But they PROMISED!!!!

[meadandale]

Prop 13 slows property turnover?

I guess that’s why we are at the tail end of a housing frenzy that saw a large portion of existing housing change hands causing it’s tax basis to be reassessed.

My next door neighbor is in his eighties. He bought that house when it was new in 1954 for about 15k. Should he be paying the same amount in tax as me? That’d mean that he was paying more than 25% of his original cost for the house in taxes every year. Would that make you feel better? Of course, that’d probably mean that he and his wife wouldn’t be able to live there anymore since they are on fixed incomes and they’d probably have to be put in a home, which would be paid for with YOUR tax dollars? Still feeling better?

Last time I checked my property tax bill, the largest majority of the money was paying for school bonds; funny, because I’m single and don’t have any kids yet I’m subsidizing the schooling of everyone else’s. Yet apparently I’m the one not paying their fair share?

Yup, seems right to me….

[meadandale]

Prop 13 slows property turnover?

I guess that’s why we are at the tail end of a housing frenzy that saw a large portion of existing housing change hands causing it’s tax basis to be reassessed.

My next door neighbor is in his eighties. He bought that house when it was new in 1954 for about 15k. Should he be paying the same amount in tax as me? That’d mean that he was paying more than 25% of his original cost for the house in taxes every year. Would that make you feel better? Of course, that’d probably mean that he and his wife wouldn’t be able to live there anymore since they are on fixed incomes and they’d probably have to be put in a home, which would be paid for with YOUR tax dollars? Still feeling better?

Last time I checked my property tax bill, the largest majority of the money was paying for school bonds; funny, because I’m single and don’t have any kids yet I’m subsidizing the schooling of everyone else’s. Yet apparently I’m the one not paying their fair share?

Yup, seems right to me….

[Coronita]

I can't wait to see that happen here. I'll bid 300k for that Pienza home in 4S Ranch please. Can you imagine the hostility in that neighborhood for years to come. The new buyers(lucky) vs old buyers(screwed). That one "Dude" looks like he'll be part of the welcome wagon for the new buyers.

 

Uh recordkeeper, it's definitely going to be a Kodak moment when homes like this are $300k,  but interest on the mortgage will be like 15-20% with tighter lending rules, higher inflation, and stagnant wages. Can you imagine the hostility in that neighborhood for years to come? 

…Some of old buyers(screwed). 

…Most of the new buyers (still screwed on affordability/attainability).

…A few of the sideliners tha can buy a $300k-400k home in cash(lucky).

 

Relaxed financing and low interest was a blessing for those that could have managed their finances. If you think things are bad for the average folks now, wait until mortgage rates get insane, inflation rises, while salaries stay stagnant.You think average salaries are going to rise at the same rate as inflation to keep pace, or that interest rates are going to stay below 6.25%? You might be in for a rude awakening yourself.

 

if you're doing what most people are doing which is keeping your funds in a CD/government bond/and or money market. It's like 5.5%-6% right now tops. Is this keeping up with inflation? Nope. You willing to take the plunge into stock market and risk a downturn to try to beat inflation?

I'm not wishing a demise for the house industry. Because either way, most average joe's will get screwed too..If you're not going to be able to do a near cash-and-carry, affordability/availability is still going to be an issue.

 

[Coronita]

I can't wait to see that happen here. I'll bid 300k for that Pienza home in 4S Ranch please. Can you imagine the hostility in that neighborhood for years to come. The new buyers(lucky) vs old buyers(screwed). That one "Dude" looks like he'll be part of the welcome wagon for the new buyers.

 

Uh recordkeeper, it's definitely going to be a Kodak moment when homes like this are $300k,  but interest on the mortgage will be like 15-20% with tighter lending rules, higher inflation, and stagnant wages. Can you imagine the hostility in that neighborhood for years to come? 

…Some of old buyers(screwed). 

…Most of the new buyers (still screwed on affordability/attainability).

…A few of the sideliners tha can buy a $300k-400k home in cash(lucky).

