Most leftists are driven by envy; they see someone else has something they can't afford, and they feel rage. They can't afford multiple houses, so seeing people with multiple houses triggers this feeling. Fundamentally it's because they're so ego-driven they can't accept the market rewards people fairly, because doing so would require accepting that someone else deserves those houses more than they do.
I want to become a landlords and I do not want to think about the moral implications of rent seeking. If the government simply taxed the unfair gains I received through rent seeking then I would have no moral qualms about other landlords. I would be very happy to pay land value taxes if that is what it takes to make free market capitalism fair again.
I do not envy Jeff Bezoz for owning $200 billion in stocks. I do not envy Bill Gates for owning Microsoft. I consider Bill Gates accumulating farmland without paying a tax to compensate for his monopoly rights to be a form of extortion that should not be allowed.
>Most leftists are driven by envy; they see someone else has something they can't afford, and they feel rage.
I don't.
> They can't afford multiple houses, so seeing people with multiple houses triggers this feeling.
I am always in favor of a land value tax that taxes home owners and large scale investors at the same rate. The reason why I have to make a concession to primary residences is that home owners would vote against the tax and the land value tax wouldn't be introduced at all.
>Fundamentally it's because they're so ego-driven they can't accept the market rewards people fairly,
How can abusing the monopoly of location be considered a fair reward? You are distorting the market.
> because doing so would require accepting that someone else deserves those houses more than they do.
No, it's the opposite. You can buy the land 30 years ago and let the property on top sit vacant and still net a return because the value of the land has risen. Such an investor made a lot of money without deserving the land at all. If land had a holding fee then only those who can extract the most value out of the land would seek it out.
Considering the high degree of competition in ~all rental markets, claims of monopoly are unfounded.
Returns on capital for land-owning businesses aren't higher than other sectors.
In the US in particular, we have ludicrisly large amounts of space. Even in our most expensive areas we don't approach the density of places like Hong Kong. Scarcity, as usual, is due to government fiat.
