7 ms·
Indeed. My home "value" has roughly doubled in the last five years. Sounds nice, but land/home values in the area I'd like to move to has nearly tripled in the
by caeril 2y ago
Indeed. My home "value" has roughly doubled in the last five years.
Sounds nice, but land/home values in the area I'd like to move to has nearly tripled in the same timespan.
I feel bad for renters priced out of the market, but many of us who have "enjoyed" the upside are actually deeply underwater relative to our preferences, to say nothing of the doubling of insurance premiums, and ~25% property tax hikes in the last five years.
- aaomidi 2y agoProperty tax shouldn’t be going up with this tbh. If everyone’s housing and land is becoming more expensive, then you need to tax smaller %s to get the same budget. To me this sounds like your city/state is just ballooning their budgets.
- khuey 2y agoYou don't need the same budget. You have to pay employees more to keep up with the rising cost of housing and land (or they all quit), so the budget has to go up too.
- ryandrake 2y agoAnd... Look at California's prop 13 for what happens when property taxes can't rise with the market. People just keep their homes forever because they don't want to sell and buy a new place where the tax rate will ratchet up from the sale. We have multi-million dollar homes that are taxed as if they were $50,000 homes, starving the local area's schools and infrastructure of funding.
- nradov 2y agoThe local governments and school districts are hardly starving. School spending per student in California is above the national average. Property taxes aren't the only source of government revenue: we also have income tax, sales tax, and a wide range of other fees. Proposition 13 did cause some distortions and needs reform. But it has at least been effective in stopping the former unchecked growth in local government spending and limiting the corrosive effect of public employee unions.
- rcpt 2y agoWhy don't I see very many school busses in California?
- triceratops 2y agoThe city or state can also put the extra $ in their rainy day fund.
- jb1991 2y ago> many of us who have "enjoyed" the upside are actually deeply underwater relative to our preferences what do you mean by this?
- IAmGraydon 2y agoWhat he said makes zero sense. Of course a more desirable area is going to appreciate faster. He’s acting like he should be able to trade his less desirable property for a more desirable one 1:1.
- patall 2y agoThey bought a starter home for say 100k which is now 200k. But the family home they now want tripled in the same time from 200k to 600k. So even though they now have 100k more, they need 400k more for their desired house, while only 200k before (Numbers obvioulsy chosen randomly)
- Spivak 2y agoThis still doesn't make sense because why would only homes on the low-end appreciate? If anything homes on the high-end should be appreciating faster because the people who live in them can afford to do more improvements.
- jb1991 2y agoIt makes sense because both the starter homes and the larger homes appreciated. I'm not sure why you say "why would only homes on the low-end appreciate" when the example talks about two different classes of homes.
- Spivak 2y agoYes, that's what I'm saying. The idea that you can trade up your starter home without getting lucky and having your starter home appreciate much faster relative to other homes is daft -- especially when home prices appreciate by percentages the gap is always going to get wider over time. I don't think there's ever been a time where this "starter home" pipeline has ever worked in general.