The added value of the land does not have to stay with the social upper classes society, nor on only one side of the bridge. Why was the building cost not shared by the Sweeds?
With a system of collecting the greater potential productive value of the sites that are affected can new revenue be brought to a country which has previously invested its tax-payers money in some durable capital goods. The bridge gives heavily taxed Danes had more productive land!
I think you may find the Swedes did shared the bridge costs. But the cost came out of public taxes, while the biggest benefactors were the rich via land values.. Fred emphasisies, the poor taxpayers subsidised the rich
The economic growth the bridge created, soaked into the land and crystalised as land values. This publicly created wealth is siphoned off by landowners
Introduce Land Valuation Tax - those who benefit most pay more for the bridge which makes them rich
The point is clearly made.
The added value of the land does not have to stay with the social upper classes society, nor on only one side of the bridge. Why was the building cost not shared by the Sweeds?
With a system of collecting the greater potential productive value of the sites that are affected can new revenue be brought to a country which has previously invested its tax-payers money in some durable capital goods. The bridge gives heavily taxed Danes had more productive land!
Macrocompassion 10 months ago 2
@Macrocompassion
I think you may find the Swedes did shared the bridge costs. But the cost came out of public taxes, while the biggest benefactors were the rich via land values.. Fred emphasisies, the poor taxpayers subsidised the rich
The economic growth the bridge created, soaked into the land and crystalised as land values. This publicly created wealth is siphoned off by landowners
Introduce Land Valuation Tax - those who benefit most pay more for the bridge which makes them rich
NearAbbeyRoad 9 months ago