Rent Control Needs Retirement, Not a Comeback

Re:Rent Control Needs Retirement, Not a Comeback by azinman2 on Friday February 09, 2018 @11:08AM (#16341266)

Prop 13 also means my parents can afford to retire, as outside forces have come and multipled property values many times, and the city has very high property taxes. Otherwise to pay 1+% on some of the worlds most expensive real estate without active income is insane.

I liked Cambridge, MA’s model... the first 250k of your property value is removed from property taxes. Doesn’t make a dent in big expensive houses, but makes property ownership more affordable on the lower end.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Rent Control Needs Retirement, Not a Comeback by derekp7 on Friday February 09, 2018 @01:07PM (#16342429)

Keep in mind that property taxes are only soft linked to property value. If everyone's property doubles in value, and the city needs X revenue to run, it is still divided by the relative value of everyone's property. The only time increased property value causes taxes to go up is if there is a lot of other property that doesn't go up in value (or taxable value), which is what you have with Prop 13. Also, if one area becomes more affluent than another one (increasing its value), then they will pay more taxes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Rent Control Needs Retirement, Not a Comeback by crdoconnor on Saturday February 10, 2018 @08:21AM (#16347185)

>Prop 13 also means my parents can afford to retire, as outside forces have come and multipled property values many times

I'm all for older people being given hand outs so that they can afford a comfortable retirement.

In general I'd prefer hand outs to be allocated via need rather than a real estate driven lottery, but I can understand how winners of that real estate lottery could feel like it was a fair and just system.

[ Parent | on HN ]