> 2% is not a reasonable amount when housing prices are regularly going up by 3x-5x that percentage. Let's examine these numbers. If housing prices are regular

> 2% is not a reasonable amount when housing prices are regularly going up by 3x-5x that percentage. Let's examine these numbers. If housing prices are regularly going up by 6% to 10% it means that a property purchased for $250K in 1995 is worth 1.2M to 3.3M today. While you can probably find such an example, that's not the norm by far. I can say that all the houses in my neighborhood (outskirts of Silicon Valley) have gone up about 4% averaged over the last 30 years. Yes that's more than the 2% valuation increase, but way below 6-10%. It's one thing to criticize prop13, but let's keep the numbers factual, no need to exagerate. > There has never been a bubble crash that brought housing prices anywhere down to the Prop 13 valuations That's very much not true. The dot.com crash brought many houses (mine included) below the prop 13 valuation. The 2008 crash did the same for a very large amount of home owners. There hasn't been a crash since 2008 so it might feel like prices can only ever go up, but there will be another crash. Perhaps soon. > I think that we need to start charging a huge capital gains tax on local property transaction, assessed by the local government, not the federal government. Maybe 25%-50% of the capital gains. What does this accomplish exactly? It is a huge incentive to never ever sell. Is that your preferred goal?