> It’s easy to assume a dead means you “own” some land, but national borders also define ownership of land by nation states which need things like militaries to defend them
For nations, treaties function as the equivalent of deeds and those have enough recognition in and of themselves without paying, say, the UN or some such organization to enforce them on a nation's behalf. That militaries defend their land borders is no different than a well-armed land owner defending the border of his property. In addition, the military isn't funded by property taxes.
> but also systems to manage that land such as deed registries, road networks, police and court systems to handle trespassers, and so forth.
These can all be itemized, and chosen a la carte. Certain states require payment of land registry fees upon purchase of a house. Road networks are paid with gas taxes, and tolls. Police officers are already paid via fines and free money from Washington. Court systems are paid through filing fees and also free money from Washington. Why do I need to pay land/property taxes for a service I'm already charged for either as another tax or as a fee upon use? And if I don't use them, why should I be made a forced rider?
The value (or lack thereof) of these services are distinct from the value of land. Land value shouldn't be determined by people who are in a position or have an incentive to self-deal by threat of force. Either there's an objective value or there isn't. Under any other circumstances, these tactics would be considered racketeering undertaken by mafiosos, but when it comes to government (whether local, state, or federal), the tune changes to deference for the sake of a nebulously defined "society".
> Understanding what a deed actually is rather than what it seems like it should help clarify what’s going on here. It’s a landlord setting rent, however governments have more concerns than maximizing revenue.
A government defining what an appropriate rent for land should be has real economic implications for nation states. Under charge and land ends up wasted, charge too much and it ends up abandoned.
I understand what a deed is [1]. My underlying contention is with the dishonest approach of how local governments are able to get the numbers they do and why they do it. I recognize that governments are are essentially Hobbesian fiefdom but I fail to see the need to preach unsubstantiated drivel about "bettering" society or falsely claiming objectivity. It would be easy enough to claim that the value assessed by the municipality has little to do with the market and everything with how much government can get away with charging you. So peddle fantasy?
> The sweet spot isn’t about maximizing income it’s about maximizing benefit for society.
The latter is often the means to the former and both come at the expense of the individual. .
> Often property taxes are based on total value of the land plus improvements on it which discourages improvements or even maintenance. Thus a sweet spot based on the lands inherent value Aka a land value tax.
Then this "sweet spot" isn't based on inherent value if a third party must rely on a subjective valuation.
>In the end land is a finite resource, any nation that wastes it runs into massive problems.
But the who gets to define waste? One could say that national parks are a waste as the land could be put to better use for property development. One could say that most military bases are a waste as the country hasn't fought foreign invaders on American soil since 1815. One could even say that major metropolitan areas are a waste, as they "rob" tax dollars from rural and suburban areas while benefitting from tax regimes (like SALT) that subsize high state-level taxation at expense of other states competing on low cost of living.
Once again, leaving these choices to government usually results in self-dealing. In such a scenario, there is no objective valuation.
[1] Despite what you claim, it's not just a document that exists to recognize the government as rentier. Deeds, like treaties are contracts and they can have all sorts of arrangements. There have been many that still precede the US government and that are still upheld today, some of which even recognize residence in a separate political sovereignty within US borders.