After hearing you explain it, I think you have me convinced that taxing only the land value is a fairer system and would encourage active development. My only concern is this:
- the land value of a plot of land in East Portland on which a single-family house sits may be worth $50,000
- a five-storey block of flats in, say, Downtown or even nearby like the Pearl District, Llyod, or whatever might have a land value of, for example, $100,000 (all numbers made up for illustrative purposes)
- the land on which the US Bank building may, for example, be worth $300,000
- the land on which Zenger Farms, a 10 ha. urban farm, sits may be worth $500,000 or more, because it’s so big
Suppose the tax is 10% of the assessed land value. This means the owners of the East Portland house, the five-storey block of flats, the US Bank building, and Zenger Farms, would be assessed $5,000, $10,000, $30,000, and $50,000 respectively in tax. Now, I think I needn’t point out that this doesn’t seem fair. All of the plots of land are being used for “adequate” purposes, and yet it seems some of them are punished for that land use decision that in all isn’t that bad. The urban farm is not exactly wasting land; it’s providing valuable fresh produce to the city.
What I think would be better is a tiered system by categorising the traditional property tax bracket by land use:
- 0.1% for agricultural
- 0.5% or lower for medium or high-density buildings, such as skyscrapers, duplexes/triplexs/n-plexes, and mixed use zoning
- 1% for low-density commercial or single-family housing
- 5% for car parking
- 10% for vacant buildings
- 30% for empty lots
The numbers are arbitrary and illustrative only, but I think this allows for a more nuanced approach that allows for a finer-grained policy to be applied to discourage unwanted development
Shoplifting gangs, I think, are one of the few crime outfits that think rationally. It’s a game of risk and reward.
- How much is the reward for us if we get away with everything?
- What are the odds of getting caught?
- What is the punishment if we get caught?
The retailers and manufacturers can influence the first factor, the police can only influence the second, and only the district attorneys and the Legislative Assembly can influence the third.
It seems the Portland police are either stretched too thin and need more resources, or they are too lazy to be bothered, or the distribution of police resources is not very efficient. I don’t know which it is but I definitely think there’s something wrong if theft is not being seriously prosecuted. It’s pretty easy to catch thieves–even a security camera and a number plate lookup will catch a large portion of the laziest shoplifters.
Of course, the underlying social issues that cause people to shoplift ought to be looked into as well. But there’s nothing more I can say about that because I’m not well-informed enough to comment.
Don’t forget that after the tourists leave, the supply mechanics of Voodoo doughnuts kick back in, resulting in copious amounts of doughnuts circulating around the city. This causes a temporary obesity problem but everyone works it off in the spring. I read a study in Nature talking about the ecological effects of this phenomenon but I didn’t really understand it.