> I think something like California's Prop 13 that puts a cap on property tax increases is a better idea

Prop 13 is one of the worst ideas in taxation ever. It would be better just to let the aged and disabled freely defer property taxes beyond a certain, income-based level (and maybe also to let other people do the same with certain limits on total deferred amount relative to assessed value for time-unlimited deferrals, and total time for value-unlimited deferrals.)

We have that already. The California Tax Postponement Program. It stacks on top of Prop 13.

Prop 13 is just a handout, it could disappear overnight and grandma wouldn't have to pay a dime.

> We have that already.

Roughly, yes (it's not exactly what I am describing, but pretty close); I’m saying if you are looking for a model to stop that problem elsewhere that has neither, copying Prop 13 (or even just the assessment increase limit, even if applied only to owner occupied primary residence) isn't the thing you should reach for.

Right. But the thing to realize about Prop 13 is that it was passed in malice. Angry voters wanted a "tax revolt" because they were upset with the state. That's why it expands to all property and not just primary residences (Jerry Brown's Prop 8 on the same ballot in 1978 was targeted but voters shot it down).

Of course nowadays it's easier to hire behind grandma than it is to defund school buses.

land use must be fair. You should tax excessive ownership of land.

Most old do not live in assisted care. ANd healthcare is independent of land ownership.

CA is extremely screwed up on how it taxes. I used to live in Cupertino where some people were paying taxes on 2 million dollar lots valued at 100k.

Land is not equally valuable so you can't look at the total land area of the USA and declare that everyone should be entitled to one tax free plot of land, land in the middle of Manhattan has a different value than land in the middle of a mountain range that's covered in 20 feet of snow half the year and is only accessible by helicopter.

Most old do not live in assisted care. And healthcare is independent of land ownership.

I didn't say "assisted care" my father lived almost his entire life on his own, but still had assistance from his children and occasionally a home healthcare worker - this is a lot harder to do if his allocated tax-free plot of land is 100 miles from family or healthcare services. Healthcare is independent of land ownership, but isn't independent of location - after one medication change, he had to go back to the doctor daily for monitoring for a couple weeks, then weekly after that for 6 months. How would he do that it it was a 4 hour round trip to the nearest healthcare facility?

Yes, people who have the property value go up around them should be kicked out of their homes. Goodbye old people and minorities who live in affordable neighborhoods that become gentrified. Kick them out on the street for failing to plan for possible future dynamics in their neighborhoods. It's the only fair thing to do.