[CaptainMarvel]

She may have earned the house to some degree (the article outlines a number of government subsidies which make this doubtful), but she definitely didn’t earn the land value increase.

I’m reminded of this quote:

> Landlords grow rich in their sleep without working, risking or economizing. The increase in the value of land, arising as it does from the efforts of an entire community, should belong to the community and not to the individual who might hold title.

[winter_blue]

Yup. I think a 90% tax on real estate capital gains would be the solution. That would also disincentivize housing speculators et al.

In addition, a 90% tax on real estate income (rental income minus costs like mortgage, interest, maintenance, property taxes, etc) would also disincentivize people who buy properties just to rent them out.

[chongli]

Grandma, living in the same house she’s lived in since 1972, collecting a fixed income pension cheque once a month, is not what I’d describe as a “rich person.”

Look instead to the people who own golf courses, sports stadiums, super yachts, private jets and the like.

[imtringued]

Everyone knows all property is owned by grandma.

[fallingfrog]

Yeah I have to agree- all that increase in value doesn’t mean anything unless she sells it, which she won’t do until she dies anyway.

[badpun]

> Landlords grow rich in their sleep without working, risking or economizing.

They are risking. Land value can go up or it can go down. It just has been mostly going up (in real terms) in the past decades, but it's far from certainty. You can lose money by investing in real estate, just like in everything else.

[ilyt]

Sure but most people just want to live in that house, not capitalize on it

[DeathArrow]

Marx or Lenin couldn't have said it better. Marxists have a fetish with seizing private property and forcefully equalizing people in poverty.