6 ms·
Wealthy AI workers send San Francisco house prices soaring
- tangenter 3mo ago[flagged]
- jrmg 3mo agoI don’t see the prejudice or jabs? The article seems pretty factual to me.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- applfanboysbgon 3mo agoAre the prejudice and jabs in the room with us? Perhaps you could excerpt the quotes of the article you found offensive?
- therobots927 3mo agoIf you have enough money to inflate the local housing market, you forfeit the right to be upset when people… point out that you are inflating the local housing market. But I guess that’s to be expected of the modern tech elite. Unlike the financiers of the past they insist on having their cake and eating it too.
- m463 3mo agoObviously the solution is an ai-funded-house-wealth-tax. I'm in favor of a politician tax, and an attractive people tax (I'm not worried, I will use my tax receipt for virtue signalling)
- smitty1e 3mo agoWhy hasn't AI proposed the ultimate "fair" taxation scheme?
- rayiner 3mo agoWe already have expert consensus on what’s the best taxes, people just don’t like the answer: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/07/19/157047211/six-policies-economists-love-and-politicians-hate https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/07/19/157047211/six-... (“Three. Eliminate the corporate income tax. Completely. If companies reinvest the money into their businesses, that's good. Don't tax companies in an effort to tax rich people. Four. Eliminate all income and payroll taxes. All of them. For everyone. Taxes discourage whatever you're taxing, but we like income, so why tax it? Payroll taxes discourage creating jobs. Not such a good idea. Instead, impose a consumption tax, designed to be progressive to protect lower-income households.”).
- throw101010 3mo agoWhy would you want to "discourage consumption" by taxing it? Following the logic in your message. I know you are just quoting this transcript/article... but you likely have an idea of how this would work since you classify this as the best solution. Especially interested on how you would progressively tax consumption... How do you apply brackets to the day-to-day purchases? The general answer is to demand people to report their income/savings and the difference is taxed... and rich people will just game this as easily as the income taxes (if not more easily).
- rayiner 3mo agoI’m not classifying it as the best solution. I’m quoting an NPR article describing the consensus view of economics experts. But as I understand it, the reason is that consumption taxes have the least distortion in terms of deviating from the efficient behavior in the no-tax scenario: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2019/09/using-tax-to-tackle-wealth-inequality-heres-how/ https://www.weforum.org/stories/2019/09/using-tax-to-tackle-...
- dpark 3mo agoThat article spends most of its time explaining why a progressive consumption tax is obviously the right choice, then basically decries liberals as too dumb to understand it and conservatives as too evil to want it, but spends zero words to explain how a progressive consumption tax might possibly be implemented.
- JumpCrisscross 3mo ago> the solution is an ai-funded-house-wealth-tax The solution is a progressive wealth tax. Start it at 2% (inflation target) above $100mm and raise it a point at every order of magnitude. 3% at $1bn, 4% at $100bn, 5% at $100bn, 6% at $1tn, et cetera. There isn't a great reason why OpenAI should be hit with a tax while Andreessen Horowitz and Microsoft are not.
- tsoukase 3mo agoIn order to conclude about taxing, we should agree how much more one should earn per unit of talent or position. Should a CEO earn x10k times a base salary, like now? If yes, don't tax them, if they should earn x1k, tax them 90%, if x100 then 99%. Sould one own 100 homes and 50 cars like billionaires, while they live in and drive one? If yes, don't tax them, if no, tax their wealth accordingly to the number we agreed. Every number not based on fundamental human utility is arbitrary, sensational opinion.
- satvikpendem 3mo agoAnything except building more housing, it seems. We'll see how the recently passed housing bill goes however.
- skybrian 3mo agoThey're working on it: Plans for nearly 4,000 homes over Safeways divide Bay Area residents https://skybrian-links.exe.xyz/post/871 https://skybrian-links.exe.xyz/post/871
- JumpCrisscross 3mo ago"These sentiments were palpable" I'm confused what to do with a source that shows this as its first words.
- skybrian 3mo agoIt's abrupt because I didn't copy the entire article, just quoted a few paragraphs. I changed it to an ellipsis.
- jandhdhshhh 3mo agoI’ve been watching this for decades now. I was hopeful in my 20s that it was just a matter of time before supply would increase. But I’ve learned the hard way, The bay area voters and political apparatus is determined to keep housing as scarce as possible
- skybrian 3mo agoSome YIMBY laws have passed, but it takes time to build things. For example, it looks like the 25-story Marina Safeway can't be stopped, though they're still trying. Berkeley has quite a few new buildings, though.
- pfannkuchen 3mo agoSF housing dropped relative to other high demand locales during COVID. I wonder if this is just a recovery after Austin et al didn’t pan out as alternatives?
- khurs 3mo agoComing soon? "AI sector's job layoffs lead to dampening of San Francisco house prices"