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

How did an entire state price itself out for entry-level home buyers?

builderonline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 172 posts

Re: How did an entire state price itself out for entry-level home buyers?

#61

Post by whamlastxmas »

lsc wrote: post #56

So, the case that expensive housing hurts California businesses is well stated and intuitive, (and I don't disagree) But I was considering a counter point the other day. Homeownership here means mid level engineers who have lived here a decade or two often have access to seven figure credit lines. What effect does this have on the entrepreneurial side of things here? To be clear, I am not putting this fourth as a ful…

>What effect does this have on the entrepreneurial side of things here?

The effect is that an already privileged group is more privileged than they previously were (financial flexibility to try a startup), and those less privileged are driven away and forced to relocate.

Here's my unformed thought from this: are startups hurting progressive/socialist movements in the US? Their benefit is that they're lean and efficient. They do more with fewer people and fewer resources. This means fewer jobs.

Re: How did an entire state price itself out for entry-level home buyers?

#62

Post by whamlastxmas »

lambdasquirrel wrote: post #7

On the flip side, does this state have enough water for the other 10-odd million people who'd be living in those 3.6 million homes?

Yes, many times over. It doesn't have enough for twice the population while continuing the existing agriculture.

Re: How did an entire state price itself out for entry-level home buyers?

#63

Post by ghaff »

moultano wrote: post #40
toomuchtodo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's the "character" of their neighborhood. > Somehow we've gotten into a cultural state where everyone expects the place they live to stay exactly as it is for their lifetime. I think this is just human nature. > It's totally implausible and destructive, but people fight for it anyways, even when it isn't in their financial interest. I disagree. Simply look at Europe or historical districts in the US. Its definite…

>I think this is just human nature. Probably, but I suspect we can trace the triumph of NIMBYism to the baby-boom reaching the "get off my lawn" age. >I disagree. Simply look at Europe or historical districts in the US. Its definitely not implausible, and only destructive to new citizens who want to live there (that don't have an existing vested interest in the area). If the area being "preserved" was limited in some…

>But the reality is that new housing is simply illegal in every positive population growth city in the country.

Las Vegas? To name one. High population growth. A lot of building.

Re: How did an entire state price itself out for entry-level home buyers?

#64

Post by ScottBurson »

xrange wrote: post #11
nugget wrote: post #3

The more prohibitively expensive California (and the Bay Area in particular) becomes, the better it is for the rest of the country - entrepreneurial talent has already started to relocate elsewhere, and I expect this trend to continue, perhaps even accelerate, in the future. There are advantages to having a single, super-dense concentration of business, marketing, and engineering talent but there are also (in my opin…

> the better it is for the rest of the country - entrepreneurial talent has already started to relocate elsewhere It's only better if they move elsewhere and refuse to vote for the same policies that caused the problems in the first place.

Yes. I've started to wonder whether there is anyplace in the US that has both (a) California-style restrictions on non-compete clauses in employment contracts and (b) a Land Value Tax [0] as its primary local tax (not necessarily excluding a state income tax). Since the LVT is not widely used, it looks like the answer is probably No.

I think anyplace that wants to attract tech companies should enact both of these things. (Of course, they won't suffice if there's no other reason to move there.)

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-compete_clause#California

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax

Re: How did an entire state price itself out for entry-level home buyers?

#65

Post by twblalock »

ScottBurson wrote: post #60

“Cities will tell you that from a property tax perspective, housing is a loser,” says David Cogdill, president of the [California Building Industry Association]. I was trying to make this point a few weeks ago here on HN, in a discussion on Prop. 13, and got pushback. I take this quote as evidence that it's common knowledge among people in the housing industry. Prop. 13 disincentivizes cities from adding housing. Pro…

Of course a disincentive to sell will be created by your proposal! Any lien that comes close to offsetting or canceling out the owner's gain will do that. The lien doesn't have to exceed the gain to create a disincentive. Why would anyone sell for little to no gain? Any time the potential gain is decreased, a disincentive to sell is created.

Furthermore, not only does this create a disincentive to sell, it also creates a disincentive to buy. Buying property becomes a lot less attractive when the same disincentive that applies to the current seller will apply to buyer in the future, when the buyer decides to sell the home.

Re: How did an entire state price itself out for entry-level home buyers?

#66

Post by gozur88 »

ScottBurson wrote: post #64
xrange wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the better it is for the rest of the country - entrepreneurial talent has already started to relocate elsewhere It's only better if they move elsewhere and refuse to vote for the same policies that caused the problems in the first place.

Yes. I've started to wonder whether there is anyplace in the US that has both (a) California-style restrictions on non-compete clauses in employment contracts and (b) a Land Value Tax [0] as its primary local tax (not necessarily excluding a state income tax). Since the LVT is not widely used, it looks like the answer is probably No. I think anyplace that wants to attract tech companies should enact both of these thi…

Since Pennsylvania is the only state with an LVT it should be pretty easy to ascertain whether or not it fits your conditions.

Re: How did an entire state price itself out for entry-level home buyers?

#67

Post by Grishnakh »

Waterluvian wrote: post #12
nugget wrote: post #3

The more prohibitively expensive California (and the Bay Area in particular) becomes, the better it is for the rest of the country - entrepreneurial talent has already started to relocate elsewhere, and I expect this trend to continue, perhaps even accelerate, in the future. There are advantages to having a single, super-dense concentration of business, marketing, and engineering talent but there are also (in my opin…

I live near Waterloo, Canada. It feels very good for us as we have always struggled to convince people to come live in the snowy abyss rather than cozy California.

From everything I've read, it's not that easy for Americans to emigrate to Canada.

Re: How did an entire state price itself out for entry-level home buyers?

#68

Post by Grishnakh »

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #21
lambdasquirrel wrote: post #7

On the flip side, does this state have enough water for the other 10-odd million people who'd be living in those 3.6 million homes?

Uhh, yes. California might have to export a bit less alfalfa. The vast majority of water use is agricultural.

Yes, and it's also frequently very wastefully used in agriculture. More water-efficient agricultural practices need to be mandated.

Re: How did an entire state price itself out for entry-level home buyers?

#70

Post by chiph »

thefalcon wrote: post #39
twothamendment wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep waiting for California to go the way of Israel and have more fresh water than they need. It would really help out the West if the coast could make use of the water that is right next to them. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/israel-proves-the...

How do we go from waiting to doing?

Convince the people living along the coast to allow the construction of a desalination plant nearby. Which won't happen because it'd devalue their million-dollar property (multi-million in places like Laguna Beach).
Post reply on HN