He is not against the concept in its entirety but throughout the wealth of nations he’s quite critical of large and absentee landholders. In another chapter he points out how Tennant made improvements drives up rents which in turns discourages improvements for example.
He thinks of land rents as a monopoly and that monopolies are bad but I believe he imagines lots of small land holders competing to improve their land for their tennants and thus strengthening the nation by increasing how productive land can be.
This uh… did not happen, as I’m sure I don’t have to point out to a comrade :p
The rest of that fucking chapter is informative but smith does not seem to think landlords are a bad thing.
He is not against the concept in its entirety but throughout the wealth of nations he’s quite critical of large and absentee landholders. In another chapter he points out how Tennant made improvements drives up rents which in turns discourages improvements for example.
He thinks of land rents as a monopoly and that monopolies are bad but I believe he imagines lots of small land holders competing to improve their land for their tennants and thus strengthening the nation by increasing how productive land can be.
This uh… did not happen, as I’m sure I don’t have to point out to a comrade :p
It seems to be a mix, really. Houses for rent or resale get improved all the time specifically to increase the value. Apartments not so much.