6 ms·

Love it. In fact, we should have expanded it to be a "millionaire tax" where everyone who has a home worth more than $1M needs to pay a one time $50k+ tax to t

by schacon 3mo ago

Love it. In fact, we should have expanded it to be a "millionaire tax" where everyone who has a home worth more than $1M needs to pay a one time $50k+ tax to the highly efficient state government. I'm sure they can easily figure out how to sell a small fraction of their home to cover it. If there is one thing that history has proven, I think it's how valuable dry taxation is for everyone in the long term.

object-a 3mo ago
I mean, people already do pay property taxes on homes? So this isn’t a very good retort.
- schacon 3mo ago
  In California, it's capped at a knowable amount when you buy the home and pegged at the sale price. You know what it is and what it always will be when the transaction happens. The people whom have owned a house now worth a million for 30 years probably pay a few grand a year and always have. Dry taxing the technical value of their assets today would destroy millions of families. The point is that dry taxation is generally pretty stupid.
  - object-a 3mo ago
    1. The tax is not pegged at the sale price. What prop 13 actually does is limit the amount of appreciation the state can recognize for tax purposes. 2. There are lots of states/cities in the US that do not cap the appreciation of your house for tax purposes, and I don’t think it destroys millions of families. In fact the California cap is generally seen as a terrible policy because it distorts the housing market
    - JKCalhoun 3mo ago
      Any why should Prop 13 apply to commercial real estate?
  - georgeburdell 3mo ago
    I wouldn’t call it stupid, but it is a policy choice. On the other side, why should Grandma pay 5% of the property taxes as the new couple next door while receiving the same access to public services, while also pushing another family to live farther away?
malcolmgreaves 3mo ago
This is an idiotic take. The difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars is basically a billion dollars. At this scale, it’s the same comparison between a billion dollars and a homeless person.
pojnttekkn 3mo ago
[flagged]
_DeadFred_ 3mo ago
No billionaire owns a single physical house that is their entire worth and that is also their sole form of shelter. Now if you are proposing a tax on all secondary homes worth $1M or more... I'm listening.

by schacon 3mo ago

object-a 3mo ago

I mean, people already do pay property taxes on homes? So this isn’t a very good retort.

schacon 3mo ago
In California, it's capped at a knowable amount when you buy the home and pegged at the sale price. You know what it is and what it always will be when the transaction happens. The people whom have owned a house now worth a million for 30 years probably pay a few grand a year and always have. Dry taxing the technical value of their assets today would destroy millions of families. The point is that dry taxation is generally pretty stupid.
- object-a 3mo ago
  1. The tax is not pegged at the sale price. What prop 13 actually does is limit the amount of appreciation the state can recognize for tax purposes. 2. There are lots of states/cities in the US that do not cap the appreciation of your house for tax purposes, and I don’t think it destroys millions of families. In fact the California cap is generally seen as a terrible policy because it distorts the housing market
  - JKCalhoun 3mo ago
    Any why should Prop 13 apply to commercial real estate?
- georgeburdell 3mo ago
  I wouldn’t call it stupid, but it is a policy choice. On the other side, why should Grandma pay 5% of the property taxes as the new couple next door while receiving the same access to public services, while also pushing another family to live farther away?

malcolmgreaves 3mo ago

This is an idiotic take. The difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars is basically a billion dollars. At this scale, it’s the same comparison between a billion dollars and a homeless person.

pojnttekkn 3mo ago

[flagged]

_DeadFred_ 3mo ago

No billionaire owns a single physical house that is their entire worth and that is also their sole form of shelter. Now if you are proposing a tax on all secondary homes worth $1M or more... I'm listening.