3 ms·
The solution is obvious: exempt people from property tax but require they only sell their house for purchase price plus CPI
by bandrami 3y ago
The solution is obvious: exempt people from property tax but require they only sell their house for purchase price plus CPI
- quickthrower2 3y agoKind of a rent control for buying houses? Then who do you sell it to given 2 people who equally want and can afford it?
- bandrami 3y agoI don't really care which one you pick, personally. If this turns out to be a problem (ppl won't sell to minorities or LGBT ppl or whatever) require they flip a coin or something.
- quickthrower2 3y agoThen given a shortage of housing and a house anyone can afford you likely will get 100 maybe 1000 offers per house. If it is a lottery then all you have done is made it so a lucky winner gets the house that would have been $1m for 250k say. So for the average person you have solved nothing infact they would be encouraged to leave for another city. Which is what a high price would have done.
- bandrami 3y agoAlmost. It keeps housing as a luck of the draw thing (since it doesn't address shortage) but it keeps more money moving around in the town's economy rather than sitting tied up in a house.
- quickthrower2 3y agoKind of! Here is the rub. When someone borrows $1m to buy a house, new money is created. Therefore the economy relies somewhat on borrowing to keep money flowing around.
- bandrami 3y agoYeah, lowering the money supply is a bonus, but more importantly a lower percent of the money supply will be in the form of current P minus current I.
- bandrami 3y agoAlso, not everybody would take the deal. People who want to resell at an appreciated price can, they just have to pay the higher property taxes in the interim.
- adamredwoods 3y agoThat's a price ceiling. I think that would lead to a housing deficit: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/price-ceiling.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/price-ceiling.asp
- bandrami 3y ago"Lead to"? We're in an unprecedented housing deficit right now.
- postalrat 3y agoSell to who?
- sys_64738 3y agoThese artificial ways might work in the short term but in the long term they totally fail. It's basic ECON 101.
- bandrami 3y agoYes, but what we're doing also fails, and I'd prefer this failure mode.
- swatcoder 3y agoIs there an adjustment when I replace the roof? When I add a bedroom? When the house next door burnt down and got occupied by squatters? When OpenAI opened an office withing biking distance? When the local industry collapsed? When the house collapsed? Because each of those scenarios opens an avenue for gaming the system, and if there's still a big deficit of units, every game of corruption will be played in order to squeeze out the market-banned value.
- bandrami 3y agoTo the first question, sure: cost of improvements plus CPI. To the rest, orienting the policy around the vanishingly rare corner cases when property values go down is kind of silly. Our entire political system is a machine optimized towards preventing home values from ever falling. (Which does make me wonder why people feign surprise at the intended result that housing is nearly impossible to afford.)
- throw0101b 3y ago> The solution is obvious: exempt people from property tax […] And how will municipalities pay for services given that property taxes are basically their only source of revenues?