Housing prices.

[Moonbeam]

Hahaha, I have to say that's a new one.

'You are a fascist for using the force of government to prevent me from using the force of government to ban housing I dislike.'

Amusingly enough that would make the 1st Amendment fascist as it uses the force of government to prevent people from using the force of government to suppress speech they dislike.

Which brings us full circle. Use of governmental force is determined by the will of the people in a democratic system. What is to prevent the will of the people being driven by envy or greed. Some want to preserve the lifestyles their hard work earned them even when the value of what they have was determined by circumstances they were unable to foresee would be coming, like skyrocketing real estate values. Others, owing to societal needs then want to cash in, seeking supply as the relief from the high price of demand. From your point of view why would this not look like one set of pigs going after another? And it's all just a numbers game, which set of pigs can collect the most votes at the highest level of force application.

The problem you have as a logician is on what do you base your moral code and what it comes down to in the end is just how humanistic your secularism is. You can never claim you hold your truth to be self evident because your logic is an empty vessel. You don't know what is self evident because you are not permitted to feel. Emotional truth is irrationally filthy and because you can't allow yourself to feel in that way you can't tell what is inalienable and genetically natural to man and what was put their by the vacuous lusts created by self hate.

But don't get me wrong. You do a good job working your way there by approximation. What you fail to see also in my opinion is that you do so via intellect guided by instinct, a passion for truth only aided by logic, that is your true guide. I like to think the middle man for me died along the way.

 

[fskimospy]

Which brings us full circle. Use of governmental force is determined by the will of the people in a democratic system. What is to prevent the will of the people being driven by envy or greed. Some want to preserve the lifestyles their hard work earned them even when the value of what they have was determined by circumstances they were unable to foresee would be coming, like skyrocketing real estate values. Others, owing to societal needs then want to cash in, seeking supply as the relief from the high price of demand. From your point of view why would this not look like one set of pigs going after another? And it's all just a numbers game, which set of pigs can collect the most votes at the highest level of force application.

The problem you have as a logician is on what do you base your moral code and what it comes down to in the end is just how humanistic your secularism is. You can never claim you hold your truth to be self evident because your logic is an empty vessel. You don't know what is self evident because you are not permitted to feel. Emotional truth is irrationally filthy and because you can't allow yourself to feel in that way you can't tell what is inalienable and genetically natural to man and what was put their by the vacuous lusts created by self hate.

But don't get me wrong. You do a good job working your way there by approximation. What you fail to see also in my opinion is that you do so via intellect guided by instinct, a passion for truth only aided by logic, that is your true guide. I like to think the middle man for me died along the way.

My moral code is very simple - to limit human suffering to the greatest extent possible. Since housing bans create mass human suffering I don't like them.

As far as people wanting to preserve their lifestyles I totally understand that, I just don't care. If the price for preserving their lifestyle is to use the government to inflict mass human suffering then their position is immoral.

 

[Moonbeam]

My moral code is very simple - to limit human suffering to the greatest extent possible. Since housing bans create mass human suffering I don't like them.

As far as people wanting to preserve their lifestyles I totally understand that, I just don't care. If the price for preserving their lifestyle is to use the government to inflict mass human suffering then their position is immoral.

On what basis do you justify such a moral belief. You seem to place great weight on the fact that those who bought simply by happenstance in areas that have vastly increased in value that you can force them out of their homes because they can't pay with cash the property taxes a new owner would have to pay, as if their wealth in equity supersedes their desire to stay in their lifelong community. Your estimation that money trumps life seems immoral to me.

I pay taxes to support the people in states like Greenman moved to. I am happy to be on the short end of the socialism stick. Limiting human suffering, in my opinion, means transferring it to people of income not home equity. I would be only too happy for my neighbors by the millions moved to freeloader states and left me here with property that was worthless because of no demand. Fuck the system for creating so many hungry mouths that are forced by fear of poverty to covet my land and that force you to think within the system. The answers are unworkable in that box. Competition creates hate. You seek within the system. I try to look beyond.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Too stupid to understand what you mean unless you're talking palisade. Anyway I was just having fun, mote and log and all that implies.

