25 Nov 2022 12:50 am
Cannonpointer » 25 Nov 2022, 1:15 am » wrote: ↑ Since you are defending fellows who do, let us have you make your case. I've made mine, but I will recap: Sitting on those lots and keeping them empty for 20 years is anti-social. It creates blight, and it causes the city's expansion to occur in a manner quite inefficient to the provision of necessary services like trash collection, water, sewer, garbage, gas and electric. It causes the city to eat into surrounding farms in order to accommodate growth.
Introducing a tax scheme that discourages, rather than rewards, that anti-social activity will not bankrupt anyone. It will simply change the **** rules and change investment strategies. If you do not like the rule change, you need to present something a bit more compelling than calling those who favor it Fidel Castro.
Make a **** case why it would be unwise OR immoral OR counter to our founding principles OR even counter to conservatism to have a tax code that encourages investing in, rather than idling, valuable real estate. Make a case for any ONE of those arguments - and leave fidel the **** out of it.
There is a frustration that builds up, when one favors LVT, from the fact that nobody can really refute it, so they just ignore it or dismiss it out of hand. I have felt that frustration before.