Are the Flippers Laying In Wait?

[an]

CricketOnTheHearth, Prop 13 started in 1978. I’m not sure if that’s a coincidence or not, but I think that could be one factor. Just look at other states that don’t have prop 13, like Texas. What is so different in Texas vs CA that cause CA property to run up faster here than TX? Why can builder build a $100-200k house over there and still be profitable while they can’t do that here? Price is determine by supply and demand. Increase supply above the demand and price will fall. Why control demand while you can easily increase supply? I think it’s retard that you limit how many house a person can buy. Limiting the amount of property a person can own is almost like limiting how many car a person can buy, or how many trip a person can take, or how many pollutant a person can create. In CAR’s mind, clean air is a limited resource just like land.

[NotCranky]

CAR,
Well anyway, you specifically said you did not like low downpayment programs for poor people. I can’t figure out how to align that with your concerns for them or your socialist views.

Anyway, I know I should drop it and I will.

[NotCranky]

CAR,
Well anyway, you specifically said you did not like low downpayment programs for poor people. I can’t figure out how to align that with your concerns for them or your socialist views.

Anyway, I know I should drop it and I will.

[NotCranky]

CAR,
Well anyway, you specifically said you did not like low downpayment programs for poor people. I can’t figure out how to align that with your concerns for them or your socialist views.

Anyway, I know I should drop it and I will.

[NotCranky]

CAR,
Well anyway, you specifically said you did not like low downpayment programs for poor people. I can’t figure out how to align that with your concerns for them or your socialist views.

Anyway, I know I should drop it and I will.

[NotCranky]

CAR,
Well anyway, you specifically said you did not like low downpayment programs for poor people. I can’t figure out how to align that with your concerns for them or your socialist views.

Anyway, I know I should drop it and I will.

[SD Realtor]

Sorry Cricket but it is not just “here”. Go to Los Angeles and try to live on the west side. Go to the bay area. Trying to compare the coast of California to anywhere other then the coast of California is simply not realistic. Housing is so expensive here because people payed to live in those areas.

I feel like I am missing something. Please point out why I feel like the laws of supply and demand dont apply anymore?

[SD Realtor]

Sorry Cricket but it is not just “here”. Go to Los Angeles and try to live on the west side. Go to the bay area. Trying to compare the coast of California to anywhere other then the coast of California is simply not realistic. Housing is so expensive here because people payed to live in those areas.

I feel like I am missing something. Please point out why I feel like the laws of supply and demand dont apply anymore?

[SD Realtor]

Sorry Cricket but it is not just “here”. Go to Los Angeles and try to live on the west side. Go to the bay area. Trying to compare the coast of California to anywhere other then the coast of California is simply not realistic. Housing is so expensive here because people payed to live in those areas.

I feel like I am missing something. Please point out why I feel like the laws of supply and demand dont apply anymore?

[SD Realtor]

Sorry Cricket but it is not just “here”. Go to Los Angeles and try to live on the west side. Go to the bay area. Trying to compare the coast of California to anywhere other then the coast of California is simply not realistic. Housing is so expensive here because people payed to live in those areas.

I feel like I am missing something. Please point out why I feel like the laws of supply and demand dont apply anymore?

[SD Realtor]

Sorry Cricket but it is not just “here”. Go to Los Angeles and try to live on the west side. Go to the bay area. Trying to compare the coast of California to anywhere other then the coast of California is simply not realistic. Housing is so expensive here because people payed to live in those areas.

I feel like I am missing something. Please point out why I feel like the laws of supply and demand dont apply anymore?

[CA renter]

[quote=AN]CricketOnTheHearth, Prop 13 started in 1978. I’m not sure if that’s a coincidence or not, but I think that could be one factor. Just look at other states that don’t have prop 13, like Texas. What is so different in Texas vs CA that cause CA property to run up faster here than TX? Why can builder build a $100-200k house over there and still be profitable while they can’t do that here? Price is determine by supply and demand. Increase supply above the demand and price will fall. Why control demand while you can easily increase supply? I think it’s retard that you limit how many house a person can buy. Limiting the amount of property a person can own is almost like limiting how many car a person can buy, or how many trip a person can take, or how many pollutant a person can create. In CAR’s mind, clean air is a limited resource just like land.[/quote]

AN,

Have you ever been to Texas? Nothing but land there, as far as the eye can see.

California has approximately 91 people per sq. km., and a total population of 36,756,666 living in 403,931.96 sq. km.

