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

San Francisco faces fiscal chaos

wolfstreet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 67 posts

Re: San Francisco faces fiscal chaos

#41

Post by jki275 »

aphextron wrote: post #37
Wolfenstein98k wrote: post #5

San Fran is a bizarre place. I'm an Aussie, an Americanophile, and I was in the States for months last year. San Fran was simply unpleasant - the people were rude (young and old) and everything cost too much. The taxes were insane too. I couldn't bear to live there - Salt Lake City seemed to have the most similar upsides with next to none of the downsides.

>"I couldn't bear to live there - Salt Lake City seemed to have the most similar upsides with next to none of the downsides." SLC seems nice in theory, until you realize Utah is a theocracy. Not a great place to live for anyone outside the LDS church.

I assume you're trying to use hyperbole, but there are no theocracies in the US. LDS definitely has a great deal of influence in Utah, but there are plenty of non Mormons who live there and have no issues living there.

Re: San Francisco faces fiscal chaos

#42

Post by eanzenberg »

mylons wrote: post #33
mc32 wrote: post #21

CA has always been about boom and busts. Governor Brown knew this and kept a tight fist on the purse strings... to the chagrin and annoyance of the “we’re rich, let’s spend” crowd. If it were not for his fiscal conservatism it’s be even worse. Of course SF is the poster child for spending copious amounts of money on pet projects while ignoring the big issues.

CA’s booms and busts now, for the state and city governments, is almost purely centered around Prop 13. The NIMBYs won. Unless you have owned a home for decades and have insanely low property taxes it’s extremely hard to weather these cycles. NIMBYs gain from the booms, and relax during the busts. And as a result of Prop 13 the state relies heavily on income taxes, when people leave or lose their jobs there goes the…

Prop 13 is just homeowner fiscal responsibility. Repeal it and watch as existing homeowners are forced out of their homes onto God knows where, for factors out of their control, and in the hands of government officials who decide how much something is worth.

Also, I’m not sure how many funds this would ultimately raise. Houses will flood the market as existing homeowners can’t afford their taxes, putting downward pressure on housing costs and ultimately decrease tax revenue.

Re: San Francisco faces fiscal chaos

#43

Post by thoughtstheseus »

quxpar wrote: post #36
mylons wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They create money via debit issuance. You’re not wrong, but they in fact just created 3T+ dollars that kinda went everywhere unaccounted for. It’s just easier to say they can print money because the common man doesn’t quite understand how debt translates into new money.

You're like halfway through the expanding-brain meme. It ends with 'actually, they just add a few zeroes to a few balance sheets, printers don't need to be involved'. All this theory around debt is a rationalization of the money printer.

Or cut off a few zeros and slap on a new name like Iran just did.

Re: San Francisco faces fiscal chaos

#44

Post by 2trill2spill »

aphextron wrote: post #37
Wolfenstein98k wrote: post #5

San Fran is a bizarre place. I'm an Aussie, an Americanophile, and I was in the States for months last year. San Fran was simply unpleasant - the people were rude (young and old) and everything cost too much. The taxes were insane too. I couldn't bear to live there - Salt Lake City seemed to have the most similar upsides with next to none of the downsides.

>"I couldn't bear to live there - Salt Lake City seemed to have the most similar upsides with next to none of the downsides." SLC seems nice in theory, until you realize Utah is a theocracy. Not a great place to live for anyone outside the LDS church.

Ohh hogwash, I live in Salt Lake for half the year and I am non religious and I love the place. Salt lake city is one of the best cities in the country for people who love the outdoors, particularly mountains.

Re: San Francisco faces fiscal chaos

#45

Post by staticautomatic »

diogenescynic wrote: post #12
drfuchs wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmmm. There was a lot of local support for the city to get rid of that very-problematic McDonalds, as the police were being called there on an average of once per day over drug dealing, shootings, etc. And the lot is slated to be developed into high-density housing, which is typically a popular notion in the HN crowd. https://sf.curbed.com/2018/4/2/17188892/haight-steet-mcdonal...

