176
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] gravitywell@sh.itjust.works 198 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Yeah some serious boomer logic going on here.

"We thought that if we kept the foundation and the outer walls of the house and we just took the roof off, it was our understanding that we were going to preserve our Save Our Homes and our homestead,” says Debbie."

"the renovations—removing the roof, adding a second floor —ultimately triggered a full reassessment of the home’s value. Under Florida law, once a property is deemed substantially improved, it can be treated as new construction, removing the protections that had capped the home’s assessed value for years."

[-] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 173 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Boomer logic ..... "I want all the benefits, entitlements and supports of society and none of the responsibilities."

[-] Noite_Etion@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago

Can you imagine the pain of having to pay fairly for what you own... Disgusting.

[-] krashmo@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago

I mean, bullshit strategies and apparent entitled attitude aside, she does have a point. $90k is an absurd property tax rate for a single family home.

[-] astutemural@midwest.social 6 points 2 weeks ago

Did you see the photo in the article? It's a 'single-family home' in the way a Mercedes SUV is a minivan.

I mean, yah, housing is way too fuckimg expensive. But that is very definitely not a no-frills family home.

[-] BastingChemina@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 weeks ago

The house is valued at $4.4 millions.

[-] krashmo@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

If it costs $90k for a $4 million home then a $1 million home would be taxed at $22.5k. That's still half a years salary at median wages for an average priced home in many markets. Don't let your hatred for rich people lead you to advocating for shitty policies.

[-] fireweed@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

a $1 million home [... is ...] an average priced home in many markets

I'm going with this is the actual problem.

Also, your math assumes a flat tax rate, and any decent tax system is progressive. I don't know how Florida's works, but again, actual problems.

[-] krashmo@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Inflated home values are a huge part of the problem. That's a large part of the point I'm making. At face value it seems fine to say "they have a $4 million home, they can afford the property taxes" but if you apply the same rate to the homes that average people have to buy you're going to end up in a shitty spot. If taxing the rich is the goal we shouldn't be talking about property taxes on single family homes unless it's specifically related to second and third homes.

[-] grue@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

but if you apply the same rate to the homes that average people have to buy you're going to end up in a shitty spot

And that's why you don't do that and instead make progressive taxation a thing.

If taxing the rich is the goal we shouldn't be talking about property taxes on single family homes unless it's specifically related to second and third homes.

Nah. It is good and correct to tax extremely large/valuable single-family homes at high rates even if they're primary residences.

(Of course, another aspect of the issue is that single-family houses in very high-demand areas should lose their zoning protection so they can be bought out and replaced with multifamily buildings. Reasonably-sized single-family houses should never have gotten to unaffordable valuations in the first place.)

[-] joel_feila@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

So is a single family home worth 4mil

[-] 3abas@lemm.ee -1 points 2 weeks ago

Alright, so you're a young gen z family and you buy your first home, which is all you can afford right now, you're young and you're starting your careers and your family.

In 10 years, property values have increased dramatically, and you've had a child and you're thinking about your second. Your careers are going well, and you think we should maybe get a bigger place for our expanding family. But oh no, there's an unsustainable housing marketing bubble that refuses to burst, so you can't afford a bigger place anywhere near your job. So you build UP, like they do in every multi-generational home culture, you expand your living space as your family expands.

It's not a crime or a moral failure to upgrade your home, and you shouldn't jump at the opportunity to beat someone when they're down just because you don't empathize with this particular boomer homeowner.

[-] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago

This Boomer homeowner is why those Gen Z families can't find homes. If your single family home is worth $4 million, that is the market telling you that that single family home should not exist. The land is too in demand, too close to jobs, too close to amenities etc. to have that lot hoarded by a single selfish person. You want to live in a single family home on a quarter acre lot? Fine. Do it on the edge of the city where the land is cheap. This women's lost could provide homes for a dozen families, at prices that would be affordable to Gen Z families. Instead people like her vote to prevent such redevelopment.

[-] 3abas@lemm.ee 0 points 2 weeks ago

Are you okay?

If your single family home is worth $4 million, that is the market telling you that that single family home should not exist.

Right, an unsustainable bubble, I said that. This boomer family bought a reasonably sized and priced house that's on the edge of the city, and now they're forced to sell it and not be able to replace it with a bigger home on their budget in the same part of town, they didn't fuck things up Zillow did!

The gen z family who buys today won't be about to upsize tomorrow, and you're gonna blame them.

