[ErikVandeWater]

> * Cost of living only works for so long. We've seen areas in the last decades that have an influx of population and they usually see a corresponding increase in COL. There are approaches governments can take to slow down the growth of COL, but it seems inevitable.

COL increases because it is difficult or impossible to build new housing, and because single-use zoning requires creating massive amounts of infrastructure since it is illegal to build work and shopping near where people actually live. In addition, taxing property value disincentivizes developing land, leaving empty lots in even the most valuable places to build: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJqCaklMv6M

[gtop3]

While I agree this is a major component, I think it's an oversimplification. As construction increases in an area construction labor costs increase. Water prices might increase, as more residents draw from a finite supply. More schools, DMVs, grocery stores and strip malls need to built and new construction is more expensive. Liquor licenses might be a static amount and grow more slowly than the population.

I would describe COL increases as local resources and infrastructure being put under more demand and investments into importing resources or building infrastructure is more expensive than using existing infrastructure. Property taxes are a large source of funding for these investments. Dense housing might reduce the additional load on infrastructure but it doesn't remove it.

[ErikVandeWater]

> Property taxes are a large source of funding for these investments.

The idea isn't to get rid of property taxes and do without that revenue; the idea is to tax things that aren't beneficial that we want more of.

I think our perspectives are different on how much of a handbrake bad policy is on the market's ability to create what people want.