Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

blog.zactownsend.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 243 posts

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#181

Post by [deleted] »

x0x0 wrote: post #144
lubujackson wrote: post #134

I keep saying these same arguments put forth (add more affordable housing!) but the reality is that there are very specific laws that cause the crazy prices here and it ISN'T because of a lack of housing. It's lack of liquidity. First there is Prop 13, which is the Ponzi scheme that let's older owners pay basically the same tax rate forever. This means that landlords have little reason to repair or sell properties. W…

Fact: units built after 1979 are not rent controlled. Fact: neither are single family homes, including most condos if you moved in after 1 jan 1986 (30 years ago).

[deleted]

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#182

Post by youngButEager »

We hardly ever see consideration of the other party in these debates. Tenants cry about high rents. What about supply and demand? There are two main causes of supply problems: (1) tough building permitting, anti-building policy seemingly; (2) shortage of willing landlords.

If I have $5 million dollars to invest, will I invest in San Francisco where (unless I buy post-1979, and 75% of units are rent controlled in SF) -- or will I invest where I can make a return on the investment?

Shortage of willing landlords. Shortage of new construction.

Almost no one talks about the shortage of willing landlords. It's as if people think "owners have their apartment buildings, they HAVE to be landlords."

NO. See here: http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2011/05/because-of-rent-control-...

- If you make it very difficult/nearly impossible for restaurants to make money, SHORTAGE OF WILLING RESTAUARANT OWNERS.

- If you make it very difficult/nearly impossible for dentists to make money, SHORTAGE OF WILLING DENTISTS

And so on.

The reason no one considers how to entice more landlords (ie. to increase the supply of units) is -- everyone probably thinks "landlords have no choice. They MUST rent their units." It's NOT TRUE.

When public policy acknowledges this point -- maybe we can all stop believing "we don't need to entice landlords -- they have units, they MUST rent them out (so we can control and limit their business).

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#183

Post by cowsandmilk »

Agustus wrote: post #67
mdb333 wrote: post #28

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_%281... Good thoughts. You failed to mention Prop 13 which was put into place a long time ago and simply doesn't make sense anymore. It's at least part of the reason it is so affordable (in relative terms) for rich people to keep second homes here when they bought them years ago. We live in a building of 60 units where probably at least a third of those are abse…

In your example, the building you describe is a condominium? If so, then what does it matter what your tax bill is and if they are absentee owners; if the owner maintains the property, pays their bills and taxes, then you should be happy to have them. Tax reassessments during the boom of 2001 to 2007 were on track to price a lot of people out of their houses based on their current economic status. Proposition 13 and…

Firstly, California property taxes are limited by Prop 13 to being 1% of assessed value, so your $30k tax bill can only happen if your property went to $3 million. A $1 million house cannot have a tax higher than $10,000.

There are well-established solutions to your issue about people being forced out of housing with rising demand. Massachusetts allows tax deferrals up to 50% of a property value. (If you want to get technical, Massachusetts allows towns/cities to allow tax deferrals; if your city does not want to offer it, they do not have to)

So, your $250,000 -> $1 million dollar house allows up to $500,000 in tax deferrals, so you've got a lot of years you can live in that house without paying taxes. When you sell the house, you pay the taxes and also pocket a pretty sum on the appreciation in the value of the house.

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#184

Post by randyrand »

650REDHAIR wrote: post #148
lubujackson wrote: post #134

I keep saying these same arguments put forth (add more affordable housing!) but the reality is that there are very specific laws that cause the crazy prices here and it ISN'T because of a lack of housing. It's lack of liquidity. First there is Prop 13, which is the Ponzi scheme that let's older owners pay basically the same tax rate forever. This means that landlords have little reason to repair or sell properties. W…

Let's just evict everyone who isn't paying $3,000/mo for a 1 bedroom!

Not evict them, but reduce their "I was here first" privilege.

