(Sorry this discussion is backwards; we are working to fix the threading feature of the blog). A couple of comments on my colleague's comments of.... (Sorry this discussion is backwards; we are working to fix the threading feature of the blog).

A couple of comments on my colleague's comments of yesterday:

While I personally don't believe that ownership of land is morally proper, land rent benefits accrue under both ownership- and leasehold-based systems. In the latter, my landlady would lease the land from the commons and sublet it to me; in either case, she has an interest in keeping the place in good repair, so she can charge me more for, and I have an interest in keeping it in good repair, so she doesn't throw me out.

As to the value of land resulting from labor: this is only partly true. Land has an intrinsic value, as it is land (or the planetary ecosphere) that sustains all human life, and, as events are proving more an dmore, labor inputs, especially for purposes of commodity production, often reduce the real value of real estate, and may end up killing us all, along with many of our inarticulate fellow creatures.

However, an essential feature of a land rent is that it balances both costs and benefits; someone is less likely to keep (in the classic illustration) a vacant lot vacant in a "good" neighborhood, because it would be taxed according to the value that accrues to it from the good works of surrounding owners (or leaseholders). Therefore, it would be wiser, in a financial sense, to sell or develop it and obtain either use or income from it, since one is paying for the value of the land, not the value of what one might put on it. This encourages efficient higher-density use because building, say, a large complex rather than a small one will return much more income without incurring much more in taxes. Likewise, a high-quality investment--top-notch condos rather than a slum tenement--returns more income without incurring a huge increase in property taxes. Land value, and so land rent, would rise, but the cost would be distributed among all the nearby parcels, since all owners/leaseholders would benefit from one's good work.

The present system in most of the world charges you more for the use of land than for the land itself, even though the usefulness of land derives in large part from the complex of uses in land immediately surrounding it.

It's merely a systemwide application of the realtor's favorite maxim: "Location, location, location."