|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:This is a dumb hill to die on. Most of the people being forced out of the Bay Area due to skyrocketing rents and property values do not have the huge benefit of getting to sell a $1M+ property as they leave. The fundamental problem is that property here has become too expensive. Fairly taxing property based on its actual current value is partially responsible. We can plainly see this by comparing California real estate values to the prices of property in other states and countries - even those that are also experiencing booming economies and population growth. Yes, CA is special, we have good weather, etc. etc. this is a very convenient way of dismissing the problem. The grandma factor is a red herring. But the hill I'm dying on I guess is also a lack of deep sympathy for someone whose luck was to buy some property 30 or 40 or more years ago on a normal working class salary and see that investment turn into a million dollars now, complaining about paying tax on that million dollar property while everyone who pays rent, or who buys property now, has to pay (irrespective of their age and gender and possession of grandchildren). Should people be forced out of their houses? Generally, no, I don't actually think so. But where is the sympathy for all the people who aren't your wealthy grandma being forced out of their communities without the benefit of that windfall profit? They are suffering that fate in part because of your Grandma's unfair tax benefit. The ability to build generational wealth needs to be equally available to everyone. When it's reserved for property owners, that's akin - obviously not identical, but with some of the same long-term dangers - to how Europe wound up with a landed aristocracy controlling the country. Maybe not in terms of political control, but certainly in terms of economic control. The wealthy plunder the poor in part through rents, which are collected by the wealthy property-owning class. While Grandma may choose not to leverage her million-dollar property to acquire and pay for more property, she could, and many many Grandmas did, both by direct borrowing, and by inderectly having more disposable income available due to absurdly low property taxes that do not even keep up with inflation, much less property values that have risen much much faster than inflation.
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 17:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 02:59 |
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Most of the people being forced out of the Bay Area due to skyrocketing rents and property values do not have the huge benefit of getting to sell a $1M+ property as they leave. The fundamental problem is that property here has become too expensive. Fairly taxing property based on its actual current value is partially responsible. We can plainly see this by comparing California real estate values to the prices of property in other states and countries - even those that are also experiencing booming economies and population growth. Yes, CA is special, we have good weather, etc. etc. this is a very convenient way of dismissing the problem. The grandma factor is a red herring. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 17:42
|
|
|
ProperGanderPusher posted:The property, located within spitting distance of Pismo Beach, is appraised at “only” 700k (it was appraised at 300k ten years ago when both grandparents were still alive), which is completely insane since there are no jobs in that town. Oh yeah, the whole Five Cities area blew the gently caress up because SLO has been underdeveloped for decades, partly because of organizations like "Preserve the SLO Life" that just flatly oppose all development. Meanwhile, the same people complain about all the traffic commuting into SLO for work and nobody can put two and two together on the subject.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 17:42
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:The one inhabited by children Ages Newborn through 5 years, where Grandparents are a vital assist to parents and the kiddos don't know better than complain about Grandma's plastic sofas and secret windfall $5 handshakes. Maybe if Grandma is providing such great servics to her family, in addition to sitting on a valuable property they will inherit tax-free, they could pool their resources to help her pay a fair property tax? I actually think the American standard of families disintigrating and segregating their wealth is a bit perverse and gross too. If we're going to treat Grandma's property as actually family property, with transfer of wealth between generations essentially untaxed (the "death tax" exemption was already $2.5M before the republicans got ahold of it this year, I forget if it's gone up now or not but who cares, $2.5M covers almost all of the wealthy prop 13 grandmas in question today), why not treat a fair tax burden on that property as also a family responsibility? Again though, the real issue here is that Grandma would have voted in favor of those new apartments down the street if she knew that while it would probably lower her property values, it'd also lower her taxes proportionally, allowing her to stay in her home and also bear a fair share of the burdens of economic growth and prosperity along with the benefits.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 17:45