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#185

Post by vacri »

lubujackson wrote: post #134

I keep saying these same arguments put forth (add more affordable housing!) but the reality is that there are very specific laws that cause the crazy prices here and it ISN'T because of a lack of housing. It's lack of liquidity. First there is Prop 13, which is the Ponzi scheme that let's older owners pay basically the same tax rate forever. This means that landlords have little reason to repair or sell properties. W…

> virtually impossible to vacate a tenant

It should be virtually impossible for a landlord to do this. A landlord should be able to vacate a rental, perhaps, but not the tenant. :)

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#186

Post by bluejekyll »

ng12 wrote: post #180
bluejekyll wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Prop 13, which is the Ponzi scheme Prop 13 is a tax issue, not a housing supply problem. It affects schools more than housing prices. Also prop 13's worst offenders are corporations not individuals. Individual property owners sell/move on average every 7 years. And the taxes are reset at that point to market rate for the new owner. This has nothing to do with housing supply constraints, but for schools we should re…

> Prop 13 is a tax issue, not a housing supply problem If it's a tax issue that impacts the housing supply, isn't it both?

It might reduce turnover, but what your arguing is that taxes replace rent as a forcing function for making people on fixed incomes move. That wouldn't increase housing, just displace lower income people more.

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#187

Post by bluejekyll »

vacri wrote: post #185
lubujackson wrote: post #134

I keep saying these same arguments put forth (add more affordable housing!) but the reality is that there are very specific laws that cause the crazy prices here and it ISN'T because of a lack of housing. It's lack of liquidity. First there is Prop 13, which is the Ponzi scheme that let's older owners pay basically the same tax rate forever. This means that landlords have little reason to repair or sell properties. W…

> virtually impossible to vacate a tenant It should be virtually impossible for a landlord to do this. A landlord should be able to vacate a rental , perhaps, but not the tenant . :)

Even if you fix the grammar problem, it doesn't address the real issue: supply. Turnover of rentals doesn't increase supply. The core of the article is about needing more inventory.

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#188

Post by mrexroad »

bluejekyll wrote: post #178
lubujackson wrote: post #134

I keep saying these same arguments put forth (add more affordable housing!) but the reality is that there are very specific laws that cause the crazy prices here and it ISN'T because of a lack of housing. It's lack of liquidity. First there is Prop 13, which is the Ponzi scheme that let's older owners pay basically the same tax rate forever. This means that landlords have little reason to repair or sell properties. W…

> Prop 13, which is the Ponzi scheme Prop 13 is a tax issue, not a housing supply problem. It affects schools more than housing prices. Also prop 13's worst offenders are corporations not individuals. Individual property owners sell/move on average every 7 years. And the taxes are reset at that point to market rate for the new owner. This has nothing to do with housing supply constraints, but for schools we should re…

> Individual property owners sell/move on average every 7 years.

Really, on average? Just SF, or Bay Area overall?

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#189

Post by rokhayakebe »

mdb333 wrote: post #28

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_%281... Good thoughts. You failed to mention Prop 13 which was put into place a long time ago and simply doesn't make sense anymore. It's at least part of the reason it is so affordable (in relative terms) for rich people to keep second homes here when they bought them years ago. We live in a building of 60 units where probably at least a third of those are abse…

But why are people upset at others who've made a good investment 10, 20, 50 years ago. That's like telling you you have to either use your savings you haven't touched in x years or give the money to someone else to use it.

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#190

Post by bluejekyll »

mrexroad wrote: post #188
bluejekyll wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Prop 13, which is the Ponzi scheme Prop 13 is a tax issue, not a housing supply problem. It affects schools more than housing prices. Also prop 13's worst offenders are corporations not individuals. Individual property owners sell/move on average every 7 years. And the taxes are reset at that point to market rate for the new owner. This has nothing to do with housing supply constraints, but for schools we should re…

> Individual property owners sell/move on average every 7 years. Really, on average? Just SF, or Bay Area overall?

I said 7 to round up, but lmgtfy: http://www.mymovingreviews.com/move/how-often-and-why-americ...

Which claims 5 year average nationwide in the US.

Post reply on HN