5 ms·
It does change the ratios of who wants a home since it makes a better investment. IMO prop 13 should only apply to primary residence.
by sgc 7y ago
It does change the ratios of who wants a home since it makes a better investment. IMO prop 13 should only apply to primary residence.
- dv_dt 7y agoI fully agree that Prop 13 should only apply to primary residences! But I fundamentally think it's wishful & unexamined leaps of thinking that repealing all of prop 13 would somehow lower home prices. I think it's repeal would just cause unnecessary churn in where people live, increase the speed of gentrification, without holding back home prices at all.
- bradlys 7y agoYour argument is that more available supply on the market would cause home prices to increase. In econ 101 terms - That doesn't make sense. More supply -> cost goes down. Lower incomes would actually be better off because it would mean that more properties would sell, lowering the price of homes, and thus rentals would have to come down in price too. Churn in housing market could lead to more housing developments as well - since you have to pay full price of the land you are just sitting on. You'd be better off developing the land than just sitting on an empty lot and paying lots of property tax.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- sgc 7y agoI just think it's repeal would be absolutely cruel to people who lived and worked in California their whole lives, making much of what it is today, but can't afford to pay today's prices because their salaries were not what people now make here. So irrespective of what the effects would be, it smacks of flagrant injustice.