Hacker News Reader

Comment by 0_____0 | Hacker News Reader

One begat the other. Of all the places that tried this, California has been the most successful at turning itself into an economic structure for enriching property owners to the detriment of everyone.

California ate its seed corn and now reaps only hunger.

View on HN

I don't think California's overall policy of enriching entrenched land owners is very different from other states. I believe the other states are only slightly behind California in terms of housing crisis phase.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/04/california...

Prop 13?

Prop. 13 is not unique. Michigan, Oregon, Massachusetts, and New York (ex. NYC) all have very similar limits on the rates of change of property taxes.

OK, that's four states. But you said "I believe the other states are only slightly behind California in terms of housing crisis phase." That sounds like all the states, or at least most of them. And I'm pretty sure that's not true.

I live in Mass and while Prop 2½ does exist it isn't universal. Property tax in my municipality is based on current assessment, and the assessment is updated yearly.

Your property tax is tied to the property value at purchase rather than reassessed over time. This, coupled with the enormous growth of CA property prices over the last 70 years, results in existing land owners paying way less taxes than their neighbors. Like 10x less tax is not uncommon.

This creates a ton of really perverse incentives - but an overwhelming one to buy and hold rather than sell or move. So it limits California housing stock.

Prop 13 mixed with California’s obscene wealth creation both make land there uniquely valuable

Yep. My hope is that other states learn from California's mistakes and correct their policies before they get tested by serious population growth in cities. Seems like that's happening to a degree (supported by examples in the article you linked).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com