Those logging trucks are incredibly common in the south, from all the pine forests down there. You can't hardly drive on the highway without staring at a bundle of toothpicks.

I just thought you were referencing those. Carry on!

 

[fskimospy]

On what basis do you justify such a moral belief.

I don’t need to justify my own moral code. The reason is I think that’s what’s right and since the universe lacks any higher authority all moral codes are justified the same way.

You seem to place great weight on the fact that those who bought simply by happenstance in areas that have vastly increased in value that you can force them out of their homes because they can't pay with cash the property taxes a new owner would have to pay, as if their wealth in equity supersedes their desire to stay in their lifelong community. Your estimation that money trumps life seems immoral to me.

Yes, I think everyone should pay the same taxes on the same property. Special tax breaks for very wealthy people that then must be made up for by higher taxes on working families are bad.

I pay taxes to support the people in states like Greenman moved to. I am happy to be on the short end of the socialism stick. Limiting human suffering, in my opinion, means transferring it to people of income not home equity. I would be only too happy for my neighbors by the millions moved to freeloader states and left me here with property that was worthless because of no demand. Fuck the system for creating so many hungry mouths that are forced by fear of poverty to covet my land and that force you to think within the system. The answers are unworkable in that box. Competition creates hate. You seek within the system. I try to look beyond.

I think it would be interesting if you told working families struggling to make ends meet that you’re sorry but they have to pay higher taxes so the millionaire next door doesn’t have to tap their equity. I’m sure they would really love that.

 

[Moonbeam]

I don’t need to justify my own moral code. The reason is I think that’s what’s right and since the universe lacks any higher authority all moral codes are justified the same way.

What you mean is unjustifiable in the same way. I think I am moral therefore I am. Morality for you just mirrors the system

Yes, I think everyone should pay the same taxes on the same property. Special tax breaks for very wealthy people that then must be made up for by higher taxes on working families are bad.

Of course you do, the god you worship is a monster. Suppose we take two young soldiers early in their careers serving their country. One buys a home in coastal California circa 1975 and the other, I don't know, maybe buys in Kansas at the same time. Each pays the same price. Each has a similar property tax rate. Each serves the country to similar degrees and receives promotions along the way. Now you want the guy in California to pay the same taxes as somebody buying next door at 20 times the original price but the guy in Kansas pays on an increase in value of say 100% Neither wants to sell but you believe one should be forced to move because his wage didn't. inflate like his home valuation did.

One guy happened to buy in California one in Kansas totally unaware how demand for their homes will changed each property completely differently. Well thanks for serving. Get the fuck out of California.


As a renter who may rent from a property owner who is gaming the tax system as you seem to think is is immoral, I am sure you are doing voluntary payments to make up for what he pockets on your rent

I think it would be interesting if you told working families struggling to make ends meet that you’re sorry but they have to pay higher taxes so the millionaire next door doesn’t have to tap their equity. I’m sure they would really love that.

Struggling to make ends meet is the story of my life and why I bought a home in the first place. Rents were going through the roof and my wage owing to inflation was worth less year by year. In no time at all I was priced out of a market that buying into created a killing mortgage payment. Now people like me with kids should tap their equities so their kids can go through the same hell. And despite all that I voted against prop 13.

Stop thinking within the system and work to change it.

 

[MrSquished]

I have no issue with there being some rules that do help protect say older folks, etc, unlike @fskimospy ... but nowhere near like what is happening in Cali, what they did is fucking insane.

 

[Brainonska511]

Idk, older people probably shouldn't get massive property tax breaks just for being old. Let them use the equity in their home (or accumulate a lien on the property at the rate the municipal government could borrow at), cut a deal with a developer like people in Greece could do (developer builds a building on the property and gives two units to the original owner to live in or rent out), or downsize (of course, this requires building properties of different sizes).

I have no issue with there being some rules that do help protect say older folks, etc, unlike @fskimospy ... but nowhere near like what is happening in Cali, what they did is fucking insane.

