3 ms·

> "you don't want old people on fixed income forced to sell their homes because property values are going up rapidly" Yes you do. It's called downsizing and re

> "you don't want old people on fixed income forced to sell their homes because property values are going up rapidly" Yes you do. It's called downsizing and relocating. This allows for large houses near good schools and close to work to be owned by working age folks with children. Buying and selling is one of the ways the market reallocates scarce resources.

sethammons 3y ago
I'm having trouble getting my words out. Your view is so myopic and harsh. Communities need older folks. Older folks need communities. Having such a view, I can only assume you've never had a long time home. That you could walk in and force a person from a lifelong home because you feel there is some marginal economic improvement is simply fucked up. If the price goes up enough, they can choose to sell and relocate. Forcing that is wrong. Just because you want it more doesn't make it right to force someone to sell something. This is the same thought pattern as the people who get angry at handicapped parking lot spaces, "how dare those handicapped people exist, I could have used that parking spot better!" (not to mention the marginal added parking spot would already be taken by the time you are prowling the lot looking for a coveted space).
- rcpt 3y ago
  Seniors and the disabled don't have to pay property taxes in California if they don't want to. The California Tax Postponement Program protects them. It's a fine policy.
- HDThoreaun 3y ago
  The issue is that prop 13 has not caused "marginal economic" problems. It's caused absolutely fucking massive problems and is largely responsible for california being completely unaffordable if you don't already own a home there. The juice just isn't worth the squeeze here, the incentives are too distorted.
  - sethammons 3y ago
    Homes are not affordable anywhere people want to live. There is no prop 13 in North Carolina, and people are being priced out of our area. Same is true in Montana. Rents are not higher because prop 13, but taxes collected are lower. High rents and high cost of homes is a supply and demand problem. Move out to Adalanto or Victorville, CA and you can buy a nice house for under $400k. If you and a partner make $50k each, you can do it. That's is not unlike we did. We got priced out of California and had to move. This is an anti prop 13 article with some numbers: https://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/stories/housing-shortage/ https://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/stories/housing-shortage/ The best they can say is that Oakland has 3k undeveloped lots that could be houses. The claim is prop 13 allows them to hold onto what would otherwise be someone's purchased home. That wont even house 1% of Oakland. You could magically put houses there and the market price for housing wouldn't change. Being angry with prop 13 feels like being angry at handicapped parking spaces being unused. If the spot were not only for handicapped people, you still wouldn't have found parking there because someone else would have already taken it.
idopmstuff 3y ago
I don't necessarily disagree with you on the downsizing part - in general, I think it's a positive thing if people are using housing appropriate to their situation. I think you're totally wrong on the relocating bit - if you've lived in SF in a two bedroom condo for your whole life, you shouldn't be forced to sell it and move to a two bedroom condo in Bakersfield just because of property taxes.
happytoexplain 3y ago
>you don't want old people on fixed income forced to sell their homes because property values are going up rapidly >Yes you do. It's called downsizing and relocating. You have to understand how hard this makes it to engage honestly with your post. All useful conversation requires a minimal foundation of trust/honesty/charity - i.e. that both parties honestly want the best overall outcome for everybody, and the disagreement is only about what that compromise looks like and how to get it. When you write like this about people, it makes you sound like you don't give a shit about them.

sethammons 3y ago

I'm having trouble getting my words out. Your view is so myopic and harsh. Communities need older folks. Older folks need communities. Having such a view, I can only assume you've never had a long time home. That you could walk in and force a person from a lifelong home because you feel there is some marginal economic improvement is simply fucked up. If the price goes up enough, they can choose to sell and relocate. Forcing that is wrong. Just because you want it more doesn't make it right to force someone to sell something. This is the same thought pattern as the people who get angry at handicapped parking lot spaces, "how dare those handicapped people exist, I could have used that parking spot better!" (not to mention the marginal added parking spot would already be taken by the time you are prowling the lot looking for a coveted space).

rcpt 3y ago
Seniors and the disabled don't have to pay property taxes in California if they don't want to. The California Tax Postponement Program protects them. It's a fine policy.
HDThoreaun 3y ago
The issue is that prop 13 has not caused "marginal economic" problems. It's caused absolutely fucking massive problems and is largely responsible for california being completely unaffordable if you don't already own a home there. The juice just isn't worth the squeeze here, the incentives are too distorted.
- sethammons 3y ago
  Homes are not affordable anywhere people want to live. There is no prop 13 in North Carolina, and people are being priced out of our area. Same is true in Montana. Rents are not higher because prop 13, but taxes collected are lower. High rents and high cost of homes is a supply and demand problem. Move out to Adalanto or Victorville, CA and you can buy a nice house for under $400k. If you and a partner make $50k each, you can do it. That's is not unlike we did. We got priced out of California and had to move. This is an anti prop 13 article with some numbers: https://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/stories/housing-shortage/ https://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/stories/housing-shortage/ The best they can say is that Oakland has 3k undeveloped lots that could be houses. The claim is prop 13 allows them to hold onto what would otherwise be someone's purchased home. That wont even house 1% of Oakland. You could magically put houses there and the market price for housing wouldn't change. Being angry with prop 13 feels like being angry at handicapped parking spaces being unused. If the spot were not only for handicapped people, you still wouldn't have found parking there because someone else would have already taken it.

idopmstuff 3y ago

I don't necessarily disagree with you on the downsizing part - in general, I think it's a positive thing if people are using housing appropriate to their situation. I think you're totally wrong on the relocating bit - if you've lived in SF in a two bedroom condo for your whole life, you shouldn't be forced to sell it and move to a two bedroom condo in Bakersfield just because of property taxes.

happytoexplain 3y ago

>you don't want old people on fixed income forced to sell their homes because property values are going up rapidly >Yes you do. It's called downsizing and relocating. You have to understand how hard this makes it to engage honestly with your post. All useful conversation requires a minimal foundation of trust/honesty/charity - i.e. that both parties honestly want the best overall outcome for everybody, and the disagreement is only about what that compromise looks like and how to get it. When you write like this about people, it makes you sound like you don't give a shit about them.