Off Topic:
The idea of value appreciation is neglected anyway in today’s society. People focus more on "being stingy is cool" and bargains. As long as it’s cheap. Even a normal price is seen by some today as a rip-off. Or a mafia price. But then add a huge markup...
... sometimes the auction procedure for real estate fits quite well.
Sorry – that may apply in some specific areas, but certainly not to land & soil – or most things related to construction. Just take a look at the general price development vs. the one in real estate. A "normal" price is funny – do you pay an
imputed rental value to the father state? Do you excessively cover your "fair" share through property tax and others, which you gained from cheap prices 10 years ago? From today’s perspective, you’ve pretty much ripped off...
Auction procedures as a guarantee of a fair price – of course. We do that everywhere, and there is never a price maximization strategy with a psychological component behind it. The consequence will simply be that ever larger parts of the population are no longer in the race. As a reminder – one’s own four walls is pretty much the only thing that existed as a "founding myth" of the Federal Republic of Germany: Work hard, learn something sensible, and you can afford a nice little house later.
It has nothing to do with gambler capitalism. There simply is no fundamental right to a single-family house.
And the municipality is, of course, also obliged to manage its budget. And that is achieved with this. High prices mean high revenues. That means high real estate transfer tax. That means people with purchasing power in the community. That CAN mean: good public facilities like swimming pool, library, youth club, daycare centers, etc., etc.
And if you want to effectively prevent rising rents, cheap land for single-family houses is also not the means of choice.
There is no right to anything – whoever didn’t understand that today in Hong Kong, America under Trump & Corona, will be surprised in the coming decades. But you can tax, balance, and shape. Your thinking is that of a controller. Whether that takes a society (or company) far?
Where the mentioned revenues come from would be the next question – at Aldi, these "special" people probably don’t buy more than others. By the way, real estate transfer tax is a state tax. Property tax as a municipal tax is also not tied to income and the value of land + house. Why a lending library should be maintained for a rich upper class (as you described there), I don’t know either. If anything, in your thinking, they would surely have to pay 10-20 euros per month there instead of a subsidized 10 per year. It’s just based on address then...
Daycare – also funny – does the educator then live somewhere in the basement apartment of this new neighborhood in the village so that the influencer sales mom can zoom off in the e-mini? Or, more likely – she just doesn’t come anymore because she can work & live better elsewhere for the same money. The power mom just has to figure out where she stays (at home)...
The idea of the gated community of the "rich" with a trickle-down effect in the village is quite amusing to me. When the PowerPoint engineer or shiny-shoe hero is drafted into the volunteer fire department, of course especially...
I still don’t consider revenue maximization of municipalities and corresponding "land management" a sensible development and see a large dividing line coming to society, which already has more than would be good.