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

High property taxes are good

brooock.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 620 posts

Re: High property taxes are good

#331

Post by Dig1t »

zdragnar wrote: post #253
zbyte64 wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably don't have bears in the area: https://newrepublic.com/article/159662/libertarian-walks-int...

Wait, why on earth is the article advising you to flee from a black bear? You literally cannot outrun a black bear- I've driven along side one that was running parallel to the road at around 30 miles an hour. If there aren't cubs around, you yell, clap and raise your arms. It'll run in a heartbeat. If there are cubs around, you back away slowly- running will just make it chase you. If it follows, stop moving.

> If it follows, stop moving.

and then what!?

Re: High property taxes are good

#332

Post by zdragnar »

Dig1t wrote: post #331
zdragnar wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, why on earth is the article advising you to flee from a black bear? You literally cannot outrun a black bear- I've driven along side one that was running parallel to the road at around 30 miles an hour. If there aren't cubs around, you yell, clap and raise your arms. It'll run in a heartbeat. If there are cubs around, you back away slowly- running will just make it chase you. If it follows, stop moving.

> If it follows, stop moving. and then what!?

That's when you play dead, to get used to how you'll be in a minute.

Realistically, it is a game of chicken. If you stop, you're signaling to the bear that you aren't intimidated. As long as it has an escape route, it'll back down.

Re: High property taxes are good

#333

Post by Aunche »

kashkhan wrote: post #37
cbm-vic-20 wrote: post #6

Land value taxes are even better. Property taxes provide a disincentive to making the land more productive. A land value tax would incentivize residential landowners to build more units which provides more supply and would lower rents.

property taxes are terrible for old people. you should be able to buy a reasonable amount of land tax free. USA has about 2.5 billion acres. 1/4 acre per person in an average area tax free is reasonable.

1/4 acre is the roughly the footprint of 432 Park Ave which is worth billions of dollars. There's no way a single old guy should be able to squat on that tax free.

The lack of property/land value taxes hurts anyone who isn't retired. I care much more about poor young people who get priced out of moving to a better job in the city than an old person who is "forced" to sell their multi-million dollar single family home. If an old person insists on living in a place where they can't afford property taxes, there are plenty of people willing to pay their property taxes until they pass in exchange for a stake in equity of their home.

Re: High property taxes are good

#334

Post by nomel »

6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #179
dwater wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way people in the US plan for old age and retirement, and the way they are treated by society, is terrible and property taxes are aspect of that. But the only way you should be able to own land tax free is if there are no government services provided on that land. No utilities, no public road, no emergency services, no municipal services. I don't know of anywhere in the US where that is an option. Unless you're s…

Why not solve it like social security? You pay in over most of your life, then retire. If you call the fire department after you’ve retired, they’ll still come because you spent a life time paying into it.

> Why not solve it like social security?

For the same reason that I'm planning my retirement without social security. Politicians can't be trusted long term. They'll write laws to allow them to use funds that were previously protected.

Re: High property taxes are good

#335

Post by frumper »

tptacek wrote: post #289
naasking wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm no anti-government squish, but there is no evidence, and a lot of countervailing evidence, that local governments can effectively (or even non-harmfully) make policy to influence the housing mix. I disagree. No planning has lead to many ghettos. The planning we've done here has avoided ghettos. I think the data is very clear on that. > When it comes to housing construction and tax incentives, what they need to…

I see no evidence at all that increased density is a livability problem for families, and plenty of --- in fact, overwhelming --- that inadequate density is a bar for access to communities in the first place. So, no, I reject this argument outright.

The evidence is that people would rather drive 2 hours each way so their family can have less density where they live. They vote with their time and wallet. This isn't some theory, it's true all over the US

Re: High property taxes are good

#336

Post by mgraf1 »

igorkraw wrote: post #31
jherskovic wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there was a supply of cheaper housing, I'd agree with this wholeheartedly. Part of the problem is that, in a lot of places (SF, NYC, Seattle, etc) you can price folks into homelessness. Sure, no one is entitled to live in a specific area, but for those who built their lives there, have a community, family, it's cruel to tell them "move to Nowheresville, OH so you can afford a roof"

I mean, either you are cruel to home owners who have capital or you are cruel to poor people. I know where my priorities would be. Or we could of course try to remove the cruelty completely by not using a market system to manage a natural monopoly (space in a community). But if you choose cruelty, at least be cruel to those that can choose to suffer as opposed that cannot really escape

How would a non market based system work for housing though? How do we decide who gets to live in places like Honolulu or Boulder?

