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: Steve_C who wrote (205308)	5/30/2009 1:16:15 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

>>What does any of that have to do with what will happen to home prices with a repeal of Prop. 13? I do get it that a lot of you are angry about the retirement packages of Ca state employees. But let's focus on the question I asked of Live2sail.<< if you increase the cost of housing, demand will drop, all else being equal. dropping demand, all else being equal, will lower price. economics DOES NOT get more basic than that. take an econ 101 class. oh, and nobody said that housing would drop 60% b/c of a prop 13 repeal - you misunderstood (imagine that!). it was 60% form the top and there would be a marginal decrease in housing should prop 13 be eliminated. the only rational argument is the size of the hit the housing market took. >>You know, if you really want to do something about public employees, you can create a proposition to reduce or eliminate those packages. Alternately, bankruptcy is a nice alternative to eliminate those obligations. I'm predicting one of the two alternatives will occur in the next decade - it's inevitable.<< CA can't file bankruptcy. now you know.

To: Steve_C who wrote (205308)	5/30/2009 2:32:39 PM
From: Patricia Trinchero	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Yes........I agree that one of the two packages will become reality in the not too distant future. I find it impossible to start a prop to reduce the police and fire pensions because I know I would be targeted.............police and firemen stick together and that's a fact. My husband and I were once bar owners.......we know how the system works. We frequently got rides home with cops............cops that had been drinking . Once I had to grab the wheel of the car we were in while a cop was driving and had an emotional breakdown. He was a CHP with a high rank. Prop 13 has been useful to many of us. My husband and I chose not to buy upwards and instead, do upgrades on our current residence...........and thank GOd for that as the economy tanked. We can use that money we would save in tax payments for our son's college and for travel,etc. I don't need to live in a million dollar mansion to be satisfied..............my 2100 sq ft 4 bedroom, 3 bath home works fine for me. We carefully selected a good neighborhood on a cul de sac which is close to a couple schools when we bought the place back in 87. I also like the bigger lot that comes with older homes. The new houses have matchbox sized yards. We have friends that upgraded and pay huge sums in taxes............some pay 2k a month!!! We also have friends that are losing their big homes because their incomes have reduced and their taxes and payments have not been reduced.

To: Steve_C who wrote (205308)	5/30/2009 8:37:09 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Respond to of 306849

RE:"You know, if you really want to do something about public employees, you can create a proposition to reduce or eliminate those packages. Alternately, bankruptcy is a nice alternative to eliminate those obligations. I'm predicting one of the two alternatives will occur in the next decade - it's inevitable." They really only have a couple choices. 1. Re-negociate the contracts 2. Bankrupt and void the contracts. If the are Union...that throws another wrench into it. Like GM and Chrysler.