4 ms·

Just remember to adjust your voting habits when you inevitably move somewhere else.

by zionic 7y ago

microcolonel 7y ago
This is the thing that takes so much effort to tell people: if the place you live in is crippled by politics, but you agree with most of your neighbours on who to vote for (the same people for often a decade at a time), then it's time to look inside a bit. I have met many people who complain non-stop about things, while not being able to name the politician they are voting for in a local or regional election, or even a politician they just voted for in a recent election.
fossuser 7y ago
For clarity the people voting for policies to restrict housing are not the people moving away because they can't afford housing. There's a class of people that own housing that pay very little property tax because they bought years ago and are protected by Prop 13. These people vote to prevent building anything because they benefit both from insane house prices and property tax protection. All the new people live with a handful of roommates and still pay $1400-$2200 in rent.
- infecto 7y ago
  Fuck Prop 13. It blows my mind how many long time California people don't even realize prop 13 covers many business properties.
  - fossuser 7y ago
    For me the individual housing protection is worse than business. Primarily because the individual housing protection is what causes the incentive problem where people prevent housing from being built. Companies would benefit from more plentiful inexpensive housing. My dream bill would be a prop that requires local communities to build X amount of housing (where X is some large number possibly determined in part by the spread between property tax payment and property FMV) every year. Failure to meet X means that all property owners see a 10% increase in their property tax. This happens every year with an upper bound on the property tax being the current tax for the FMV of their property. This is basically impossible to actually pass, but it's what I would do if I was king of Palo Alto, either build the housing or pay the actual cost of your policy. Maybe one day SB50 will pass - at least that'd be something.

Just remember to adjust your voting habits when you inevitably move somewhere else.

by zionic 7y ago

Just remember to adjust your voting habits when you inevitably move somewhere else.

This is the thing that takes so much effort to tell people: if the place you live in is crippled by politics, but you agree with most of your neighbours on who to vote for (the same people for often a decade at a time), then it's time to look inside a bit. I have met many people who complain non-stop about things, while not being able to name the politician they are voting for in a local or regional election, or even a politician they just voted for in a recent election.

fossuser 7y ago

For clarity the people voting for policies to restrict housing are not the people moving away because they can't afford housing. There's a class of people that own housing that pay very little property tax because they bought years ago and are protected by Prop 13. These people vote to prevent building anything because they benefit both from insane house prices and property tax protection. All the new people live with a handful of roommates and still pay $1400-$2200 in rent.

infecto 7y ago
Fuck Prop 13. It blows my mind how many long time California people don't even realize prop 13 covers many business properties.
- fossuser 7y ago
  For me the individual housing protection is worse than business. Primarily because the individual housing protection is what causes the incentive problem where people prevent housing from being built. Companies would benefit from more plentiful inexpensive housing. My dream bill would be a prop that requires local communities to build X amount of housing (where X is some large number possibly determined in part by the spread between property tax payment and property FMV) every year. Failure to meet X means that all property owners see a 10% increase in their property tax. This happens every year with an upper bound on the property tax being the current tax for the FMV of their property. This is basically impossible to actually pass, but it's what I would do if I was king of Palo Alto, either build the housing or pay the actual cost of your policy. Maybe one day SB50 will pass - at least that'd be something.