Re: High property taxes are good

#337

Post by allenrb »

mring33621 wrote: post #312
horsawlarway wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My strong suspicion is that this will completely fuck over the elderly and marginalized communities. It also requires property owners to do EXTENSIVE research and information gathering CONSTANTLY to ensure that the number they put down is reasonable. Many of them literally can't (ex: my 87 year old Neighbor Phylis doesn't care what her house is worth, because she plans to die in it, and isn't seeking to maximize util…

"It also requires property owners to do EXTENSIVE research and information gathering CONSTANTLY" Every year in Chicago. My house has been, and still is, assessed for 600K over what I paid in Nov. 2021. It had been on the market since 2016, until I bought it. The price I paid is the value of the house. First assessment appeal denied. Second appeal lost in the system. We have to fight against an unfair and arbitrary ta…

I’m with you, mring33621. Cook Co. is ridiculous. Bought our home (in 2018) just north of Chicago, out of foreclosure. Taxes jumped far beyond what they’d been trying (and failing) to sell for prior to foreclosure. Similar experience last year with an apartment building being valued at more than twice what I’d paid (in rough condition) in an open, arms length transaction literally months earlier.

AFAICT, hiring an attorney is the way to go. Then you still have to pay, but much less overall. I’m about 80% convinced that the tax assessors are in it with the appeal attorneys to almost literally write themselves checks. Not that such misdeeds would ever occur in Chicago/Cook…

Re: High property taxes are good

#338

Post by [deleted] »

jjoonathan wrote: post #171
dwater wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way people in the US plan for old age and retirement, and the way they are treated by society, is terrible and property taxes are aspect of that. But the only way you should be able to own land tax free is if there are no government services provided on that land. No utilities, no public road, no emergency services, no municipal services. I don't know of anywhere in the US where that is an option. Unless you're s…

> tax free if there are no government services provided on that land You're still giving the "it's property" framing waaay more credit than it's due. Remember, granting someone exclusivity to a contested resource means preventing other people who would like to use the resource from using the resource. It's entirely reasonable for those people, represented in aggregate by the government, to ask for compensation in ret…

[deleted]

Re: High property taxes are good

#339

Post by monksy »

mring33621 wrote: post #312
horsawlarway wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My strong suspicion is that this will completely fuck over the elderly and marginalized communities. It also requires property owners to do EXTENSIVE research and information gathering CONSTANTLY to ensure that the number they put down is reasonable. Many of them literally can't (ex: my 87 year old Neighbor Phylis doesn't care what her house is worth, because she plans to die in it, and isn't seeking to maximize util…

"It also requires property owners to do EXTENSIVE research and information gathering CONSTANTLY" Every year in Chicago. My house has been, and still is, assessed for 600K over what I paid in Nov. 2021. It had been on the market since 2016, until I bought it. The price I paid is the value of the house. First assessment appeal denied. Second appeal lost in the system. We have to fight against an unfair and arbitrary ta…

You forgot the major rule. Hire an attorney that has serious connections with the alderman(s) and plays golf with the daileys.

Re: High property taxes are good

#340

Post by sokoloff »

tptacek wrote: post #324
sokoloff wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's plenty of landlords who own SFRs as well. Building for building, I don't think tax policy should favor landlords over owner-occupants. How zoning should work is an orthogonal question in my view.

Most owner-occupants own SFZ lots. Every owner of a multi-family dwelling is a landlord.

I'd prefer that an owner-occupant be able to write off the interest on N/N units on a parcel, just the same as a landlord is able to write off the interest on N/N units.

That's true for N=1 (SFR), N=2 (duplex, half-occupied by the owner), N=3 (triple-decker with owner living in one), or N=50.

Post reply on HN