Fritzonomics
A Plan To Defeat TBLC
(To those of you following for the city building project, keep reading - we get there)
In This Post
Baby Boomers are wealthy primarily because they used the US Government to bring about “Total Boomer Luxury Communism” that only benefits themselves.
I pose a hypothetical model for how we could legally push ~all of the boomers out of an existing city - and then buy the homes they left behind for pennies.
We talk a bit about the economic theory behind why property taxes are basically good - and perhaps even a source of economic salvation for young Americans.
I explore a couple failure cases to avoid - how this can go wrong if done poorly
I wrap with a practical call to action on how we can put this thinking to work and use it to build our new city.
I despise Communists to the utmost of my capacity. The entire moronic ideology they constructed and so staunchly defend is fundamentally unsound and morally bankrupt.
They’ve long abused government power to enshrine self-serving regulations and entitle themselves to handouts at the expense of others - and of society as a whole.
But there’s one specific kind of Communist I hate more than any other - The Boomer.
Baby Boomers, the generation born from 1946-1964, were the largest ever generation, demographically speaking, and have sat at the center of US Politics for fifty years now.
As an imperfect rule, every Boomer is a Communist. They certainly don’t believe they are - but the truth is evident from the words that they say and the votes that they cast.
Boomers, as a group, have no qualms about taking other people’s property rights with overbearing regulation - passing strict zoning laws and bogus environmental reviews (CEQA et al) to block any new housing that might compete with the dilapidated shoebox they bought for a basket of raspberries in 1973.
They’ve decided - through the communists they elect to state & local Governments - they’d prefer not to pay taxes they’d otherwise owe on their homes - so they shift the burden to poorer working-aged homeowners, many of whom have children to raise.
These tax exemptions (handouts) allow the boomer to unjustly “age in place”, holding on to large homes near major employers that new families could use far better.
Boomers rich and poor all cash the monthly checks they collect from the Social Security Administration, even as they spend the associated trust fund down to nothing. It’ll be empty in around 2036… right as the youngest boomers are dying off. Heh.
They will insist - to their dying breath - that it’s THEIR MONEY they’re getting back from the fund, when even the most cursory knowledge of the program’s financial structure or just … common sense, makes that statement clearly & plainly untrue.
There’s absolutely no amount of explanation or actuarial math that will make them see they’re taking far more than their “fair share” of the pot we all pay our taxes into.
Their life is easier and less emotionally taxing if they choose to believe there’s a nice little bank account in D.C. where their social security number is handwritten on a nice paper label and all THEIR MONEY is stored - and so believe it, they do.
Fritzonomic Praxis
Okay, you might say, maybe boomers are selfish Communists that are busy sucking the marrow from the bones of gainfully employed young people to gamble in casinos, buy second homes, and book cruise ship vacations. Perhaps they are doing irreparable damage to our nation and societal fabric to further their own selfish ends.
Now what? Well, there are a ton of them, and there will be for the next decade - with Gen X filling in a similar role as time goes on. They still vote more than any other group - and they’ll line up at the ballot box to stop anyone who isn’t in lockstep with Total Boomer Luxury Communism (read this after you’re done here).
Every state has a ton of senior citizens, to the point that any given state legislature / governor’s office is politically unassailable for even a well-coordinated and highly-intentional opponents over the next decade.
What if we thought smaller, though? State & Federal Governments aren’t the only jurisdictions with taxing powers! I’m speaking, of course, about Cities. Consider, for a second, that the largest asset most senior citizens possess is their home.
I’m suggesting that we try to win a city’s local elections, then flip the switch on local retirees by leveraging the city’s well-understood taxing powers to demolish local home values and use those dollars to douse local businesses with rocket fuel.
As you’re probably aware, most states allow cities significant latitude to set and levy a wealth tax against the current value of real property, which is commonly called a “property tax”. The upper bound for what these can be set to in theory is often quite high relative to where they end up in practice - which presents an opportunity.
Imagine a Boomer who owns a $1,000,000 lake house in Horseshoe Bay, TX, that they use for three months a year. If Horseshoe Bay’s city property tax climbed by ~10x - from .25% to 2.5% - their property tax bill would climb by about $22,500 to match.
Unless the owners are extremely wealthy and truly don’t care (unlikely), that’d be plenty to force them to dispose of it in a fire sale, or perhaps have it sold by the sheriff to cover the outstanding tax debt - because nobody else would want it at that rate.
This level of taxation would cause a city’s property values to collapse, because if there are zero interested buyers (and there wouldn’t be, at least at first), and many eager sellers, supply and demand math becomes very painful very fast. That’s how we win.