 

[MrSquished]

Idk, older people probably shouldn't get massive property tax breaks just for being old. Let them use the equity in their home (or accumulate a lien on the property at the rate the municipal government could borrow at), cut a deal with a developer like people in Greece could do (developer builds a building on the property and gives two units to the original owner to live in or rent out), or downsize (of course, this requires building properties of different sizes).

I don't think it should be as massive as it is now and I think it should also partially be dependent on income, but based on those conditions I don't mind if there is some break.

 

[hal2kilo]

I have no issue with there being some rules that do help protect say older folks, etc, unlike @fskimospy ... but nowhere near like what is happening in Cali, what they did is fucking insane.

Sane laws like deferring property taxes after a certain age, until the estate is settled at death when they will get paid.

 

[fskimospy]

Sane laws like deferring property taxes after a certain age, until the estate is settled at death when they will get paid.

I have proposed similar things to this before and surprise, surprise, people don't want that either.

They are ashamed to say it because they know it's shitty but what they really want is exactly what you would think. They don't want to pay taxes on their increased home value but they still want to be able to sell it for full profit.

 

[Moonbeam]

Sane laws like deferring property taxes after a certain age, until the estate is settled at death when they will get paid.

Now that we have some start on eliminating housing discrimination and skin cancer protected people can start to build generational wealth hundreds of years after less protected people can afford to destroy themselves seeking the look in tanning salons, let's be sure to close that door too.

No offense, just saying a a lot of people sacrifice their lives in the hope of leaving something for their kids. Sucks for people who don't have parents or parents who have anything but even Mohamed knew to recommend that charity should begin at home.

 

[fskimospy]

What you mean is unjustifiable in the same way. I think I am moral therefore I am. Morality for you just mirrors the system

I'm sorry if you find that uncomfortable but you know it's true as well as I do.

Of course you do, the god you worship is a monster. Suppose we take two young soldiers early in their careers serving their country. One buys a home in coastal California circa 1975 and the other, I don't know, maybe buys in Kansas at the same time. Each pays the same price. Each has a similar property tax rate. Each serves the country to similar degrees and receives promotions along the way. Now you want the guy in California to pay the same taxes as somebody buying next door at 20 times the original price but the guy in Kansas pays on an increase in value of say 100% Neither wants to sell but you believe one should be forced to move because his wage didn't. inflate like his home valuation did.

One guy happened to buy in California one in Kansas totally unaware how demand for their homes will changed each property completely differently. Well thanks for serving. Get the fuck out of California.

You forgot to mention the massive financial windfall for the California guy for some reason. Gee, I wonder why.

Also, who cares if they are soldiers.

As a renter who may rent from a property owner who is gaming the tax system as you seem to think is is immoral, I am sure you are doing voluntary payments to make up for what he pockets on your rent

What on earth are you talking about?? This is just bizarre.

Struggling to make ends meet is the story of my life and why I bought a home in the first place. Rents were going through the roof and my wage owing to inflation was worth less year by year. In no time at all I was priced out of a market that buying into created a killing mortgage payment. Now people like me with kids should tap their equities so their kids can go through the same hell. And despite all that I voted against prop 13.

Stop thinking within the system and work to change it.

So I encourage you to have that conversation with those struggling working families where you explain to them they have to pay up to subsidize their millionaire neighbors. I'm excited to hear how it goes!

 

[repoman0]

Idk, older people probably shouldn't get massive property tax breaks just for being old. Let them use the equity in their home (or accumulate a lien on the property at the rate the municipal government could borrow at), cut a deal with a developer like people in Greece could do (developer builds a building on the property and gives two units to the original owner to live in or rent out), or downsize (of course, this requires building properties of different sizes).

Yeah, the ability to tap equity is a really good point. Nobody is forcing these poor millionaire old folks out because they can get highly favorable rates on a new mortgage to pay for their fairly assessed property taxes. Then they can just use their piggy bank home to pay the same as everyone else does without freeloading off of younger generations.