[-] grue@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago

The fuck-up was by the city, which failed to abolish the single-family zoning in order to allow the land to be developed to its highest and best use.

[-] jj4211@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Based on the backstory, they kind of did what you said, bought it in a relatively more affordable context, and then the world changed their minds around them and retroactively declared it a multi million dollar property. Well at least for tax purposes and likely insurance, but not necessarily market rate (tax assessments commonly lag the market, so a market downturn could leave them with a multi-million dollar house that no one will pay the stated value for

[-] grue@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago

Well at least for tax purposes and likely insurance, but not necessarily market rate (tax assessments commonly lag the market, so a market downturn could leave them with a multi-million dollar house that no one will pay the stated value for

More like the house is likely worth even more than the $4.4M it was assessed at. But nice try trying to spin your point to fit your narrative.

[-] MsPenguinette@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

At the same time, that absolutely is a life altering change. Even the biggest idiots don't deserve to get their life upended. I don't know what the right solution is, but I can extend significant empathy to "I did a dumb thing and I don't know how to keep my home now without uprooting it".

I've only bought one home and it was recently. It was every bit as aweful as I expected but having seen what they are in for, they might not have the cash around nessicary to sell the home without getting scammed by predatory buyers.

The entirety of real estate is so fucked

[-] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 58 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

A professional tax attorney built a $4.4M home and expected to keep their original valuation?

That’s not a big idiot, that’s attempted tax fraud.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 20 points 2 weeks ago

Won't someone think of the poor multimillionaires?

[-] roofuskit@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

They were trying to cheat their taxes and failed. Fuck em.

[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

I’ve only bought one home and it was recently. It was every bit as aweful as I expected

I've now bought two in my lifetime. I wouldn't call either awful for my experience.

What was bad about yours?

[-] Photuris@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 weeks ago

Hot take: I’m all for fair taxation. But I also believe that if you’ve paid off your home and intend to maintain it and retire in it, you should own it outright no matter what, and no property tax should keep you from keeping and living in your own home.

In China, not the most free of nations, once you’ve paid for a home, it’s yours, forever. Property taxes aren’t a thing there like they are here. If you’re old and no longer have much of an income, you still have your home. If you become disabled, sick, or mentally ill, and can’t work like you used to, you don’t become homeless for lack of ability to pay property tax, you still have your own home.

Look, China has a lot of problems, and I’m not saying we should copy everything they do. But one problem they don’t have is homelessness or people losing homes over property taxes.

[-] roofuskit@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

I agree, we should replace property taxes with very large income and wealth taxes. First we can end property taxes and then we can implement guaranteed income so people who become disabled can afford to maintain their homes.

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The thing about yearly property taxes is they often go to the city/municipality and that's how they pay for things.

The city doesn't charge income tax, that's a state/province/fed level type thing.

We'd need a new way for cities to collect taxes themselves, or a new system to properly and fairly distribute taxes from the incomes to the cities/municipalities where they live.

Definitely doable, but it's a bit different than just raising income taxes.

[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Some municipalities may also have an income tax (completely separate from state or federal income taxes). Other states have much larger sales taxes.

[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

If you’re old and no longer have much of an income, you still have your home. If you become disabled,

We already have this is many states in the USA. Its called the "Homestead Exemption". Here's an example from Ohio:

"This is a statewide program, administered by County Auditors under rules established by the Ohio Legislature and the Ohio Department of Taxation. This allows senior citizens (65 or older) as well as permanently and totally disabled homeowners to reduce their real estate taxes by the amount equal to the taxes that would otherwise be charged on $25,000 of the market value of an eligible taxpayer’s homestead or residence. The homestead may include up to one acre of land. Under the changes made by the Ohio Legislature and beginning with applications for tax year 2014, new participants in the program will be subject to an income test to be eligible."

So matter how big your house is (as long as its on one acre of land or less and you have an income $$75k/year or below) you only get charged as though the house is worth $25k, which I think would obviously be a very low tax bill.

[-] socsa@piefed.social 3 points 2 weeks ago

This is incorrect. In China nobody owns a home. They get a lease on it from the government. For wealthy urban Chinese this has meant they get lifetime ownership so far, but this is not guaranteed.

Also if you are not born with the correct hukou then you are not allowed to purchase any valuable property at all.

[-] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

I'm sure it's possible to achieve those things if you know the right people.

this post was submitted on 15 May 2025
176 points (85.2% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

12320 readers
343 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS