third of the amount currently in production, so that says a lot.) Using Australia as an example for anything to do with land is highly suspect at best. Hell, the Prosper Australia site you linked me to even says "Under a land tax system, the rural sector would enjoy a lower tax burden, encouraging decentralisation." This could very directly contribute to even further worsening the topsoil of Australia. (If you're really interested, I highly recommend Montgomery's Dirt: The Erosion of Civilization.)
There's no practical difference in collecting tax on land and on resources extracted from land when it comes to historical environmental degradation. We have examples of both methods dating back to the Roman Empire- only direct controls on land use, like preserves and National Parks, prevent environmental degradation of the land.
You're conflating land tax (or land rent) with land use.
A land value tax would be the wrong thing for agricultural land because it would incentivise people to pillage as quickly as possible and exit so as to minimise their tax burden.
Collecting royalties is appropriate because you're charging people for what they've taken. The more they pillage the land, the more they have to pay. If anything, it's a disincentive!
I agree with you that the environment is extremely important and I believe that this can be achieved by managing resources with a long-term mindset. One of the things I love about permaculture is how they focus on building soil and rehabilitating land.