Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GraceZ who wrote (12856)	8/21/2003 5:55:25 PM
From: the_wheel	Respond to of 306849

Hear Hear! I voted against those bond measures. I knew the budget was in trouble. So did Grey Davis, he is not stupid, he just wanted to get reelected. However, I agree the people that vote for the bond measures assume it is someone else's dough. I assume all the bond measures passed, they did not report them on the news election night and they were not in the election articles I read the next day, although I was looking for the results. We had a local measure that failed I do believe because someone pointed out that it would cost like a few hundred thousand and apply to only a single student in our little community, they at least had enough sense to realize that was not cost effective.

To: GraceZ who wrote (12856)	8/21/2003 7:40:08 PM
From: gpowell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Very good post and nicely sums up the issue. No doubt prop 13 has had unintended consequences. But I don't think the mindset was to do good - it was more about capping government spending - which was out of control due to inflation increased tax receipts. Of course looks like the last 5 years spending has once again gotten out of control - can't blame inflation for that.

To: GraceZ who wrote (12856)	8/21/2003 7:42:48 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

Grace I don't resent anything. I am trying to run a business. We can't get young people to work/live here, that is the issue. There is no housing for people. The housing is taken up by unproductive freeloaders, in this a desirable industrial area. Of course everybody who is not a productive tech worker sides with the freeloaders. They can see themselves in the situation of some elderly person who bought here 30 years ago and passed laws to insulate themselves from free market dynamics. People rarely see themselves living in my position, trying to hire engineering managers or whatever and having to negotiate with some spoiled, selfimportant granny in order to run a business. I can't really move, because stanford and berkeley are here, so we need to be here. I notice you fall into the same trap as some other folks here. Grace, I lost millions in the stock market bear- "paper money". The little $$ I lost in real estate pales in comparison to what I had in the bubble. It was never real money of course, but neither is home equity here, it is propped up by this law. So I have no personal axe to grind about my own economic situation, unlike others here whose entire future in terms of wealth rests on this law. My wealth picture does not rest on this law, other than the issue of whether or not I can build a company with all these headwinds like a tax system that is so skewed against the young and young companies.

To: GraceZ who wrote (12856)	8/21/2003 8:24:50 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

>>Work to lower the overall spending. Over and over I've told you that collectively you are all are paying too much. If you concentrate on that you'll do far more good than trying to beat this dead horse of the elderly yeasting off the young. It was the newer buyers that drove up the prices in the first place. Someone sitting on their house for thirty years doesn't drive up prices (thus real estate taxes) , they are driven up by people buying at the margin. Had you said back in 2000, I won't pay these inflated prices that would have been one less million dollar tract home. I did. I moved from CA because I didn't want to spend 50% of my income for a house. I'm not sorry I did that and I'm far better off than my friends who stayed even though they have a ton of home equity (I have investments instead of an expensive house). << it's almost amusing to read lizzie's and amy j's posts about the inability to pay employees sufficiently such that the new hires can actually afford to live where they have chosen to site their businesses... if they cannot afford to pay wages that enable them to pay prospective employees enough that allows them to buy inflated SV RE <g>, i really do not see how that is due to the "elderly" or proposition 13. basically they have two choices, either pay up sufficiently to attract and keep employees who can afford to live in the area OR relocate their businesses to an area where housing isn't such an issue. <edit> yeasting? <vbg>