6 ms·
While this may be true, I'm not sure this is the calculus that goes through the average NIMBYite's mind. There are a lot of SF nativists that don't own propert
by anonuser123456 8y ago
While this may be true, I'm not sure this is the calculus that goes through the average NIMBYite's mind. There are a lot of SF nativists that don't own property and are activists against change.
- conanbatt 8y agoThe calculus definitely goes through their mind: if you bought a house 20 years ago, worth 1 million in the market, you might be paying less than 5k a year, while their average tax consumption from the city would be 31k. Unless they make up the difference with a business, working, or consuming enough to offset with sales taxes, they are 26k+ positive.
- anonuser123456 8y agoI think your assuming the city provides 26k+ of value on those taxes to residents. That's a dubious assumption in SF.
- conanbatt 8y agoI don't, im pretty sure is well below that. But its how much it spends. Precisely, as homeowners are disproportionately voters, the following step would be to restrict goverment spending: who wants to pay 2600 a month for a closed transit station, heroin needles and exporting homeless people. But now, the homeowner gets a very sweet deal, probably 50k a year in rental per unit he has.