Someone already deemed the mall worthy of being built and opened, so why should the comfort and convenience of the mall’s hundreds or thousands of visitors be impeded for the sake of one guy who happens to live near there or own land near there.
The fact that the person living near the mall benefits from being near his job and family has value only to him. If he is forced to move, that value is simply lost, not gained by the next person who moves in.
Besides which, in real life, malls are usually not opened in residential areas at all.
That’s fighting the hypothetical. If you don’t think malls are a good example of something out of the property owner’s control that can raise the value of the property, pick something else that is.
why should hundreds of thousands of working people across the Bay Area in California or New York City be kept without affordable housing, sometimes even homeless, just so that landowners in the center-city areas can make massive amounts of money off pure location-value?
My point is that this screws people who are not landowners making money from location value.
Remember as you contemplate this scenario, that oftentimes the working-class/salaried-class citizens competing so hard for affordable housing are the very people who made the location desirable in the first place
Oh, I haven’t forgotten that, but that favors my side. Those people are, in your comparison above, the “hundreds of thousands of working people” screwed over by the land tax, not the landowners making “massive amounts of money off pure location-value”.
The fact that the person living near the mall benefits from being near his job and family has value only to him. If he is forced to move, that value is simply lost, not gained by the next person who moves in.
That’s fighting the hypothetical. If you don’t think malls are a good example of something out of the property owner’s control that can raise the value of the property, pick something else that is.
My point is that this screws people who are not landowners making money from location value.
Oh, I haven’t forgotten that, but that favors my side. Those people are, in your comparison above, the “hundreds of thousands of working people” screwed over by the land tax, not the landowners making “massive amounts of money off pure location-value”.