Public Employee Unions want to change Prop. 13 so busness property tax goes up & up more every year. (Los Angeles: refinancing, bankruptcy)

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by thelopez2

No one is making the buyer pay quadruple the price of the neighbors house. Those zombie owners already put in their time, they too had a hard time.

Exactly. Those "zombie owners" (I realize that you're simply quoting the poster before you) have already paid in for decades.

For years we lived next door to a couple in their 80s whose property tax bill was about 1/10th of what ours was. They had built their home many, many years before. We--and all the other neighbors--were GLAD to see people of their ages being able to stay in their home because of Prop 13. And let's not forget that most of us will be at that stage of life someday.

[CaliRestoration]

Erasing prop 13 would disproportionately hurt the poor, just like 99% of leftist democrat policies. So it would fit with the party platform.

[TheFlats]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

Don't blame homeowners for your inability to afford to buy a home. Houses are worth what they are worth, set by free market prices.

In many cases the biggest NIMBYs are the current homeowners who would like to see supply artificially restricted by zoning, etc. to keep their property values up.

However, I am a homeowner and very much a YIMBY. So I guess blame the NIMBYs and BANANAs (Build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything).

[Bill the Butcher]

Originally Posted by USDefault

I understand why Prop. 13 was passed, and it's a great check on out-of-control California politicians. But it's also grossly unfair to new home purchasers. Recent buyers could easily be paying triple, quadruple, even quintuple the taxes on nearly identical properties versus their neighbor, who happens to have a foot in the grave and bought their house thirty-five years ago. This arrangement favors old zombie owners versus those who are just starting out. And this is another key reason California, from a financial point-of-view, is beyond terrible for young adults and young families, who get absolutely screwed by taxes and fees in California.

As others have mentioned, young buyers in their 20's and 30's will eventually also be "old zombie owners" in their 60's and 70's. They'll get the benefit too, they'll just have to wait for it. You could say it encourages owners to stay in their homes for decades which is not a bad thing IMO.

[Lovehound]

Originally Posted by TheFlats

In many cases the biggest NIMBYs are the current homeowners who would like to see supply artificially restricted by zoning, etc. to keep their property values up.

However, I am a homeowner and very much a YIMBY. So I guess blame the NIMBYs and BANANAs (Build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything).

I don't understand half of what you said.

If I can continue to afford my property taxes I plan to live in my present house until I die or have to go into assisted living. I'm not concerned about the potential sale value of my house because I plan on being dead before it is sold.

All I want is for my neighbors to keep up the appearance of their houses and not change the character of my neighborhood. Fortunately our HOA is of a like mind.

The only thing I'm doing to keep property values up is taking care of my own home and keeping its appearance in character with the rest of my neighbors. Except for a few commercial properties near the edge of my development the entire area is zoned residential, and multi-unit residential only at the edge near major shopping areas far from the vast majority of single family homes.

Originally Posted by Bill the Butcher

As others have mentioned, young buyers in their 20's and 30's will eventually also be "old zombie owners" in their 60's and 70's. They'll get the benefit too, they'll just have to wait for it. You could say it encourages owners to stay in their homes for decades which is not a bad thing IMO.

And I'd like to point out to young people that you too will become old some day--if you are lucky to live long enough--and you had better be careful what you do to retired people today because one day you'll be retired too, and the situation you create today will the one you experience down the road later in your life.

[thelopez2]

Originally Posted by TheFlats

In many cases the biggest NIMBYs are the current homeowners who would like to see supply artificially restricted by zoning, etc. to keep their property values up.

However, I am a homeowner and very much a YIMBY. So I guess blame the NIMBYs and BANANAs (Build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything).

Supply is not artificially restricted, the constrains are already in place. The values go up due to desirability, more often than not, single family homes with lower density is more desirable that higher density condos and apartments. Less people, better schools, less traffic, less of commercial traffic trucks, less noise.

Even when properties appreciation, long time residence don't like the changes, they simply don't want change regardless of the appreciation. They knew what slow suburban lifestyle they were getting into. Some people get into relationships hoping change their partners, they do the same with neighborhoods.

