Quote:
Originally Posted by timun
And I said property tax ought to be based on density, didn't I? Let me check the tape... yup, sure did.
Ah, now we're really starting to get esoteric, hahaha! "The blame for someone buying in some greenfield development rests with the greedy people who live on 50-ft inner city lots and won't divvy 'em up!" Hahaha, that's a new one.
|
It’s not esoteric, every person in the city occupies x square feet. The cost of servicing a city is a result of its total square feet. It does not matter where those square feet are located. So yes the location of the next burb being built is the fault of every single piece of property built and occupied before it. If all lots were half the size then the cost of servicing the next burb would be lower. So why should the next burb bear the costs of the decisions of all the residents before it.
Basing it on distance from downtown is just classist and really would only drive the cost of inner city housing higher with the benefits going to the 50 foot lot owners exacerbating the problem.
Location does not matter, square footage of city used does.