Texas has approximately 35.88 people per sq. km., and a total population of 24,326,974 living in 678,051.12 sq. km.

http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/populations/usadensityh.htm
——————-

Personal Income Per Capita in Current and Constant(2000) Dollars By State: 1990 to 2005:

California is #9 in 2000, and #11 in 2005

Texas is #23 in 2000 and #27 in 2005

http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/07statab/income.pdf
——————–

Some history on Prop 13 (and why I vehemently support it):

In 1966, after an assessors’ scandal, the Legislature enacted a reform bill (AB 80) to keep assessments at a uniform percentage of market value. As a result, during the 1970s, when real estate values escalated rapidly, so did home assessments.
By 1978, with home ownership threatened by escalating property tax bills, the fate of Proposition 13 was sealed. The tax revolt was born, aided in part by the release of new assessments just prior to the election showing large increases in assessed value for many taxpayers.

http://www.caltax.org/research/prop13/prop13.htm
———————

California’s housing market has historically been much more volatile than markets in other states. Just as we’ve seen this past decade, speculators, “investors,” and immigrants (foreign and domestic) have served to drive up housing costs for native and long-time Californians. In response, California residents passed Prop 13 so that residents could no longer be “priced out” of their own homes.

This is where I strongly support private property rights. If you bought a single, primary residence, no speculator or new resident should be able to tax you out of your own home.

Like adjustable-rate mortgages, variable propery tax rates/costs make budgeting nearly impossible. Under Prop 13, buyers **choose** their tax payments when they buy a house. If all buyers were smart enough to budget for the full PITI payment, perhaps they’d learn not to overpay for their properties. They should not offer to pay a certain tax when they purchase, then complain about it later on, when the taxing authorities make they comply with their agreements.

Prop 13 protection for seniors and other prudent buyers does not bother me. It does bother me when we allow tremendously wealthy people to buy up all the homes, then force people to rent from them so the wealthy can secure a stream of income. Prop 13 effectively subsidizes their **profits** which is something I am very opposed to.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN]CricketOnTheHearth, Prop 13 started in 1978. I’m not sure if that’s a coincidence or not, but I think that could be one factor. Just look at other states that don’t have prop 13, like Texas. What is so different in Texas vs CA that cause CA property to run up faster here than TX? Why can builder build a $100-200k house over there and still be profitable while they can’t do that here? Price is determine by supply and demand. Increase supply above the demand and price will fall. Why control demand while you can easily increase supply? I think it’s retard that you limit how many house a person can buy. Limiting the amount of property a person can own is almost like limiting how many car a person can buy, or how many trip a person can take, or how many pollutant a person can create. In CAR’s mind, clean air is a limited resource just like land.[/quote]

AN,

Have you ever been to Texas? Nothing but land there, as far as the eye can see.

California has approximately 91 people per sq. km., and a total population of 36,756,666 living in 403,931.96 sq. km.

Texas has approximately 35.88 people per sq. km., and a total population of 24,326,974 living in 678,051.12 sq. km.

http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/populations/usadensityh.htm
——————-

Personal Income Per Capita in Current and Constant(2000) Dollars By State: 1990 to 2005:

California is #9 in 2000, and #11 in 2005

Texas is #23 in 2000 and #27 in 2005

http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/07statab/income.pdf
——————–

Some history on Prop 13 (and why I vehemently support it):

In 1966, after an assessors’ scandal, the Legislature enacted a reform bill (AB 80) to keep assessments at a uniform percentage of market value. As a result, during the 1970s, when real estate values escalated rapidly, so did home assessments.
By 1978, with home ownership threatened by escalating property tax bills, the fate of Proposition 13 was sealed. The tax revolt was born, aided in part by the release of new assessments just prior to the election showing large increases in assessed value for many taxpayers.

http://www.caltax.org/research/prop13/prop13.htm
———————

California’s housing market has historically been much more volatile than markets in other states. Just as we’ve seen this past decade, speculators, “investors,” and immigrants (foreign and domestic) have served to drive up housing costs for native and long-time Californians. In response, California residents passed Prop 13 so that residents could no longer be “priced out” of their own homes.

This is where I strongly support private property rights. If you bought a single, primary residence, no speculator or new resident should be able to tax you out of your own home.

Like adjustable-rate mortgages, variable propery tax rates/costs make budgeting nearly impossible. Under Prop 13, buyers **choose** their tax payments when they buy a house. If all buyers were smart enough to budget for the full PITI payment, perhaps they’d learn not to overpay for their properties. They should not offer to pay a certain tax when they purchase, then complain about it later on, when the taxing authorities make they comply with their agreements.

Prop 13 protection for seniors and other prudent buyers does not bother me. It does bother me when we allow tremendously wealthy people to buy up all the homes, then force people to rent from them so the wealthy can secure a stream of income. Prop 13 effectively subsidizes their **profits** which is something I am very opposed to.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN]CricketOnTheHearth, Prop 13 started in 1978. I’m not sure if that’s a coincidence or not, but I think that could be one factor. Just look at other states that don’t have prop 13, like Texas. What is so different in Texas vs CA that cause CA property to run up faster here than TX? Why can builder build a $100-200k house over there and still be profitable while they can’t do that here? Price is determine by supply and demand. Increase supply above the demand and price will fall. Why control demand while you can easily increase supply? I think it’s retard that you limit how many house a person can buy. Limiting the amount of property a person can own is almost like limiting how many car a person can buy, or how many trip a person can take, or how many pollutant a person can create. In CAR’s mind, clean air is a limited resource just like land.[/quote]

AN,

Have you ever been to Texas? Nothing but land there, as far as the eye can see.

