This is basically an all-in bet on land, which I guess could be a great bet if land increases in value, but extremely bad if land decreases in value.
The value of land (other than farmland) depends wildly on its location: cities are far more expensive. Cities are currently popular for two reasons:
High population densities and short distances make delivering a wide range of goods and services more efficient by shortening the lengths of pipes, wires, roads, and transmission networks.
Having a lot of people working in the same industry in the same place produces social network effects and makes it easy for people to change employers without having to move.
Of these effects, 2. would go away, but 1. would remain (since of a lot of it is basic physics). So while cities would still be favored, they might become less favored. Thus the value of land might change. So I’d recommend against investing in land in cities where effect 2. is currently strong (like the SF Bay Area, Seattle, Los Angeles, New York) and instead investing in land either outside a city (but perhaps near one) or where 2. doesn’t currently apply (such a currently-blighted city in the rust belt, say Detroit). Also allow for climate change and sea-level rise.
The value of land (other than farmland) depends wildly on its location: cities are far more expensive. Cities are currently popular for two reasons:
High population densities and short distances make delivering a wide range of goods and services more efficient by shortening the lengths of pipes, wires, roads, and transmission networks.
Having a lot of people working in the same industry in the same place produces social network effects and makes it easy for people to change employers without having to move.
Of these effects, 2. would go away, but 1. would remain (since of a lot of it is basic physics). So while cities would still be favored, they might become less favored. Thus the value of land might change. So I’d recommend against investing in land in cities where effect 2. is currently strong (like the SF Bay Area, Seattle, Los Angeles, New York) and instead investing in land either outside a city (but perhaps near one) or where 2. doesn’t currently apply (such a currently-blighted city in the rust belt, say Detroit). Also allow for climate change and sea-level rise.