3 ms·
A reminder that Hacker News has an "assume the strongest interpretation of one's argument" idea. (In case it's not clear, expanding with my thoughts below). Wh
by JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
A reminder that Hacker News has an "assume the strongest interpretation of one's argument" idea. (In case it's not clear, expanding with my thoughts below).
What is the primary effect of rent control? Everyone renting before the enactment pays proportionally less in rent than those after enactment.
What is the primary effect of Prop 13? Owners who purchased before 1978 pay proportionally less in property taxes than those who purchased after 1978.
These are huge, (in my view) obvious parallels between the two. Both policies encourage the market to become sticky: renters won't leave, for fear of giving up their cheap rent as time goes own; for landowners, they are discouraged to sell, knowing an identical property would raise their annual property tax expenses. As property values go up, it further encourages landowners to hold, becoming a negative feedback loop on the housing supply.
- jedberg 7y ago> Owners who purchased before 1978 pay proportionally less in property taxes than those who purchased after 1978. It's even worse than that, since prop 13 isn't a one time thing. Just like rent control, you lock in whenever you purchase. My neighbor pays double what I do for effectively the same house. It's totally unfair to them.
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y agoI'd imagine it's very unfair for people who bought in 2006 vs 2008 vs 2010. One time, I asked an older coworker about this, and he told me that getting a reassessment was popular for those who purchased in the bubble after it popped.
- Ericson2314 7y agoI would say the original motivation for both is the same, but the outcome is definitely worse with Prop 13.