Celebrating 10 years! 2007-2017

California's Prop 13

I was looking at property taxes owed on an $800,000 home in finklebots04/17/17
Proposition 13 serves the same function now that it did when cacrimdefense04/17/17
Our budget is balanced, with a small surplus that we're cont guyingorillasuit04/17/17
I guess. I should note the source of my rant is my in-laws w finklebots04/17/17
It should have been for a limited time, ending BEFORE the Bo propita04/19/17
The Bay Area is full of houses like that. Just drive around municipald104/20/17
You need not worry. California has ways to force old people imoothereforeim04/17/17
finklebots (Apr 17, 2017 - 4:23 pm)

I was looking at property taxes owed on an $800,000 home in the bay area. Only $2,180 was owed for last year with an assessed value of only 152,000! I understand that back in the 70's old people being forced out by rising property taxes was a real issue, but the pendulum has swung too far the other way. Boomers need to pay their fair share or gtfo.

Reply Like (0)
cacrimdefense (Apr 17, 2017 - 8:03 pm)

Proposition 13 serves the same function now that it did when passed in the late 70's (and was of benefit to non-Baby Boomers). It prevents the elderly and retired in CA from being forced out of their homes by wildly growing property values, and the govt. rape that comes w/ them. The same fail safe that keeps the reduced rates from going on in perpetuity - death - will catch up w/ folks now in their 50's and 60's, as it did w/ their parents, the original beneficiaries of the measure.

As for suggestions that the problem here is a failure of people to "pay their fair share," please. Since Jerry Brown began his second go-round as governor, the state annual budget has grown to over 130 billion dollars, from about 99 billion when he took the office.

Californians are already ridiculously overtaxed to pay for every idiotic social justice notion that comes into the heads of the Democrat dominated legislature. There will never be enough money to keep these folks satisfied.

Reply Like (0)
guyingorillasuit (Apr 17, 2017 - 8:44 pm)

Our budget is balanced, with a small surplus that we're contributing to a rainy day fund. There is a federal grants component, but that is true for every State. California citizens pay a ton of money into the federal treasury.

http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/budget/2017-18/#/Home

Reply Like (0)
finklebots (Apr 17, 2017 - 11:04 pm)

I guess. I should note the source of my rant is my in-laws who are occupying a property they inherited from their parents by trust. Nice people, but extreme hoarders who are ruining their only asset. If they had to pay higher property taxes, they would have to let go of all their storage facilities they are paying on.

Reply Like (0)
propita (Apr 19, 2017 - 10:17 pm)

It should have been for a limited time, ending BEFORE the Boomers started taking over. What happened was, prices started to rise, so oldsters couldn't/wouldn't downsize but held on to their houses, leading to a lack of "family-sized" houses. So prices rose. Circle repeat.

As for me, my mom has her house and a rental. If she doesn't have to sell for her care, I'll get 1/3 when she passes.

I'm trying to help her get out of her financial mess. So far, so good.

Reply Like (0)
municipald1 (Apr 20, 2017 - 11:12 am)

The Bay Area is full of houses like that. Just drive around Monte Sereno, Los Altos, or Saratoga.

Lots of good estate sales around here.

Reply Like (0)
imoothereforeim (Apr 17, 2017 - 9:28 pm)

You need not worry. California has ways to force old people out. Few can actually afford to stay in the state after a certain age.


California just passed a 50B tax hike on gas and electric cars (on top of the already-highest tax on gas). Sales taxes are also rising (close to 10%) in LA. Water is exceedingly expensive, and electricity cost will continue to rise as a matter of policy. Old people will be forced out eventually.

Reply Like (0)
Post a message in this thread