 

[Brainonska511]

Yeah, the ability to tap equity is a really good point. Nobody is forcing these poor millionaire old folks out because they can get highly favorable rates on a new mortgage to pay for their fairly assessed property taxes. Then they can just use their piggy bank home to pay the same as everyone else does without freeloading off of younger generations.

Also, if we allowed people to build more varied housing, people wouldn't have to age in their non-accessible housing. They would be able cash out and downsize after kids moved out (if they wanted) before old age effects kicked into high gear, reducing future costs and getting a nice chunk of change for their home.

 

[Moonbeam]

I have proposed similar things to this before and surprise, surprise, people don't want that either.

They are ashamed to say it because they know it's shitty but what they really want is exactly what you would think. They don't want to pay taxes on their increased home value but they still want to be able to sell it for full profit.

How Republican of you to rationalize your so called moral values. Your position makes perfect sense if all that were at issue is selfishness and lo and behold, that's what you see as the only motivation at play.

 

[fskimospy]

Also, if we allowed people to build more varied housing, people wouldn't have to age in their non-accessible housing. They would be able cash out and downsize after kids moved out (if they wanted) before old age effects kicked into high gear, reducing future costs and getting a nice chunk of change for their home.

Yes, while Prop 13 has a ton of awful effects one of the worst is making it a financially sound decision to live in a largely empty home in the middle of a housing crisis because you've lived there for a while.

 

[fskimospy]

How Republican of you to rationalize your so called moral values. Your position makes perfect sense if all that were at issue is selfishness and lo and behold, that's what you see as the only motivation at play.

When people tell you who they are, believe them. If all they wanted was to stay in their home then that sort of deal should present no problem. Turns out that's not all they want.

This is something that annoys me about American policy discussions - when someone pretends to hold a position they clearly don't I am under no obligation to pretend to believe them.

 

[K1052]

Some close to home news about how San Diego basically doubled the amount of housing permitted from the previous year. Still short of goals but one of a few places working aggressively in the right direction. A good chunk of this is coming from the density bonuses enacted and the extremely permissive ADU law the city adopted.

On tap are major up zonings for Hillcrest and University City that will combined allow some 60K new homes.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1811810564110450901

San Diego saw a dramatic surge in homes approved for construction during 2023, nearly twice as many as were approved the year prior and the highest number in a single year since at least 2005.

City planning officials, who said it’s likely this was the most homes approved in a single year since the 1980s, credited the surge to a variety of developer incentives spearheaded by Mayor Todd Gloria in recent years.

More than 86 percent of the new units are near transit, which could help the city meet its climate change goals. But officials said not enough are in high-resource areas with good jobs and schools.

The surge went beyond approvals for market-rate homes, which rose by 51 percent year over year. Approvals of rent-restricted homes for low-income residents were up eightfold and those for very low-income residents more than doubled.

Meanwhile in the other two big CA costal cities:

City officials said the surge is still good news, noting that San Diego approved 70 homes per 10,000 residents in 2023 — far more than Los Angeles at 49 per 10,000 and San Francisco at 38 per 10,000.

 

[Moonbeam]

When people tell you who they are, believe them. If all they wanted was to stay in their home then that sort of deal should present no problem. Turns out that's not all they want.

This is something that annoys me about American policy discussions - when someone pretends to hold a position they clearly don't I am under no obligation to pretend to believe them.

And, of course, you use your moral beliefs to pretend to know what they are stating what they believe and what is pretense. I have no doubt there are many who have ambitions to sell and avoid taxes others pay. What you described as greedy self interest in my opinion was that for some the hope is to live in their homes until death and pass them on to their children just as is possible today under prop 13 in California. To think of your children above all else strikes me as why Mammalia and other classes exist.

 

[fskimospy]

And, of course, you use your moral beliefs to pretend to know what they are stating what they believe and what is pretense.

No, I use my eyes, ears, and brain. If someone's only goal was to remain in their home they would be open to solutions that enabled that while still paying what they owe in taxes. Turns out as you say below, the have additional reasons for wanting this, primarily to keep their wealth.