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Again though, the real issue here is that Grandma would have voted in favor of those new apartments down the street if she knew that while it would probably lower her property values, it'd also lower her taxes proportionally, allowing her to stay in her home and also bear a fair share of the burdens of economic growth and prosperity along with the benefits.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Yup. Just another form of FYGM. gently caress Your GrandMa?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 17:57
|
|
|
MarcusSA posted:gently caress Your GrandMa? gently caress You Grandma, Move gently caress You, Grandma Money
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:00
|
|
|
CPColin posted:Oh yeah, the whole Five Cities area blew the gently caress up because SLO has been underdeveloped for decades, partly because of organizations like "Preserve the SLO Life" that just flatly oppose all development. Meanwhile, the same people complain about all the traffic commuting into SLO for work and nobody can put two and two together on the subject. A lot of LA olds move up there to retire and get away from the bustle of SoCal, so I’m totally not surprised at the substantial turbo-NIMBY presence in SLO.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:04
|
|
|
Let’s think of two grandmas. Granny O owns a duplex in Palo Alto. She lives in one unit and rents the other to her lifelong best friend, Granny R, for a pittance. Both have roughly equivalent fixed incomes. If Granny R dies, Granny O could cash in by renting her now vacant unit for enormous profit. If Granny O dies, her several grandkids who all hate each other only marginally less than they collectively hate Granny R inherit the property AND it’s low tax assessment. They evict R, sell the property for millions and split it amongst themselves. Granny R is a homeless 80 year old within half a year. Prop 13 proponents often seem to be arguing that because Granny’s O and R have the same fixed income, they are equally poor. So what I am saying is, let all the Granny Os in California build and rent ADUs to cover the reassessment of their taxes to reflect there actual value after we repeal Prop13, tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:05
|
|
|
Don’t worry, with the political realities of Californian any goon expecting a sweet sweet payday when gramps finally kicks it will still get to keep it. We’d be lucky if we got prop 13 phased out over 100 years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:06
|
|
|
Hermsgervørden posted:We can conceive of two grandmas. jesus loving christ
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:07
|
|
|
Let me use this example: Imagine four grandmas built houses on the edge of a cliff. Say a direct copy of the grandma's house nearest the cliff is sent to the back of the line of houses and takes the place of the first house. The formerly first house becomes the second, the second becomes the third, and the fourth falls off the cliff. Prop 13 works the same way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:10
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Let me use this example: Imagine four grandmas built houses on the edge of a cliff. Say a direct copy of the grandma's house nearest the cliff is sent to the back of the line of houses and takes the place of the first house. The formerly first house becomes the second, the second becomes the third, and the fourth falls off the cliff.  pacifica.jpg
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Let me use this example: Imagine four grandmas built houses on the edge of a cliff. Say a direct copy of the grandma's house nearest the cliff is sent to the back of the line of houses and takes the place of the first house. The formerly first house becomes the second, the second becomes the third, and the fourth falls off the cliff. Somebody draw a picture of Johnny I-5 Dustbowls (O.C. Do Not Steal).
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:22
|
|
|
Yeah I think you'll need provisions for Olds, teachers, vets and so on if you want any chance of a 50% favorable opinion on your repeal or replace 13 legislation. Ripping the band-aid off at this point is not going to sell.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:24
|
|
|
First the Obamacare death panels, now Leperflesh literally wanting to throw her on the streets. When will the Democrat persecution of grandmothers end?
