If I am an ordinary schlub and some speculator buys my house against my will, I'm stuffed. If I have 3 houses, my transaction..
So where in your previous tweet you said "no", you meant "yes". Have you really thought this through? (I haven't, BTW).
-
-
i was wrong on one claim: in fact the mechanism is perfect & always incentivises pricing where you truly value it
-
true value to you incl sentiment & precaution & cost of moving
-
having connections in a community is to be penalised. Being mobile & rootless is tax-efficient. OK, labour mkt efficiency benefits
-
but I'm not convinced that outweighs impact on culture & cohesion.
-
if cohesion predictably benefits you more than someone who'd want to move in, you pay less tax
-
I'm speaking of community cohesion as a public good. There are externalities to committing to a place. (not all positive).
-
then tax moves, so people set their price higher. Or maybe communities pay some of the tax themselves so prices are higher
-
It's complicated. That's all I wanted to say :-) . It's such a "clever" trick that I think it's easy to become too attached to it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.