[davidt1]

Originally Posted by USDefault

.....


I understand why Prop. 13 was passed, and it's a great check on out-of-control California politicians. But it's also grossly unfair to new home purchasers. Recent buyers could easily be paying triple, quadruple, even quintuple the taxes on nearly identical properties versus their neighbor, who happens to have a foot in the grave and bought their house thirty-five years ago. This arrangement favors old zombie owners versus those who are just starting out. And this is another key reason California, from a financial point-of-view, is beyond terrible for young adults and young families, who get absolutely screwed by taxes and fees in California.

This is a terrible argument. It looks like public employee unions and the democrats have succeeded in brainwashing some people into believing that Prop 13 is the root of CA's financial problems. It is not. In this corrupt state, it is the protection home owners need.

It would break my heart if an elderly grandmother who barely survives on a meager social security income suddenly finds her property taxes increase ten times more than before. This scenario is all too real if Prop 13 is repealed. And this is exactly what public employee unions and the democrats want.

If you want know where your taxes and fees go, read here:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamand.../#17a8cc444e03

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamand.../#493858d03945

[Lovehound]

Originally Posted by davidt1

This is a terrible argument. It looks like public employee unions and the democrats have succeeded in brainwashing some people into believing that Prop 13 is the root of CA's financial problems. It is not. In this corrupt state, it is the protection home owners need.

It would break my heart if an elderly grandmother who barely survives on a meager social security income suddenly finds her property taxes increase ten times more than before. This scenario is all too real if Prop 13 is repealed. And this is exactly what public employee unions and the democrats want.

You just described me except I'm a senior citizen man with no children. If they take away my Prop 13 I'll be forced to sell and move out of state. I grew up here, had my career here, almost everybody I know is here. If the CA government takes away Prop 13 and goes nuclear on my property taxes I'll have no choice but to move. My property taxes already take half of my social security income.

What are they going to want next? If I had a first born I'd give it to them. But I can't cut off a body part and send that in.

California has just got to quit spending (and wasting) so much money! We should all be together on this because we are all being taxed to death!

[TheFlats]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

I don't understand half of what you said.

What part? That NIMBYs restrict the housing supply?

Originally Posted by Lovehound

And I'd like to point out to young people that you too will become old some day--if you are lucky to live long enough--and you had better be careful what you do to retired people today because one day you'll be retired too, and the situation you create today will the one you experience down the road later in your life.

I think that's why the majority of the younger generations want better infrastructure and more housing to be built, because both crumbling infrastructure and high priced housing will continue to negatively impact our generations as we age, care for families, purchase houses, build careers, etc.

Originally Posted by thelopez2

Supply is not artificially restricted, the constrains are already in place. The values go up due to desirability, more often than not, single family homes with lower density is more desirable that higher density condos and apartments. Less people, better schools, less traffic, less of commercial traffic trucks, less noise.

You think if Atherton or Palo Alto or Santa Monica had minimal zoning and development restrictions like Houston there wouldn't be an increase in the supply of housing?

[Lovehound]

What part? That NIMBYs restrict the housing supply?

All I can tell you is that I live in a residential area restricted to SFRs and I'm happy here. I could care less how the rest of the state is zoned. My "back yard" is full of houses and there is no room to tear down houses and put up businesses, condos or apartments. What YOU or everybody else does in their "back yard" is of no concern to me. I keep my nose out of other peoples' business.

And about the infrastructure, take Los Angeles for example. Just exactly where are you going to build more freeways and widen the roads for more traffic? And don't tell me you'll dig underground subways. They've been fighting for that for longer than I remember. LA will never have a functional public transportation system. IMO the only way LA can remain livable is for more employees to telecommute and work from home. That's what I do now: telecommute.

I don't know what the cities you mentioned are like, particularly whatever zoning they have. Again, none of my business. I'll let the residents of those cities work it out.

And I'm okay with whatever you want to do in your "back yard." Just don't raise my property taxes and kick me out of my native state.