 

Relaxed financing and low interest was a blessing for those that could have managed their finances. If you think things are bad for the average folks now, wait until mortgage rates get insane, inflation rises, while salaries stay stagnant.You think average salaries are going to rise at the same rate as inflation to keep pace, or that interest rates are going to stay below 6.25%? You might be in for a rude awakening yourself.

 

if you're doing what most people are doing which is keeping your funds in a CD/government bond/and or money market. It's like 5.5%-6% right now tops. Is this keeping up with inflation? Nope. You willing to take the plunge into stock market and risk a downturn to try to beat inflation?

I'm not wishing a demise for the house industry. Because either way, most average joe's will get screwed too..If you're not going to be able to do a near cash-and-carry, affordability/availability is still going to be an issue.

 

[contraman]

Like my dad always said “Sucker born every minute”

Sincerely, Contraman

[contraman]

Like my dad always said “Sucker born every minute”

Sincerely, Contraman

[waiting hawk]

Dude where is my “equity”?

[waiting hawk]

Dude where is my “equity”?

[barnaby33]

recordsclerk, thats a total red herring. There are lots of ways to keep people in their houses that don’t involve unfair taxation policies. First of all, how long someone has lived in a place has little to do with what infrastructure maintenance costs.

Second prop 13 is a bold faced lie, its an attempt to starve the beast, not save little old ladies. If you don’t like the way govt spends your money, vote for a govt that will do so responsibly. Don’t try and short circuit the taxation collection when its really the spending people object to.

All prop 13 really does is shift the burden from long time residents to newer ones, regardless of age. Does the little old lady next door use the roads less? How about ambulances, police and fire? I bet she uses more of those, but doesn’t pay her fair share.

Josh

[barnaby33]

recordsclerk, thats a total red herring. There are lots of ways to keep people in their houses that don’t involve unfair taxation policies. First of all, how long someone has lived in a place has little to do with what infrastructure maintenance costs.

Second prop 13 is a bold faced lie, its an attempt to starve the beast, not save little old ladies. If you don’t like the way govt spends your money, vote for a govt that will do so responsibly. Don’t try and short circuit the taxation collection when its really the spending people object to.

All prop 13 really does is shift the burden from long time residents to newer ones, regardless of age. Does the little old lady next door use the roads less? How about ambulances, police and fire? I bet she uses more of those, but doesn’t pay her fair share.

Josh

[bubba99]

Prop 13 has its merits and problems, but is not nearly as insidious as Mello-Roos(MR) taxes. For Mello-Roos, the existing residents vote a tax on new residents who cannot yet vote in the elections. It is truly a tax without any representation to those actually paying it. In one city in Northern California, the underlying bonds have been paid off due to higher than anticipated MR revenues, but the city plans to keep collecting for the life of the “planned” payoff period. IT is this type of unfair taxation that created prop 13.

[bubba99]

Prop 13 has its merits and problems, but is not nearly as insidious as Mello-Roos(MR) taxes. For Mello-Roos, the existing residents vote a tax on new residents who cannot yet vote in the elections. It is truly a tax without any representation to those actually paying it. In one city in Northern California, the underlying bonds have been paid off due to higher than anticipated MR revenues, but the city plans to keep collecting for the life of the “planned” payoff period. IT is this type of unfair taxation that created prop 13.

[Coronita]

The way i look at it. Renters should pay prop taxes to support the “infrastructure” where they are using too. Don’t they get a free ride?

[Coronita]

The way i look at it. Renters should pay prop taxes to support the “infrastructure” where they are using too. Don’t they get a free ride?

[recordsclerk]

“The way i look at it. Renters should pay prop taxes to support the “infrastructure” where they are using too. Don’t they get a free ride?”
This would be double taxation since the property owner already pays the taxes. Renters pay the rent which goes towards the carrying cost for the landlord or profit. But since we are trying to be fair, why not let the renters pay their fair share.

[Author]

Posts