41–50 of 173 posts
This will get spicy if the tax itself is upheld, but the exclusions for single family homes and 3-or-less unit buildings is thrown out. Are there any examples of a similar tax in other parts of CA or elsewhere in the USA?
"“The government cannot compel a property owner to rent his or her property to third parties without violating” the Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution, the lawsuit said." A vacancy tax no more compels someone to rent their property than an income tax compels me to be unemployed. Feels like the kind of lazy argument you'd lob up just to give your fellow rich people an opportunity to bail you out in a hyper undemo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your analogy doesn't hold, because owning and neglecting such items doesn't prevent someone else from having them. Property speculation is so runaway that landlords are keeping properties vacant because they hope to make more money on rising real estate values alone.
The number of top–end GPUs in existence is finite and surprisingly small. If I buy one, that is one fewer for everyone else to squabble over. It is in effect just the same as land, and GPU prices are much higher today than they were 5 years ago. Even 5 year old used GPUs cost as much or more than they did 5 years ago.
"“The government cannot compel a property owner to rent his or her property to third parties without violating” the Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution, the lawsuit said." A vacancy tax no more compels someone to rent their property than an income tax compels me to be unemployed. Feels like the kind of lazy argument you'd lob up just to give your fellow rich people an opportunity to bail you out in a hyper undemo…
A better argument would be that the government cannot force the person to enter into a contract with a private party.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, housing is a fundamental human need and expensive guitars aren't. Call it the Shkreli principle.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are there any limiting principles to your perspective? Do you feel it would be acceptable for your municipality to tax your disuse of expensive guitars, riding mowers, boats, or graphics cards you don't actually employ to their satisfaction?
Yes, housing is a fundamental human need and expensive guitars aren't. Call it the Shkreli principle.
Definitely a nasty tax. Another example of why you should not locate your home or business in SF - the voters love to tax anything no matter what the harmful effects are.
It’s sad because it’s true — politics and governing here seems far more insane than anywhere else I’ve lived in terms of a focus on bananas laws/taxes/regulations instead of just getting the core job done. It’s a great place in a lot of ways, that could be great in a lot more. (No particular opinion on this tax as I intend to leave regardless).
Definitely a nasty tax. Another example of why you should not locate your home or business in SF - the voters love to tax anything no matter what the harmful effects are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are there any limiting principles to your perspective? Do you feel it would be acceptable for your municipality to tax your disuse of expensive guitars, riding mowers, boats, or graphics cards you don't actually employ to their satisfaction?
Sure, if voters elect politicians who enact taxes like that, the judicial branch shouldn’t stand in their way. The remedy for that problem would be the ballot box.