[jaapz]

Why would you build on a plot of land when the plot of land itself is already appreciating in value with you doing nothing to it

Building is risky and costly

Having an asset that appreciates on its own regardless of what you do with it is not

[salawat]

In Texas, at least, the lack of income tax is made up for in property taxes. Just owning that plot with nothing on it is still going to be a sizable liability.

[bpt3]

Holding costs of land are far from $0 in any major metropolitan area. Sitting on it involves its own form of risk.

Vacant land that's desirable is often held back from development due to zoning or infrastructure issues.

[estearum]

> Vacant land that's desirable is often held back from development due to zoning or infrastructure issues.

Nah, it's mostly speculation. Zoning/infrastructure issues get baked into the price. If you cannot build anything on a plot of land, its price falls.

[philipallstar]

Only at point of buying. If you buy some land and the mayor suddenly implements rent control then the value goes down.

[bpt3]

Until someone gets the zoning board to wave a magic wand and change the allowable uses of the property, and then it's a lot more valuable.

This happens all the time, and is a major reason why people will sit on land for extended periods of time.

[soco]

Sitting on it is a predictable cost, while building means a costly chaos which may or may not turn out the wished profitability. So when you are used to "old profits" you maybe rather wait on the predicted do-nothing-cost, and hope for the tide to turn again in your direction.

[juleiie]

Guys you have no idea about these things and what you are talking about. source: I am a city plot owner.

No land owner will suddenly become a developer to build an apartment block.

A plot owner can sell land to a developer or form a joint venture with developer putting in their land as starting capital (much more risky) most people either keep land as gold or sell it when they need money.

I hope it is clearer now.

The very idea that everyone who owns land should build an apartment block is laughable, it is very complicated endeavour best not to get into it if you know nothing about it. Hell building a single family house is complex, let alone five story building.

So you either keep it if you don’t need money or you sell it if you want to buy something else or need to have liquidity. And you don’t even sell it to buy other investment vehicle because land is already better than gold.

My plot increased 3 times in price in 10 years. Try to beat that with SP500. It’s virtually immune to inflation no matter how the broader economy fares it will always shield from inflation because you cannot make more land hah.

Even in utopia of automation and post scarcity society good location land will be truly lucrative and unimaginably expensive if not outright prohibited to own by private individuals. The question is what will be a “good location” in 30 years.

[oblio]

> My plot increased 3 times in price in 10 years. Try to beat that with SP500. It’s virtually immune to inflation no matter how the broader economy fares it will always shield from inflation because you cannot make more land hah.

The GFC says hi :-)

[polothesecond]

> Even in utopia of automation and post scarcity society good location land will be truly lucrative and unimaginably expensive if not outright prohibited to own by private individuals.

Indeed, there’s a reason you see silicon valley execs going all in all acquiring land to build fortresses. At the end of the day, regardless of the cold march of technological progress, land remains the root of all real power.

[bpt3]

> No land owner will suddenly become a developer to build an apartment block.

No one is suggesting this.

> A plot owner can sell land to a developer or form a joint venture with developer putting in their land as starting capital (much more risky) most people either keep land as gold or sell it when they need money.

Most people don't own vacant lots, but some who do hold onto it as an investment. It's a pretty poor one on average over time, just like gold (which is a good analogy).

> The very idea that everyone who owns land should build an apartment block is laughable, it is very complicated endeavour best not to get into it if you know nothing about it. Hell building a single family house is complex, let alone five story building.

Again, no one is suggesting this. The assumption is that a developer would buy a lot to build on, because that's what happens in practice.

> So you either keep it if you don’t need money or you sell it if you want to buy something else or need to have liquidity. And you don’t even sell it to buy other investment vehicle because land is already better than gold.

Land and gold are not better than the stock market over time.

> My plot increased 3 times in price in 10 years. Try to beat that with SP500. It’s virtually immune to inflation no matter how the broader economy fares it will always shield from inflation because you cannot make more land hah.

The S&P 500 beats real estate over time. Congratulations on getting lucky with your plot of land. Land is a good inflation hedge, assuming you are in a growing area. Ask rust belt land owners how things worked out for them.

> Even in utopia of automation and post scarcity society good location land will be truly lucrative and unimaginably expensive if not outright prohibited to own by private individuals. The question is what will be a “good location” in 30 years.

Thanks for highlighting one of the many issues with communism, but we will never reach a post-scarcity society for many reasons, including this one.

[juleiie]

[flagged]

[bpt3]

[flagged]

[ApolloFortyNine]

If you think you do know what you are talking about, do you think you could back it up with a source?