News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable hou... by abritinthebay on Monday October 23, 2017 @01:17PM (#15534839)
Read up on Prop 13 a bit. That’ll explain it.
Re:Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable hou... by oldsklgdfth on Monday October 23, 2017 @01:24PM (#15534917)
Related to prop 13 that is also how golf courses in cali metro areas are able to exist, despite taking up huge swaths of land and having very few members.

There was a revisionist history episode on it: http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/11-a-good-walk-spoile...

Re:Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable hou... by CalChris on Monday October 23, 2017 @01:37PM (#15535089)
That’s because Prop 13 applies to commercial real estate as well because corporations are people too.
Re:Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable hou... by taysic on Monday October 23, 2017 @03:50PM (#15536378)
Wow. That makes sense. That explains why so many seemingly infrequently visited businesses still have storefronts in Berkeley. I always wonder how they stay in business. I thought perhaps commercial rent control.
Re:Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable hou... by CalChris on Monday October 23, 2017 @04:03PM (#15536490)
Moes owns its building. Black Oak Books didn’t.

If Prop 13 wreaks havoc on housing, it’s much worse on commercial RE where it literally it spawns a class of rent seekers.

Re:Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable hou... by abritinthebay on Tuesday October 24, 2017 @12:22PM (#15542792)
Fun fact about those golf courses: Remember when everyone was freaking out about Nestle using millions of gallons of CA water during the drought?

Turns out they used the same amount as one large golf course.

Re:Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable hou... by gnarcoregrizz on Monday October 23, 2017 @01:39PM (#15535113)
prop 13 is insane. heirs are even able to inherit their parents or grandparent's tax rate (prop 58/193). i was renting a ~$600k property, where the owner was paying $600/year in tax, and the last valuation was $60k... she actually bought the property for $150k, so I think she transfered the property tax rate from a different house (you can do that if you're 55 and older). ca's overall effective property tax rate is something like .8%, so the remaining .2% is basically subsidized by newcomers, some of who pay much more than their neighbors.