Tax is the most powerful policy lever: take tax away from work and production, and on to natural monopolies.
Policy is pointless without a body politic.
How do all the "increasing supply will bring house prices down" crowd square their views with the policy of "build and they will come"?
I mean, do they think Dubai builds more to bring prices down?
People should pay tax on the unimproved value of their home. This means houses are cheaper, but are enjoyed for their use-value, not as an economically inert form of investment.
Besides, under the Georgist single-tax system, a bottle of 16-year-old Lagavulin would cost about £12, so noone would care how much tax they were paying in any case.
Sadly, in many areas, our society is becoming more and more zero-sum.
Government hand-outs vs tax, control of monopoly vs paying the rent, demographic primacy vs minority.
Schools should not be about it- but there is no denying an element of zero-sum jostling exists. The cure is not to punish good schools/ good parents however, but to reduce the weight of the zero-sum elements that dominate the economic landscape.
@riversorare He didn't reference land once. Despite land being the most important element of "wealth", and the one doing the heavy lifting in terms on causing inequality.
@DanNeidle Piketty was always an idiot. He managed to write a whole (very dull) book about inequality without mentioning land once.
Land being 3/5 of total UK wealth a few year ago for reference.
Everyone here loved the book/Piketty of course...
@Fat_Jacques@prieurdp It's also easier to reverse into a tight space too. When you have front-wheel steering, you can maneuver/ change the angle of the car much tighter.
Ha! I've probably explained myself better- however- when I said "supply and demand" I was really thinking about the simplistic line graphs shown in Econ 101 rather than meaning to say that their is no connection whatsoever.
Supply of land being fixed- changes the dynamic entirely- and makes the usual supply side arguments moot.
I get really tired of people claiming mass low wage immigrants are the main cause of house price rises- although I accept this fellow doesn't seem convinced!
You’ve clearly not read the parts of the thread where I affirm my opposition to mass immigration and support of remigration.
As well as being rude- you have now moved the goalposts. I said real value was destroyed, and you said no- the prices just rise elsewhere.
Now you accept that real value is destroyed but tell me this isn’t the point.
I am saying the mass immigration damages aggregate prices, I.e the total value. This might be captured in average prices too. I am right in this.
Obviously localised prices will go up and down- but I am looking at prices in aggregate. And to be honest- even here I think your position weak. Do you think the last remaining ‘safe’ compound in South Africa will have higher prices than when much of the country was safe? lol! All the residents will be even more desperate to escape and prices will be at rock bottom.