Sure, but a homeless tent camp is a far cry from high-density housing. How long do the locals have to deal with a tent camp and all the associated problems? If you don't understand why spending $15.5m to actively make the lives worse of the locals and not really solve the problem--then I think you're missing why SF has budget problems. >For some nearby residents, the decision was met with dismay and frustration and a…

For as long as it takes. We should turn civic center into a giant homeless camp sitting as a painfully constant reminder outside the windows of city hall, the courthouse, the department of public health, and the state buildings.

Re: San Francisco faces fiscal chaos

#47

Post by 2trill2spill »

jakebol wrote: post #23
Hongwei wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canuck here who spends a lot of time in the States (or used to). SLC also has some of the most underrated and inexpensive skiing just 30 minutes out from the airport.

Underrated it is not, just search for Cottonwood Canyon traffic jams to see what skiing really is like here when the snow flies. 30 minutes no traffic, can easily be 3+ hours now.

Exactly, a normal drive from my apartment to Brighton or Snowbird is about 45-50 minutes, I've had several times where it was just short of 3 hours one way, this past season.

Re: San Francisco faces fiscal chaos

#48

Post by thorwasdfasdf »

mylons wrote: post #33
mc32 wrote: post #21

CA has always been about boom and busts. Governor Brown knew this and kept a tight fist on the purse strings... to the chagrin and annoyance of the “we’re rich, let’s spend” crowd. If it were not for his fiscal conservatism it’s be even worse. Of course SF is the poster child for spending copious amounts of money on pet projects while ignoring the big issues.

CA’s booms and busts now, for the state and city governments, is almost purely centered around Prop 13. The NIMBYs won. Unless you have owned a home for decades and have insanely low property taxes it’s extremely hard to weather these cycles. NIMBYs gain from the booms, and relax during the busts. And as a result of Prop 13 the state relies heavily on income taxes, when people leave or lose their jobs there goes the…

And, while new residents and the next generation are paying insanely high property taxes, the NIMBYs pay a small fraction of the real property taxes. And, big businesses like Stanford and all the countless farms that fill up much of the land across CA, are paying a tiny fraction of the property taxes that any resident would pay.

Re: San Francisco faces fiscal chaos

#49

Post by firloop »

eanzenberg wrote: post #42
mylons wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CA’s booms and busts now, for the state and city governments, is almost purely centered around Prop 13. The NIMBYs won. Unless you have owned a home for decades and have insanely low property taxes it’s extremely hard to weather these cycles. NIMBYs gain from the booms, and relax during the busts. And as a result of Prop 13 the state relies heavily on income taxes, when people leave or lose their jobs there goes the…

Prop 13 is just homeowner fiscal responsibility. Repeal it and watch as existing homeowners are forced out of their homes onto God knows where, for factors out of their control, and in the hands of government officials who decide how much something is worth. Also, I’m not sure how many funds this would ultimately raise. Houses will flood the market as existing homeowners can’t afford their taxes, putting downward pre…

> Prop 13 is just homeowner fiscal responsibility.

This argument doesn’t hold up when you consider that Prop 13 applies to much more than single family homes; commercial property is included and wealthy land developers benefit greatly from the measure.

Re: San Francisco faces fiscal chaos

#50

Post by mc32 »

eanzenberg wrote: post #42
mylons wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CA’s booms and busts now, for the state and city governments, is almost purely centered around Prop 13. The NIMBYs won. Unless you have owned a home for decades and have insanely low property taxes it’s extremely hard to weather these cycles. NIMBYs gain from the booms, and relax during the busts. And as a result of Prop 13 the state relies heavily on income taxes, when people leave or lose their jobs there goes the…

Prop 13 is just homeowner fiscal responsibility. Repeal it and watch as existing homeowners are forced out of their homes onto God knows where, for factors out of their control, and in the hands of government officials who decide how much something is worth. Also, I’m not sure how many funds this would ultimately raise. Houses will flood the market as existing homeowners can’t afford their taxes, putting downward pre…

You could apply it to new sales —grandfather current owners to minimize that effect.
Post reply on HN