California has approximately 91 people per sq. km., and a total population of 36,756,666 living in 403,931.96 sq. km.

Texas has approximately 35.88 people per sq. km., and a total population of 24,326,974 living in 678,051.12 sq. km.

http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/populations/usadensityh.htm
——————-

Personal Income Per Capita in Current and Constant(2000) Dollars By State: 1990 to 2005:

California is #9 in 2000, and #11 in 2005

Texas is #23 in 2000 and #27 in 2005

http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/07statab/income.pdf
——————–

Some history on Prop 13 (and why I vehemently support it):

In 1966, after an assessors’ scandal, the Legislature enacted a reform bill (AB 80) to keep assessments at a uniform percentage of market value. As a result, during the 1970s, when real estate values escalated rapidly, so did home assessments.
By 1978, with home ownership threatened by escalating property tax bills, the fate of Proposition 13 was sealed. The tax revolt was born, aided in part by the release of new assessments just prior to the election showing large increases in assessed value for many taxpayers.

http://www.caltax.org/research/prop13/prop13.htm
———————

California’s housing market has historically been much more volatile than markets in other states. Just as we’ve seen this past decade, speculators, “investors,” and immigrants (foreign and domestic) have served to drive up housing costs for native and long-time Californians. In response, California residents passed Prop 13 so that residents could no longer be “priced out” of their own homes.

This is where I strongly support private property rights. If you bought a single, primary residence, no speculator or new resident should be able to tax you out of your own home.

Like adjustable-rate mortgages, variable propery tax rates/costs make budgeting nearly impossible. Under Prop 13, buyers **choose** their tax payments when they buy a house. If all buyers were smart enough to budget for the full PITI payment, perhaps they’d learn not to overpay for their properties. They should not offer to pay a certain tax when they purchase, then complain about it later on, when the taxing authorities make they comply with their agreements.

Prop 13 protection for seniors and other prudent buyers does not bother me. It does bother me when we allow tremendously wealthy people to buy up all the homes, then force people to rent from them so the wealthy can secure a stream of income. Prop 13 effectively subsidizes their **profits** which is something I am very opposed to.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN]CricketOnTheHearth, Prop 13 started in 1978. I’m not sure if that’s a coincidence or not, but I think that could be one factor. Just look at other states that don’t have prop 13, like Texas. What is so different in Texas vs CA that cause CA property to run up faster here than TX? Why can builder build a $100-200k house over there and still be profitable while they can’t do that here? Price is determine by supply and demand. Increase supply above the demand and price will fall. Why control demand while you can easily increase supply? I think it’s retard that you limit how many house a person can buy. Limiting the amount of property a person can own is almost like limiting how many car a person can buy, or how many trip a person can take, or how many pollutant a person can create. In CAR’s mind, clean air is a limited resource just like land.[/quote]

AN,

Have you ever been to Texas? Nothing but land there, as far as the eye can see.

California has approximately 91 people per sq. km., and a total population of 36,756,666 living in 403,931.96 sq. km.

Texas has approximately 35.88 people per sq. km., and a total population of 24,326,974 living in 678,051.12 sq. km.

http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/populations/usadensityh.htm
——————-

Personal Income Per Capita in Current and Constant(2000) Dollars By State: 1990 to 2005:

California is #9 in 2000, and #11 in 2005

Texas is #23 in 2000 and #27 in 2005

http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/07statab/income.pdf
——————–

Some history on Prop 13 (and why I vehemently support it):

In 1966, after an assessors’ scandal, the Legislature enacted a reform bill (AB 80) to keep assessments at a uniform percentage of market value. As a result, during the 1970s, when real estate values escalated rapidly, so did home assessments.
By 1978, with home ownership threatened by escalating property tax bills, the fate of Proposition 13 was sealed. The tax revolt was born, aided in part by the release of new assessments just prior to the election showing large increases in assessed value for many taxpayers.

http://www.caltax.org/research/prop13/prop13.htm
———————

California’s housing market has historically been much more volatile than markets in other states. Just as we’ve seen this past decade, speculators, “investors,” and immigrants (foreign and domestic) have served to drive up housing costs for native and long-time Californians. In response, California residents passed Prop 13 so that residents could no longer be “priced out” of their own homes.

This is where I strongly support private property rights. If you bought a single, primary residence, no speculator or new resident should be able to tax you out of your own home.

Like adjustable-rate mortgages, variable propery tax rates/costs make budgeting nearly impossible. Under Prop 13, buyers **choose** their tax payments when they buy a house. If all buyers were smart enough to budget for the full PITI payment, perhaps they’d learn not to overpay for their properties. They should not offer to pay a certain tax when they purchase, then complain about it later on, when the taxing authorities make they comply with their agreements.

Prop 13 protection for seniors and other prudent buyers does not bother me. It does bother me when we allow tremendously wealthy people to buy up all the homes, then force people to rent from them so the wealthy can secure a stream of income. Prop 13 effectively subsidizes their **profits** which is something I am very opposed to.

[Author]

Posts