Shear Modulus fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Jun 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:28
|
|
|
quote:Yeah I think you'll need provisions for Olds, teachers, vets and so on if you want any chance of a 50% favorable opinion on your repeal or replace 13 legislation. Ripping the band-aid off at this point is not going to sell. It's so nice that we didn't do anything recently around the bay area where we blocked affordable housing for teachers and low-income university employees. I mean, everyone cares so much about teachers. quote:First the Obamacare death panels, now Leperflesh literally wanting to throw her on the streets. When will the persecution of grandmothers end? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:33
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Let me use this example: Imagine four grandmas built houses on the edge of a cliff. Say a direct copy of the grandma's house nearest the cliff is sent to the back of the line of houses and takes the place of the first house. The formerly first house becomes the second, the second becomes the third, and the fourth falls off the cliff. CPColin posted:Johnny I-5 Dustbowls You guys are loving killing me
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
Okay, so my take on the ballot is: Senate: Kevin de Leon. Seems like the best candidate politically, and also I'm forever frustrated with Feinstein. From what little I've read, I actually like Alison Hartson better, but she seems unlikely place in the top two, whereas de Leon has a good shot at it. Governor: John Chiang. My thinking is he hits the sweet spot of "decent enough politically" (although I like Delaine Eastin better) and "likely to make top two" (although Antonio Villaraigosa is clearly more likely). I had a lot of trouble deciding here--I think Antonio Villaraigosa is pretty clearly the more strategic vote, but he's got his corruption scandals, the whole 2012 DNC thing, his "taking on teacher's unions" crusade, and I think I would just feel dirty voting for him. So John Chiang it is. Prop 68: Yes. This seems like a bunch of pretty reasonable environmental policy. The Noice Proposition: Yes, although I always struggle with these things. In general I dislike tying the hands of the legislature, instead more-or-less trusting them to legislate well, but transportation is really important and I want to see it remain a priority. This proposition seems like a good way to accomplish that. Prop 70: No. See above, I'm generally against controlling exactly how governing bodies can spend public money. Especially if it requires a 2/3rds majority to overturn. Prop 71: No. Why limit the flexibility of the implementation dates of the ballot system? Prop 72: Yes. I get the arguments already posted in this thread, but I also think that it's important not to dis-incentivize rainwater collection and honestly I think at this point Prop 13 is never going away for primary residences. What does everyone think of this? Anything major that I'm missing about one of these candidates / propositions?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 19:14
|
|
|
So I'm at about 1 text an hour now. You guys doing better or worse?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 19:16
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:So I'm at about 1 text an hour now. You guys doing better or worse? 1 or 2 a day. Ballot's in the mail already so I ignore them
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 19:21
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:Prop 71: No. Why limit the flexibility of the implementation dates of the ballot system? I just read the arguments about this one more closely. In the rebuttal to the argument for, some guy with no title and no affiliation says that waiting until after the election is certified for a proposition harshly punishing pedophiles to go into effect could theoretically give them 38 more days to commit crimes. And therefore the proposition is bad. Anyway, I'll either vote Yes or abstain. It passed the Legislature unanimously and is only on the ballot because it's a constitutional amendment. It also allows propositions to specify that they won't go into effect immediately, so there isn't really any flexibility that's being eliminated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:Prop 71: No. Why limit the flexibility of the implementation dates of the ballot system? Incorrect. No proposition can actually become law until all of the votes are tallied. The current constitution dictates that propositions should take effect the day after the election, opening us up to situations where mail-in and/or provisional ballots swing the result so that a proposition which everyone has already started following was actually defeated. Prop 71 just makes it so that can't happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 19:50
|
|
|
I'm getting 2 or so texts a week, but I voted by mail the day I received my ballot and whenever I get a text, I respond to say that I have already voted and how I voted.VikingofRock posted:Prop 71: No. Why limit the flexibility of the implementation dates of the ballot system?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:So I'm at about 1 text an hour now. You guys doing better or worse? I'm at zero texts, total. They don't know I exist yet. Yet. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:33
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:Okay, so my take on the ballot is: just throw a vote in for Delaine
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
Agreed, a vote for anyone but Newsom is essentially a protest vote. Either compromise your principles and embrace our robot overlord, or just vote for Eastin.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:46
