News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Liberalizing Land Use Regulations: The Case of Houston (2... by zip1234 on Monday May 03, 2021 @09:53PM (#27033242)
California's property tax system is completely messed up to prevent that person from ever having to move or be impacted in any way. Why does that person get to be exempt from change when everyone else has to deal with it?
Re:Liberalizing Land Use Regulations: The Case of Houston (2... by majormajor on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @01:43AM (#27034397)
"The person causing change should pay for it" seems equally reasonable as a starting point. Perpetual growth has problems of its own.

California's mistake may be ONLY protecting homeowners from newcomers bringing change, and leaving renters out to dry.

Re:Liberalizing Land Use Regulations: The Case of Houston (2... by epistasis on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @01:01PM (#27039806)
I don't think "perpetual growth," is really what people complain about. what they really mean is that they want to shortchange everyone who does not already have housing.

There are a finite number of people with finite needs. Growing the housing stock to house this finite number of people is not "perpetual growth" and it's downright offensive to say that when we camps of homeless people, camps of people in RVs without other housing, camps of people in their cars, people working full time but only able to afford overcrowded housing, and at the same time enormous wealth within miles.

A society that allows such destitution while others have enormous wealth is not one that is running well. It shortchanges us all, economically.

Re:Liberalizing Land Use Regulations: The Case of Houston (2... by sagarm on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @12:07AM (#27033969)
They could just file for postponement or use a reverse mortgage/HELOC to pay their societal obligations. This idea that people should get to keep the entire windfall while shortchanging their communities is ridiculous.