Landlord wants to kick me out to sell his house--what to do? (Oakland: real estate, condo)

[kgbnsf]

Originally Posted by TheCityTheBridge

Landlords can only offer housing at market rate. If they can't afford to offer housing due to taxes, then they would need to sell. The buyer will either 1) move-in, or 2) be able to manage the costs. In either event, existing housing is used.

But, with option 1, there is one less property available on the rental market- which is the point I am making. Overzealous housing/rental regulations are making it cost prohibitive on property owners and it's going to end up hurting renters as a result of less options and poorer quality of rental units.

[TheCityTheBridge]

Originally Posted by kgbnsf

But, with option 1, there is one less property available on the rental market- which is the point I am making. Overzealous housing/rental regulations are making it cost prohibitive on property owners and it's going to end up hurting renters as a result of less options and poorer quality of rental units.

Property tax (which is what I mentioned) is hardly an overzealous housing regulation. In spite of strong tenant protections, San Francisco has a really high tenant population, i.e., a high proportion of housing units are rentals.

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by TheCityTheBridge

Property tax (which is what I mentioned) is hardly an overzealous housing regulation. In spite of strong tenant protections, San Francisco has a really high tenant population, i.e., a high proportion of housing units are rentals.

Most of those who own either bought when it was 10,000 dollars for a house, inherited, 100,000 for a house, or are in the 1%

[TheCityTheBridge]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

Most of those who own either bought when it was 10,000 dollars for a house, inherited, 100,000 for a house, or are in the 1%

And you could create a glide path to routine property tax. Just because you bought a house when houses cost 1-10% of what they do today does not mean you should be essentially exempt from property taxes. It's misguided.

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by TheCityTheBridge

And you could create a glide path to routine property tax. Just because you bought a house when houses cost 1-10% of what they do today does not mean you should be essentially exempt from property taxes. It's misguided.

No, it's protecting the only teachers/police officers/other middle class people we have left

[TheCityTheBridge]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

No, it's protecting the only teachers/police officers/other middle class people we have left

You could increase pay for teachers, police officers, and other "middle class" people who otherwise can't afford the City.

[WizardOfRadical]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

No, it's protecting the only teachers/police officers/other middle class people we have left

No the fixed property taxes are meant to protect elderly people living on fixed income.

The notion that you should tax a 70 year old out of their home, after they payed off their house, paid all their taxes, and helped make/keep the neighborhood desirable is moronic.

The people who usually are the biggest proponents of raising property taxes are (big surprise) renters with no skin in the game.

[TheCityTheBridge]

Originally Posted by WizardOfRadical

No the fixed property taxes are meant to protect elderly people living on fixed income.

The notion that you should tax a 70 year old out of their home, after they payed off their house, paid all their taxes, and helped make/keep the neighborhood desirable is moronic.

The people who usually are the biggest proponents of raising property taxes are (big surprise) renters with no skin in the game.

It's sold to help 70 year olds. But it helps all property owners, especially those who've held property for a long time (like Danielle Steele, for example).

California property taxes are artificially limited, unlike the approach taken by most other states.

[WizardOfRadical]

Originally Posted by TheCityTheBridge

It's sold to help 70 year olds. But it helps all property owners, especially those who've held property for a long time (like Danielle Steele, for example).

California property taxes are artificially limited, unlike the approach taken by most other states.

Uh, people who have held property for a long time ARE typically old.

And all taxes are artificially limited, that's why they are called taxes, genius. This is not corn, there is no such thing as a "market rate" on taxes.

And property taxes are limited in other states too. Just to a different degree. They might take more property taxes, but they will take less income and sales tax, for example.

[SocSciProf]

Originally Posted by WizardOfRadical

Uh, people who have held property for a long time ARE typically old.

What do you think of the rule that keeps the property tax the same after inheritance?