How oligarchs destroyed a major American city - Houston (Franklin: home, neighborhood)

[Augiec]

Originally Posted by PedroMartinez

ROFLMAO!!!

If you want to blame a political mindset, it's the "we need to keep raising taxes" mantra that is too blame for these changes.

When you FORCE people out by continually raising their property taxes, that is what is allowing these neighborhoods to be gentrified and the "cookie cutter million dollar homes" to replace the old cottages and such.

If we had TEA Party taxes in place, nobody would be forced out of their homes due to gentrification.

Darn, why'd you have to throw that last line in there, otherwise I would've agreed completely. :P

I do agree though that rising property taxes are attributing to what pushes people out of their homes. At the same time, I'd be curious to see what alternatives exist and the strengths or weaknesses of those alternatives.

Going back to the article, I think the author raised some good points, but his bias was too strong for his logic. I heard him on Houston Matters on NPR and he really had a hard time getting past the idea of the "evil developers."

Is Gentrification of Houston Neighborhoods a Good or Bad Thing? | Houston Matters

[PedroMartinez]

Originally Posted by Augiec

Darn, why'd you have to throw that last line in there, otherwise I would've agreed completely. :P

I do agree though that rising property taxes are attributing to what pushes people out of their homes. At the same time, I'd be curious to see what alternatives exist and the strengths or weaknesses of those alternatives.

Going back to the article, I think the author raised some good points, but his bias was too strong for his logic. I heard him on Houston Matters on NPR and he really had a hard time getting past the idea of the "evil developers."

Is Gentrification of Houston Neighborhoods a Good or Bad Thing? | Houston Matters

Just because you might agree with the type of taxes the TEA Party would put on property, that doesn't mean you'd have to agree with their other issues.

Additionally, the only reason I mentioned the TEA Party is because the person I responded to attempted to place blame on TEA Party principles when in reality, TEA Party principles would do the exact opposite.

[Augiec]

Hey, I repped you, didn't I? Sheesh :P

[crone]

We have lived in a state where the property tax remained at what was the property value the day the house was purchased. My next door neighbor was born in his house and lived in it for 80 years. The taxes were based on the value when the house passed to him 40 years prior. The city got revenue by taxing utilities. Even on churches.

California used to say property tax could be no more than 1% of appraised value.

Houston was founded by real estate developers.

NYC would no longer have rent stabilized and rent control if the building owners didn't want it. If they go condo, the buildings have to brought up to current code. It is cheaper on the owner to have my SIL in a classic 5 apartment on CPW, directly across the street from Strawberry Field for his meager 1500 month rent when he can get 10x that for the apartment upstairs.

[PedroMartinez]

I prefer a different taxing structure than property taxes (since it prevents you from ever truly owning your home), but if we tax property, it should be locked into the value upon acquisition with the only change being based on inflation AND deflation.

[radiolibre99]

Originally Posted by ipuck

And I would say the same for your reasoning. Why do you feel you need government help everytime for everything and anything?

Hey I am getting kicked out of my $800 a month bungalow in Montrose. The landlord want to charge me $3000 now after all the nice plants i put in the yard. Those greedy people. Let's call the mayor and ask them to change the rules so we have rent control in place.

I can't believe they want a Starbucks on this corner where the Sal's Tattoo parlor been for 20 years. Those greedy developers. This is wrong. Where am I going to get my weed if Sal's place close down. Let's protest on their site so they can't build it.

Look at that yuppie with their $1,000 strollers. This is not the neighborhood for that. Let's go harass them.

Sound about right to you? Is this fair?

If people in a neighborhood are within their right to appeal to the city to curtail more development in their area then it makes it fair. Just because you don't like it, it doesn't mean its anti American or whatever other canard you're calling it. Yes these developers get greedy and want to completely uproot communities simply to reap a big reward. You may call it rational self interest as a dogmatic libertarian, but others call it being greedy.
You can't just expect people to take it, sit back and say, "well gee honey, ya know, it's the free market at work here, we can't go against its majestic invisible hand here".

[ipuck]

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

If people in a neighborhood are within their right to appeal to the city to curtail more development in their area then it makes it fair. Just because you don't like it, it doesn't mean its anti American or whatever other canard you're calling it. Yes these developers get greedy and want to completely uproot communities simply to reap a big reward. You may call it rational self interest as a dogmatic libertarian, but others call it being greedy.
You can't just expect people to take it, sit back and say, "well gee honey, ya know, it's the free market at work here, we can't go against its majestic invisible hand here".

So what is acceptable and what is not?

Should I call the mayor if Walmart open near my house?

I don't drink coffee and Starbucks is kicking out the old donut shop. Should I appeal that too?

To argue even further, say you inherit a house from your long lost uncle that happen to live in Montrose. It is 90 years old and is pretty much not habitable. You want to rebuild it so it can habitable for modern living. Your next door neighbor don't like the idea of this and petition the city from tearing down the house. is this ok with you?

There are basic framework for laws already in place so the American free market system generally work quite well.

The minute special interest groups and government start meddling is when everything slow down and price goes up. Nobody wins.

[vwgto]

It is ironic that we pay so much in property tax, yet have so little to say about the neighboring development which impacts that property value. It breeds growth, but to what end?

[ipuck]

Originally Posted by vwgto

It is ironic that we pay so much in property tax, yet have so little to say about the neighboring development which impacts that property value. It breeds growth, but to what end?

It allow you to not pay a state income tax.

It also in some way allow the housing and development to be still reasonable price.

Would you like the average house price in Houston to be 400k? Regulations guarantee higher real estate price.

[radiolibre99]

Originally Posted by ipuck

So what is acceptable and what is not?

Should I call the mayor if Walmart open near my house?

I don't drink coffee and Starbucks is kicking out the old donut shop. Should I appeal that too?

To argue even further, say you inherit a house from your long lost uncle that happen to live in Montrose. It is 90 years old and is pretty much not habitable. You want to rebuild it so it can habitable for modern living. Your next door neighbor don't like the idea of this and petition the city from tearing down the house. is this ok with you?

There are basic framework for laws already in place so the American free market system generally work quite well.

The minute special interest groups and government start meddling is when everything slow down and price goes up. Nobody wins.

What a way to muddy the issue by including all sorts of absurd examples. You act like the free market is this abstract entity that gets strangled whenever outside forces meddle in. Everything is really political and most of these fights against the developers are legal. Only a libertarian such as yourself would bring in this silly idea that it's the free market being attacked here. People fighting a developer are not a special interest. The developer isn't some neutral agent pursuing a rational self interest. I think perhaps you presume too much libertarian drivel.