I have no doubt there are many who have ambitions to sell and avoid taxes others pay. What you described as greedy self interest in my opinion was that for some the hope is to live in their homes until death and pass them on to their children just as is possible today under prop 13 in California. To think of your children above all else strikes me as why Mammalia and other classes exist.

Okay so we agree that they both wish to not pay taxes AND for their families to reap the financial windfall, just like I've said all along.

Case closed.

By the way you should be sure to add that into the conversation: 'BTW I don't just want you to pay higher taxes to support me but after I pass my million dollar property to my kids I want you to pay higher taxes to support them in perpetuity too.'

 

[fskimospy]

Some close to home news about how San Diego basically doubled the amount of housing permitted from the previous year. Still short of goals but one of a few places working aggressively in the right direction. A good chunk of this is coming from the density bonuses enacted and the extremely permissive ADU law the city adopted.

On tap are major up zonings for Hillcrest and University City that will combined allow some 60K new homes.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1811810564110450901

Meanwhile in the other two big CA costal cities:

While this is good news 70 per 10k is still woefully under what San Diego needs to be doing. I would also be interested to know what that looks like in SD county more generally as the City of San Diego comprises less than half the population of SD county.

Still, a good start if nothing else.

 

[K1052]

While this is good news 70 per 10k is still woefully under what San Diego needs to be doing. I would also be interested to know what that looks like in SD county more generally as the City of San Diego comprises less than half the population of SD county.

Still, a good start if nothing else.

The city council is aware and fairly responsive that they are not yet hitting targets. I think they'll get most of the way there eventually. They've worked aggressively to sideline NIMBY homeowner groups and add more renters to the conversation.

The other municipalities in the county can be a problem especially the wealthier ones up the coast. Though they are running into problems with the AG now when they're blocking developments that state law requires them to accommodate. Some are holding out, some are crankily caving. As long as the state gov keeps the pressure on they'll come along sooner or later.

 

[Moonbeam]

No, I use my eyes, ears, and brain. If someone's only goal was to remain in their home they would be open to solutions that enabled that while still paying what they owe in taxes. Turns out as you say below, the have additional reasons for wanting this, primarily to keep their wealth.

Okay so we agree that they both wish to not pay taxes AND for their families to reap the financial windfall, just like I've said all along.

Case closed.

By the way you should be sure to add that into the conversation: 'BTW I don't just want you to pay higher taxes to support me but after I pass my million dollar property to my kids I want you to pay higher taxes to support them in perpetuity too.'

Right, low income parents should play fair and pass laws that make their children homeless as well. This would be the equivalent of taking a gun away from someone so someone else can kill them risk free, but not as a hypothetical. You worship a system that makes people competitive and motivationally self interested and then complain about the results. If you want idealism insure people don’t live in fear. Change the system. You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear or create virtuein a corrupt system. You are spitting into the wind. The path you are on will lead to criminal gaming the system because I me me mine are the rules. It. Will require powerful authoritarianism to create your nation of docile ants. You are more like Edward Teller than Albert Einstein. The homeless can’t afford the cost of the building materials much less the costs of the land and the completed home.

The only way to house the homeless is for the government to build it and give it away and the only way to fund that would be tax on income but nobody wants to pay that.

 

[fskimospy]

Right, low income parents should play fair and pass laws that make their children homeless as well. This would be the equivalent of taking a gun away from someone so someone else can kill them risk free, but not as a hypothetical. You worship a system that makes people competitive and motivationally self interested and then complain about the results. If you want idealism insure people don’t live in fear. Change the system. You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear or create virtuein a corrupt system. You are spitting into the wind. The path you are on will lead to criminal gaming the system because I me me mine are the rules. It. Will require powerful authoritarianism to create your nation of docile ants. You are more like Edward Teller than Albert Einstein. The homeless can’t afford the cost of the building materials much less the costs of the land and the completed home.

The only way to house the homeless is for the government to build it and give it away and the only way to fund that would be tax on income but nobody wants to pay that.

Nope, remember you are the one supporting policies that cause these prices to skyrocket by using the power of government to prevent construction of housing.

You found the authoritarian all right - it’s you.