Does this guy at the so-called "Adam Smith" institute understand that Adam Smith warned about the dangers of unearned land wealth http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN5.html#B.I … while those who invoked his spirit in the 70s passed Prop. 13, letting private land owners absorb disproportionate land rents?https://twitter.com/Sam_Dumitriu/status/945708446107750400 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler
80% of our policy work is about reducing planning constraints on new developments.
4 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Sam_Dumitriu
that's certainly one part of it! But just blanket saying "regulation" doesn't make any sense because land will always be regulated in one sense or another. How does anyone have property rights without some sort of governance or regulations that protect those property rights?
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
We are not anarchists, but it is clear that the problem with housing supply is caused by recent excessive restrictions on property rights. See our August paper:https://www.adamsmith.org/research/yimby
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Sam_Dumitriu
I definitely think that's one part of the issue in California, but so is Prop. 13, which was pushed by the right and is framed as a deregulatory move, when it actually just enabled something that behaves like a private tax taken by landlords, land monopolists.pic.twitter.com/KzL3cGRusE
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @Sam_Dumitriu
the only way that society makes truly transformative policy/structural moves is usually through consensus/complicity of both the left and the right (at least in a pre-2016 world)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
and so you have zoning from both the right and the left, and then you have the property tax revolt.
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.