|
|
|
Xaris posted:villaraigosa is basically a vile corrupt republican who realized it would be a non-starter to go that route. gavin, although not good at all, would be way loving better than that piece of poo poo and he's gunna end up getting there anyways. Because I'd love Eastin but gently caress my life if it's like TonyV 45, Newsom 20 and the rest poll at like 3% Oh Hai thanks Trump Thread: Face The Bloodshed posted:CA-GOV FilthyImp fucked around with this message at 20:52 on Jun 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
CPColin posted:I just read the arguments about this one more closely. In the rebuttal to the argument for, some guy with no title and no affiliation says that waiting until after the election is certified for a proposition harshly punishing pedophiles to go into effect could theoretically give them 38 more days to commit crimes. And therefore the proposition is bad. To be fair, this is pretty funny and up there with the guy who ran for governor with a platform of quarantining pedophiles on Catalina Island. E: Although it's a tier below the guy who ran for county board of supervisors here that used to have a youtube video of him singing the theme song to Ducktails but with the lyrics changed to be about chemtrails. King Hong Kong fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Jun 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
I had actually misread Prop 71 and thought that it forbid propositions from going into effect at a later date than the one prop 71 specifies. Thank you everyone for clarifying! I'm changing my vote to yes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
I have to say I think I like Dave Jones's stance on gun control but I have concerns about his proposal to perform executions by putting death row inmates on a boat, sailing it into the middle of the ocean, and sinking it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:So do we have any metrics for their estimated votes yet? quote:Feinstein (D): 38%  Dehumanize yourself and face to Feinstein
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:
The general election is still five months away. Although if De Leon doesn't make the runoff then lol rip.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 21:57
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:
I'll still vote De Leon in the hopes he gets through, but he's got a shitload of work to do against someone that's loving ancient and probably should step aside by now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 22:08
|
|
|
We can only hope that some brave adventurer discovers Feinstein's phylactery before the general.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:We can only hope that some brave adventurer discovers Feinstein's phylactery before the general. speaking of.... http://thedollop.libsyn.com/330-feinstein-and-the-flag
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:So I'm at about 1 text an hour now. You guys doing better or worse? I'm doing much better. Just got one asking if I plan on voting for Gayle LcLaughlin for Lt. Governor. I replied that I had planned to, but thanks to the spam text, I would now be voting straight-ticket Republican. We'll see if they reply.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
CPColin posted:I'm doing much better. Just got one asking if I plan on voting for Gayle LcLaughlin for Lt. Governor. I replied that I had planned to, but thanks to the spam text, I would now be voting straight-ticket Republican. We'll see if they reply. Lol, they won't. Canvassers like that are trained not to waste time on anyone who can't be won over to vote for their candidate or convinced to donate/volunteer. I've gotten two texts, both asking me to vote for McLaughlin and Armendariz. That's it this entire year.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:Yeah I think you'll need provisions for Olds, teachers, vets and so on if you want any chance of a 50% favorable opinion on your repeal or replace 13 legislation. Ripping the band-aid off at this point is not going to sell. You could just go after the low hanging fruit and exempt commercial property from prop 13 protections. As it currently stands, commercial property gets purchased by a shell holding company and then never sold again. Anyone who wants the building simply buys the shell company and retains the same tax burden.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 02:59 |
|
|
Canvassers are trained to put people into categories at every contact attempt. The categories are typically Support/Oppose/Maybe/Did Not Respond. If you are in Maybe or Did Not Respond, they will attempt to contact you again, Oppose they will stop contacting you, Support they will stop contacting you until the Get Out The Vote effort begins unless you vote early. They will also stop contacting you if you vote early because your name will drop off the Department of Elections list of people who haven't voted yet. The Department of Elections can take a day or two to update their list, and campaigns may not have the manpower to frequently get a new list from the Department of Elections and cross check it with the responses they've already gotten. Plus it may take a couple days to pass around to all their offices what response they got on someone was, so it might take a few days for campaigns to stop, but campaigns will stop trying to contact you if you either 1) make a support/oppose statement at every contact attempt or 2) vote early. I voted early and have responded with a support or oppose statement to every text that I have gotten, so have only gotten 8 texts about the primary.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 23:45
|
|