In this in case that we can affirm that a property in the areas noblest of the city, and located well it will have greater value in the real estate market; regarding the localization, Villaa says in them: ' ' … The first one is of the products in itself? the buildings, the streets, the squares, the infrastructure. The other is the value produced for the agglomeration. This value is given by the localization of the buildings, streets and squares, therefore to this localization that inserts in the agglomeration. The localization if presents as well as a value of use of …

' ' (VILLAA, 2001, P. 72). We notice previously in told facts that the State through its performance when implanting definitive equipment privileges nobler areas, giving it localization, that in turn &#039 increases its; ' value of troca' ' use e. Fact seen in the noble parts of Araguana, that its localization fruit of values previously cited, a it a bigger value in the real estate market. The State, in its municipal scale, only has as the one of its goals, infrastructure implantation in urban, that this process of implantation, it happens of form to privilege definitive areas for real estate pressure of the greater layers purchasing power, and promoters, aiming at with these improvements, the valuation, and consequently the increase of the price of the property of these areas. It is this performance differentiated in the space, they generate localizations differentiated in the urban space, and with different social content, regarding this Corra fact, says in them: In view of this intention the capitalist State creates mechanism that leads to the residential segregation and its ratification. Thus, the differentials of taxes territorial and land are a strong discriminante factor, affecting the price of land and of the property and, as consequence, happening in the social segregation: the groups of raised income more inhabit in located more expensive property in quarters where the price of the most raised land to.