[ohhnoodont]

There are ways to address this problem, but in any case this is still ultimately a very good problem for property owners to have. Their property value has increased dramatically. Being forced to move is inconvenient, but you do so with a large bag of cash.

[compiler-guy]

That big bag of cash won’t buy a community where you know most everyone and have friends of decades or more whom you support and support you in return. Social connections take a long time to build and are hard to replace with cash.

[no_wizard]

Then you need to square values here.

You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Everyone wants their home to be worth more and more year over year but doesn’t want to incur any obligation for it.

How do you square that with the idea that communities and social connections are more important? Look at what California did with prop 13. It’s a disaster by all accounts. We need to switch models not create more complicated exemptions around property taxation.

Land Value Tax is more equitable and doesn’t have the intrinsic volatility and unpredictably of how we do property taxes today which is assessed in the unit value not the land and only punishes under utilization and vacant land holdings. This encourages building and to some extent smaller parcels of land per unit built

[IG_Semmelweiss]

Seems like you are opining for "everyone", including a huge number of retirees and families on very limited income like SS or disability.

Yet somehow I dont think those two personas make any amount of the "everyone" posting here on HN

[riversflow]

I would rather have my home than a bag of cash. I’m not even old, but I did grow up here and it has immense sentimental value to me. My grandma lived in her house for over 65 years, and died in it. I doubt she would have moved for anything short of multigenerational wealth.