[ericd]

Nope, that wasn’t the only alternative. If it was really meant for seniors, they should’ve made it age-based, and they should’ve set reasonable limits - the yearly tax exemption should’ve been set at a 1 bedroom condo level, with them paying whatever the excess is. This would’ve encouraged the behavior many seniors in other places engage in - downsizing when their kids leave home, to allow family-sized housing stock to open up for people with growing families.

And they certainly shouldn’t have made the tax exemption inheritable. And it shouldn’t apply to corporations.

As it’s designed, the whole “don’t let seniors lose their homes” argument is pretty obviously just political cover for a pretty egregious wealth transfer scheme.

No argument about the pension liability problem, CA’s governance issues are a big reason we decided not to put down roots long term. Prop 13 is one of the bigger examples of that, in our minds.

[jelliclesfarm]

I agree. Wealth transfer should be considered as income and should be taxed moderately. There is no legal reason for kicking out seniors out of their homes from which the unrealized gains haven’t been harvested.

The truth is that most people don’t want to downsize. Why should anyone work 40-60 hours a week and pay a mortgage for most of their working adult life and taxes only to live in a condo when they have paid their dues and want to enjoy their retirement.

Should we be dictating to seniors that they deserve no more than a one bedroom condo just because they got older? Is that what you are suggesting?

That’s akin to discarding people and kicking them out of their homes. I don’t know any culture or country that would even suggest this except here in the United States. It’s actually truly appalling to me.

[ericd]

I'm not suggesting kicking them out, I'm suggesting that they pay property taxes at market rates, minus the property taxes of a 1 bedroom condo, which would be society's freebie to them. They could live in a small place and not pay property taxes, regardless of what happens with the market, or they can continue paying property taxes on a huge house, if they can afford to do so. That's more generous a deal than they'd get anywhere else in the US.

[NoRagrets]

1.in which universe do we pay taxes on good we didn't buy or sell? The gains haven't materialized. you realize that it would apply to everyone right and everyone would have to pay a different tax amount every year. Rents will fluctuate too. How does that even remotely come close to stable housing or affordable housing? 2. Will we be evicting renters if they can't pay that years rent due to market rate taxes. A foreign power can inject cash and destablise the housing stock with buying and selling easily. Thats how you destroy a nation and bankrupt its population. I am not sure the proponents of unstable housing are hearing themselves. if you dont understand the above point, there is nothing to discuss here anymore between us. 3. Taxing like that is a way to ensure that a citizen never owns property and the state becomes the landlord. That is communism. If thats what we want, we are not America anymore. Time to rewrite the constitution. 4.your comment that seniors could live somewhere smaller or cheaper is ageist. One might say that it is distillation of the truth of an ungrateful impotent underachieving parasitic loser younger generation. I might be inclined to support that notion. 5. Here is what I hear...people who should rent and are likely not qualified to own houses have been fed the fantasy that they too can own homes. This is what politicians do. They lie and rabble rouse for votes. In California, they have perfected it to an artform and start the brainwashing from school. Thats why we are an one party state. 6. The truth js that many people buy homes and can afford it in a competitive market. There is no shame in renting. People do that all the time everywhere else in the world. Its a bitter pill to realize that wishes don't align with wallets...but we are so lucky to be in California and in the USA. Especially because we have so much opportunities here for upward economic mobility. Ask any immigrant. We are all grateful to have that opportunity to start midlife in a diff country and thrilled when hard work is rewarded. Its possible. 7. Housing is important. Thats what we should focus on. Its like looking out of the window at our neighbors beautiful lit kitchen window while we neglect our own homes..and wanting their life is unrealistic. You can't order champagne on a beer budget. 8.But housing is a basic human right. We should work together and stop the govts from pitting one against the other. 9. Multi generational housing compounds is a good option in America. Asians do it..Indians, Middle Easterners. Anyone from a place with scarce resources and huge population will fund ways to conserve and build. It is one way to accumulate generational wealth. Americans haven't figured this out yet and it has worked for the Old World. Being the third most populous country in the world, we better start learning from them. There are tools like family trusts in the Western system tho'.. 10.There are many options. Singapore houses over 75% of its population in state owned rentals. Noone needs to be homeless. The ultra wealthy own homes. Would that be ok? There is a price for every form of refuge. Do we want to accept and obey rules like they do in sinagpore? 11.But what is the goal? Stable housing for all to live well and raise families or bankrupting/downsizing seniors whose home you desire? Why aren't corporations urged to operate out of cheaper locations? Why is the strategy always to penalize someone to get what we want? It is a childish tantrum. People die. All the time. Wait your turn and compete with your peers instead of driving old people out of their homes. 12.every generation works for the next one. Seniors did their part. Now the next generation should work for the next. They shouldn't expect grandpa and grandma to foot the bill for their kids future. Soft nations will fold and collapse like a souffle. Attacking the weakest and most vulnerable in society..the seniors..is indicative of this. Imagine able bodied, young people who had the very best in the world..free education...stable govt..no wars..a safety net..the top one percent of the world wanting grandpas and grandmas to live in the boondocks because they can't make it and have gotten used to importing everything, outsourcing everything and relying on cheap immigrant labor, no manufacturing, no tech innovations, just extractive ways to suck little amounts from the back of concentrated capital. Capitalism means creation of capital. We as a nation have gotten used to living on the interest of capital rather than creating it. I wish we'd stop advertising our limp youth to the whole rest if the world. Its embarrassing. 13.I am not going to address the ageist and financial suggestions for elder abuse. Because thats what it is...your suggestions.