Once prices have settled in at their new, lower level, and taxable valuations adjust to the new normal, we’ll be able to buy those same homes we’ve deliberately pushed landlords and elderly homeowners out of,
A $1,000,000 home taxed at $30k a year might be out of anyone’s price range, but that same house - now worth, say, $300k and taxed at the same rate but for $9k/year total, is doable for many young singles or couples.
We’d use the enormous tax revenues from the first couple years - plus the modestly-higher revenues continuing revenues from values in the “new normal” - to fund economic development projects that bring excellent and high-paying employment to our community.
This might look like splitting the cost of building a new factory with a manufacturing company like Ford, Boeing, or SendCutSend - or convincing a financial services firm to move their headquarters to your city in exchange for investing in their fund. Texas cities (for instance) have broad discretion here under LGC Ch. 380 provisions.
Critically, we’d give all new construction / development a 100% 10-year “tax abatement” on what they build - because we want to encourage new housing and companies being built. Growth is good - and the more employers there are competing for the same labor pool, the more those employees will get paid.
Fritzonomic Theory
The reason this makes general idea makes sense has been explored by thinkers like Adam Smith (The Wealth of Nations) and in the various works of Henry George.
Their thoughts (roughly) boil down to “rent-seeking - unlike wage labor, productive capital, or entrepreneurship - doesn’t create value, it only extracts it.”
Closely associated is the idea that land ownership is - at its core - a monopoly that is established and protected by the government on behalf of the landlord.
If the government is going to protect your right to use a certain plot of land, I think it’s reasonable for them to charge you a tax (fee) to do so - and it’s similarly not crazy that more valuable land should command a higher rate.
Nobody made the land in the first place (well, God… but still)- and it’s not capable of running away from taxes like a person is - so it’s both the best & most just kind of tax.
Not to mention, homes being extremely affordable makes local businesses more competitive against foreign and domestic alternatives - and that lower cost turns into an economic surplus for employers that local workers can demand a piece of.
Pair this with subsidies for factories, machine tools, etc - and you can build something akin to 1950s Detroit - a globally dominant local economy, that does a ton to enrich all who participate in it at some level or another.
Pitfalls & No-Nos
There’s a couple potential pitfalls I foresee if someone tries following this plan - but then tweaks it a bit to fit their personal politics. Making a note of them here in hopes you avoid doing that.
First - spending the increased property tax dollars you raise on welfare programs like housing vouchers, food-stamp analogues, or cash transfers would be a huge missed opportunity. This is how you get a low-level “Argentina in the noughts” situation.
This would still work to lower property values - but not in a way that makes the city or its residents permanently richer, and while attracting welfare-seeking residents who won’t help achieve the goal of increased local wealth either.
Because of the drastic drop in home values that would follow higher taxes, these tax dollars should be thought of as a one-time windfall - which must be used to drive up wages and make residents better-off for decades to come - not blown on giveaways.
Second - this whole system works better if property taxes stay unusually high even after the original base of owners has been mostly forced out. It is good for society to have homes at low price points - and if you switch right back to the original rate, the prices will climb again - and un-affordability will return.
This is obviously an appealing prospect for someone who just bought a home for nothing - but from an ethical POV, we must be better than the people we set out to replace. There are a ton of positive externalities from consistently affordable homeownership - and you get there by keeping wages high and home prices low.
So… You Want In?
I’ve been busy exploring specific examples of places where this sort of endeavor could be accomplished - where we could build or rebuild the wonderful new city I’ve been talking about in my videos.
There are counties and cities in Texas both on my list, for instance - but the reality is that my time to search and look and filter is limited. I need help from people who also care.
If you’re still reading, you’ve likely hardened your heart to what needs to be done to get things back on track in our society. We cannot implement the plan above without little old ladies losing their gigantic homes they can no longer afford to pay the taxes on. This will happen for no specific fault of their own.
I’ve mostly made peace with this, because I feel that they had their time - and are now stealing ours. I don’t know how many of you will agree.
If you’re a American who wishes to exert political power, and you’ve read this far, I’d like you on my team as part of this grand quest to save the United States of America.
All I ask is that you become a paid subscriber to this substack (for $10/month) to demonstrate a minimal level of commitment to what we’re doing here.
Once you sign up, I will email / message you with a link to the FOUNDATION discord, where we’ll be talking about how to quietly achieve this righteous mission.
I’ll be posting a paid article tomorrow or later this week - likely about some ways for young men who have been “locked out” by our current systems to get ahead anyway.
Until then,
Fritz Johnson, Signing Off.