I think it’s better for building to be done mixed-style, eg fancier homes mixed with less fancy ones. Prevents ghettoisation too, and forces the rich to interact with the poor more.
Taxing vacant homes is meh, I think it’s better to outright seize them. We then can claim we don’t tax vacant homes (as there aren’t any).
Plus not taxing vacant homes removes the incentive for the government to make MORE vacant homes. If it’s taxed, at least let the vacant home tax be less to the government in terms of profit, than having them be occupied; but more taxed to homeowners. The extra money left should be used in a way that doesn’t incentivise people to profit off vacancy. We could for example use it to build new homes which cannot be bought nor owned even partially by people already owning a home - which will drive down the price for vacant homes.
Thus we get an effect of:
too many vacant homes
–> vacancy tax (levied by independent non-profit volunteer agency, which gives a part to government, less to government than if it were occupied; thus giving the government an incentive to build homes).
–> remainder of both vacancy and occupancy tax goes to homebuilding by social housing cooperations (not landlords)
–> more homes are built.
–> More homes
–> price goes down.
–> People are inclined to sell the vacant homes.
–> Fewer vacant homes
–> Fewer are built
–> Price stabilises around rates where vacancy rates are at their lowest and the fewest second home occupiers exist.
We should also necessitate that as much as possible in the government is for and by the people themselves, as decentralised as possible.
Democratic socialism is not capitalism. Democratic socialism is a system without capitalism altogether. What you suggest is social democracy. Which, although it is good too, has its deficit in not tackling for-profit egoistic mindsets enough. While capitalism “excels” at raising productivity for the employer, socialism excels at raising living standards for all. Kropotkin has written more about this in his Conquest of Bread. Very good work, might I say!
Taxing vacant homes is meh, I think it’s better to outright seize them. We then can claim we don’t tax vacant homes (as there aren’t any).
It’ll upset the powers that be, they’ll yell communist!
So, increasingly tax’em for a couple of years, then seize them (and maybe use that tax money for remodeling if need be).
40%? Why not 30%? Or 20%, maybe even 10%?
I think it’s better for building to be done mixed-style, eg fancier homes mixed with less fancy ones. Prevents ghettoisation too, and forces the rich to interact with the poor more.
Taxing vacant homes is meh, I think it’s better to outright seize them. We then can claim we don’t tax vacant homes (as there aren’t any).
Plus not taxing vacant homes removes the incentive for the government to make MORE vacant homes. If it’s taxed, at least let the vacant home tax be less to the government in terms of profit, than having them be occupied; but more taxed to homeowners. The extra money left should be used in a way that doesn’t incentivise people to profit off vacancy. We could for example use it to build new homes which cannot be bought nor owned even partially by people already owning a home - which will drive down the price for vacant homes.
Thus we get an effect of:
too many vacant homes
–> vacancy tax (levied by independent non-profit volunteer agency, which gives a part to government, less to government than if it were occupied; thus giving the government an incentive to build homes).
–> remainder of both vacancy and occupancy tax goes to homebuilding by social housing cooperations (not landlords)
–> more homes are built.
–> More homes
–> price goes down.
–> People are inclined to sell the vacant homes.
–> Fewer vacant homes
–> Fewer are built
–> Price stabilises around rates where vacancy rates are at their lowest and the fewest second home occupiers exist.
We should also necessitate that as much as possible in the government is for and by the people themselves, as decentralised as possible.
Democratic socialism is not capitalism. Democratic socialism is a system without capitalism altogether. What you suggest is social democracy. Which, although it is good too, has its deficit in not tackling for-profit egoistic mindsets enough. While capitalism “excels” at raising productivity for the employer, socialism excels at raising living standards for all. Kropotkin has written more about this in his Conquest of Bread. Very good work, might I say!
I wasn’t super with your comment at first, but this point - - holy fuck, watch the “housing crisis” disappear overnight if this was even hinted at.
It’ll upset the powers that be, they’ll yell communist!
So, increasingly tax’em for a couple of years, then seize them (and maybe use that tax money for remodeling if need be).