[seiji]

It would fix a lot of things like e.g. San Francisco. Imagine if all those two story, single family homes were taxed at their land value (40 story condos! condos everywhere!) where 3,000 people could live in the space currently occupied by 2 to 6 people.

Living in a place shouldn't grant you the right to obstruct progress forever just because you got there first. In the same vein, just because you got somewhere first also shouldn't mean you get unlimited profit potential just because... you got there first.

[LesZedCB]

It would be accompanied with democratic process of the people who currently use that land. If the community of land users decided it would not hurt them for whatever progress somebody else proposes, they would democratically decide among themselves whether or not to do that.

Nobody would vote to gentrify and therefore forcibly remove themselves from their homes.

Again, you just attached value to the very loaded term progress. What is progress for one person might not be progress for the people who use that land for their own sustenance, whether that be a house or a farm or an enterprise.

[saint_fiasco]

>with democratic process of the people who currently use that land

Why only the people who currently use that land? Why don't the other 3000 people who could be living there have a say?