What happens to property values in areas like SF and NYC with work going virtual? (taxes, work from home)

[ddm2k]

Originally Posted by Hoonose

The RE taxes here in Portland are astronomical compared to home in AZ. 1/2 the house and twice the tax! And parking! lol But no sales tax.

I hear TX is bad, too, for property taxes. It's terrible that it somewhat offsets an otherwise very accessible housing market.

[StealthRabbit]

I would not want to own a commercial property that rented to a Broadway theater, or bar or office space in NYC or SF. Huge 'write-down' 2020-2024.

[StealthRabbit]

Originally Posted by ddm2k

I hear TX is bad, too, for property taxes. It's terrible that it somewhat offsets an otherwise very accessible housing market.

My (6) Texas income properties are very high taxed, but all combined are less than my primary home taxes in WA state. Taxes are over 2x what my highest house payment ever was.

No income tax states got to collect somewhere, and homes are a very easy target. Mine went from $800/ yr taxes to $14,400. That's difficult on no income (retiree, no pension, no healthcare)

I re-buy my complete home every 7 yrs in taxes.

[Electrician4you]

Originally Posted by ddm2k

I hear TX is bad, too, for property taxes. It's terrible that it somewhat offsets an otherwise very accessible housing market.

I see Texas as half the cost twice the house size average twice the tax liability compared to California. I’m about ready to pull the pin and buy in Idaho or Wyoming but I’m gonna wait to see until next year. I figure if housing craps the bed might as well buy something out of state abd slowly make mo escape

[ddeemo]

Originally Posted by Hoonose

I'm not condoning the riots one bit. What I'm saying is that so far the riots have not stirred up the virus. Probably because they are outdoors.

But being from Chicago, these are hardly even riots compared to the '60's and '70's!

There has not been time to determine if the riots have impacted virus infection rates but there has been increased rates based on outdoor protests other places, I don't think Portland is exempt from that impact.

As far as riots, it is very disingenuous to say well, it is not as bad as riots 50-60 years ago half way across the country. And use a movie line to imply not really a riot is very seriously wrong. Just like any knife is a threat, no matter how small, if it is used on you - so is any riot if you are targeted. Based on length and damage - this riot is NOT small and NOT to be dismissed only because the message is BLM. Just because it may be a cause you support does not make it less of a riot - if it was a protest of masks, you wouldn't be so quick to defend.

These riots have cost millions in damage and countless other impacts and have impacted many who live or work in the areas where they occur. Riots of any type are bad, especially when they get out of hand because zealots don't care who they hurt. Just because they are hurting others and not you personally is not a reason to dismiss their impacts.

BTW - Going to school at Berkeley in the 70s, I believe I have seen riots and unlike most, was personally impacted / targeted, not just lived across town - I think you said they didn't impact you. Riots don't have the same impact when they happen across town as when they happen right in front of you.

[ddeemo]

As far as property values in SF (or San Diego - I have rentals in the SF Bay Area and a house in San Diego) - I am more worried about the endless attempts to raise taxes decreasing property values than increase on remote working options.

[Hoonose]

Originally Posted by ddeemo

There has not been time to determine if the riots have impacted virus infection rates but there has been increased rates based on outdoor protests other places, I don't think Portland is exempt from that impact.

As far as riots, it is very disingenuous to say well, it is not as bad as riots 50-60 years ago half way across the country. And use a movie line to imply not really a riot is very seriously wrong. Just like any knife is a threat, no matter how small, if it is used on you - so is any riot if you are targeted. Based on length and damage - this riot is NOT small and NOT to be dismissed only because the message is BLM. Just because it may be a cause you support does not make it less of a riot - if it was a protest of masks, you wouldn't be so quick to defend.

These riots have cost millions in damage and countless other impacts and have impacted many who live or work in the areas where they occur. Riots of any type are bad, especially when they get out of hand because zealots don't care who they hurt. Just because they are hurting others and not you personally is not a reason to dismiss their impacts.

BTW - Going to school at Berkeley in the 70s, I believe I have seen riots and unlike most, was personally impacted / targeted, not just lived across town - I think you said they didn't impact you. Riots don't have the same impact when they happen across town as when they happen right in front of you.

Nothing good about riots. I've not been impacted in Portland, but yes in Chicago and confines.

I worked for the Saxon Paint and Hardware chain, and the owner Al Saks was a noted activist liberal. He bought up distressed properties in Black areas of the city where he would make his presence and policies known. We rebuilt the buildings as paint stores and ran them using local labor. We had riots over the years for sure. And there were times when the Blacks defended us.

[redguard57]

I'm skeptical of the "forever" pronouncements people make about Covid19. Even the Black Plague ended, and generally the rich were still rich and the poor still poor.

There may be a temporary slump in values of hard-hit places, but what made them valuable before will still be true 2-3 years from now.

[M3Guy]

Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy

I think you're putting the cart before the horse i.e. it's far too soon to tell what the WFH situation will look like (realistically) down the road (or what percentage of the workforce it will be possible to do so long-term without at least occasional jaunts into an office, lab, school, whatever).

Additionally, people still have to live somewhere; and cities, particularly SF, have far more to offer (by comparison) beyond simply being a city to work - for singles, couples and a fairly significant retired population in the Bay Area as well. I would think it could ultimately affect other areas far more so in the long-term (which don't have much going on other than being a location for employment).

Agreed!

[M3Guy]

Originally Posted by ohio_peasant

Quite true, but it all depends on the duration of the mitigating measures, such as social-distancing.

How many would-be couples - and eventually parents - never met, because the prospective partners were, ahem, socially distancing? Consequently, how many babies would not be born? What will be the reverberations for decades into the future?

Technical experts who already convened in-person prior to the 'rona, can largely continue their work, while working from home, perhaps from distant and disparate locations. But what about junior-people, looking for their first STEM job? Would about young scientists/engineers, who need hands-on mentorship and unmitigated group interaction? At a minimum, these people will be less productive. They'll be making a smaller economic contribution, even if they keep their jobs and their benefits and so forth. The stunted productivity growth-rate, will reverberate for decades into the future.

If we're all hunkered in our apartments, does it matter if those apartments are in SF or in Peoria? If we're watching a symphony-concert remotely, instead of going to Davies Hall, does it matter if we're doing this in our apartments in SF, or in a small-town in Alabama? A large part of going to Davies Hall in the first place, is to see and to be seen, to mingle during intermission, to spot people in the gallery, to chat them up after the performance. Lacking that, why pay the "SF tax"? Why bother?

Besides playing with a dog in your backyard, or spending the weekends cleaning the extra rooms in the expansive house or having a slightly cheaper rent, what would be different vs living in the city (which most cities have houses as well)?

You know whats crazy, now that people are apparently leaving cities, the city actually feels more spacious ironically. I guess people are fleeing only to come back because the Walmarts are too crowded and the HOA meetings grew by 150%.