U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-23-2017, 03:05 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 20,714,185 times
Reputation: 8928

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
No... not what happened... those renting at the time it passed did receive rent reductions... both my grade school teacher and my Uncle had their rents reduced when the new tax bills arrived.

Many poor people do become home owners...

In 2012 home prices here in Oakland were down as much as 80% with 50 to 60% being the norm for block after block in the avenues... it was a fantastic opportunity to buy in and I work at a Hospital... no one was laid off... we did have reduced hours but no lay offs...

I spread the word of a buy opportunity of my generation and only 1 taker
... a single Mom RN... the rest were smug saying why buy when rent is half the cost of owning with no maintenance...

Prop 13 is the only thing tax payers having in California in their favor and as said many times... it was not politicians but the people that made it so...

Count me among the millions who wanted to buy but were unable to do so. They also build wealth who stand and rent. (Just not for themselves.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-23-2017, 03:08 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 20,714,185 times
Reputation: 8928
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise View Post
You need to research the reason for Prop 13 a little more.

Doesn't Prop 13 illustrate the congruence between government and landlords - they're both equally greedy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2017, 03:15 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 20,714,185 times
Reputation: 8928
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise View Post
Prop 13 doesn't pay anyone to live. Having lived there, I know that. You, having never lived there, have no clue.

Never said Prop 13 pays anyone - it merely protects incumbent homeowners from being priced out by newcomers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2017, 03:23 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 20,714,185 times
Reputation: 8928
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrkliny View Post
In the NYC area, there were plenty of "projects". These were expensive mistakes that cost a lot of taxpayer money and resulted in some of the world's worst crime and poor living conditions. No one wants to see more of those. Certainly no middle class neighborhood wants to see the decay that resulted. There is not a whole lot of support for public supported, low income housing.


Now, let us consider privately funded, low income housing. Yuck, who in their right mind wants to be a landlord for low income housing? Being a landlord has somehow become a dirty word. Laws protect the tenants. There are often rent controls and difficulties evicting a deadbeat tenant. Property values can drop when low income areas become slums.

What's wrong with being a landlord for low-income studio apartments? Rent to a bunch of college-educated baristas and you get NO juvenile delinquents, no gangbangers, low crime, and a never-ending rent stream.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2017, 07:41 PM
 
Location: Big Bayou
721 posts, read 217,799 times
Reputation: 981
The market would work if these lower skilled workers all moved to some of the more affordable areas in the country and left the expensive metros with no blue collar workers. Their situation would immediately improve because they would have jobs and houses in a new area. Then see how fast low income housing gets built in the areas that workers are leaving. Demanding that someone else, like the government, handle their lives for them is not how the market works.

There are jobs that pay $20 or more an hour in parts of the country that have reasonable costs of living. Skills shortages even. I blame the workers who insist on living in expensive metros instead of showing some initiative and applying for jobs other places.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2017, 10:41 PM
 
25,801 posts, read 49,697,815 times
Reputation: 19248
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
Never said Prop 13 pays anyone - it merely protects incumbent homeowners from being priced out by newcomers.
Prop 13 applies to every taxable property in the State... and it provides two important things... predictability in future property taxes and requires voter approval for new assessments.

Prior to Prop 13 taxes were spiraling out of control... not sure how returning to a pre-Prop13 era would benefit any taxpayer not on the government payroll.

Hardly sounds anti-American... seeking voter approval which in the case of schools may be as low as 55% voter approval.

How several simple paragraphs that make up Prop 13 continued to be misconstrued even after 40 years boggles the mind...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2017, 10:58 PM
 
5,221 posts, read 2,377,031 times
Reputation: 5111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zambon View Post
The market would work if these lower skilled workers all moved to some of the more affordable areas in the country and left the expensive metros with no blue collar workers. Their situation would immediately improve because they would have jobs and houses in a new area. Then see how fast low income housing gets built in the areas that workers are leaving. Demanding that someone else, like the government, handle their lives for them is not how the market works.

There are jobs that pay $20 or more an hour in parts of the country that have reasonable costs of living. Skills shortages even. I blame the workers who insist on living in expensive metros instead of showing some initiative and applying for jobs other places.
The market IS working.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2017, 12:17 AM
 
Location: Washington State
15,355 posts, read 8,025,596 times
Reputation: 13158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonepa View Post
You are certainly right about that. My the neighborhood around my house in South Kensington is pretty much all Russian and Middle Easterners. I don't even think that an Englishman can afford to live in that neighborhood.
South Kensington is the Underground stop I believe where I need to change to get on the line to Heathrow....I'll look around the neighborhood when I pass by on Tuesday.

Anyway, the expensive areas of London are/have been bought up largely by wealthy from other countries. I'm told that Brexit has stopped the rampant house price inflation which I think may be a good thing overall.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2017, 01:48 AM
 
33,046 posts, read 20,714,185 times
Reputation: 8928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonepa View Post
You are certainly right about that. My the neighborhood around my house in South Kensington is pretty much all Russian and Middle Easterners. I don't even think that an Englishman can afford to live in that neighborhood.

How many houses do you have? Perhaps you're part of the problem?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2017, 01:53 AM
 
33,046 posts, read 20,714,185 times
Reputation: 8928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
Prop 13 applies to every taxable property in the State... and it provides two important things... predictability in future property taxes and requires voter approval for new assessments.

Prior to Prop 13 taxes were spiraling out of control... not sure how returning to a pre-Prop13 era would benefit any taxpayer not on the government payroll.

Hardly sounds anti-American... seeking voter approval which in the case of schools may be as low as 55% voter approval.

How several simple paragraphs that make up Prop 13 continued to be misconstrued even after 40 years boggles the mind...

All I'm suggesting is that renters share in the 'predictability' homeowners enjoy. If government should protect homeowners from being priced out of their homes, why shouldn't government also protect renters from being priced out of their homes? The 40-year homeowner is well-protected under Prop 13...the 40-year renter has zero protection under Prop 13.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top