Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JBTFD who wrote (3900)	10/31/2006 3:42:11 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 10087

I guess I can see why you consider it a zero sum game because you are focused on land, and that is indeed in limited supply. Of course a subsidy on land can just as easily be considered a gift of cash, and cash isn't limited in the same way. Also while there is a limited amount of land, there is quite a lot of it, its only really valuable if its in a good location. I tend to focus on the fact that its a subsidy. I don't have a problem with a large company owning huge tracts of land. I don't want the government to give it away to them, but my problem with land give aways isn't any more severe or important than my problem with straight cash giveaways and is maybe less important than my problems with government restraint of trade in order to give advantages to special interests (for example sugar import quotas on the national level, or highly restrictive licensing at a state or local level).