cross-posted from: https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/12162

Why? Because apparently they need some more incentive to keep units occupied. Also, even though a property might be vacant, there’s still imputed rental income there. Its owner is just receiving it in the form of enjoying the unit for himself instead of receiving an actual rent check from a tenant. That imputed rent ought to be taxed like any other income.

  • JasSmith@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I argued that the solution is both, not one or the other. You provided me an example of an extreme in the other direction. I also think libertarianism and anarchy does not work. Please re-read my comment.

    I think the solution lies somewhere between government and markets.

    • tracyspcy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Countries which prevent markets from operating efficiently tend to do really poorly over time. The more authoritarian, the worse they perform.

      In general it means less government control over the markets. And less means libertarian concept (see article again). If you mean something in between , there is need in very detailed scale to find difference between current regulated markets, non regulated markets (libertarian nonsense) and balance that you want.