[jaredklewis]

But what if I want to live in a country with a growing economy and improving infrastructure? Forbidding all development does hurt corporations and the wealthy, but just in the sense that it hurts everyone, including them.

If we do want to soak the rich, can we do it in a progressive, targeted way (such as taxes) and not in a NIMBY way where we just say no one can build or improve anything?

[lenkite]

Private Corpo Infra != Public Use Infra. They cannot be treated the same way.

[jryle70]

If they pay enough, why not? What is public use infrastructure in your opinion? Any difference than building more houses (like a dense apartment complex) and extend the grid there? That's still private corp infrastructure.

[bigfishrunning]

There's a difference between "The state will seize your property" and "You may sell your property to the corporation at a rate you choose, and if you don't want to then they'll have to find some other land to use". In either case, development does happen, but the primary beneficiaries of the development (the owners of the data center) would have to pay the people who's land they're using (or taking!) instead of lobbying the government to just take it.

I think that unwitting land owners should not be subsidizing the AI grifters...