this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2025
666 points (89.5% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

29174 readers
3729 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Comparing property taxes now in 2025 dollars to unadjusted original cost in 1950 dollars is nonsensical. The two numbers bear no relation nor should they.

The average social security check is $1,978 a month or $23,736 per annum. Half of that is $11,868. Lets suppose he lives in CA where the annual rate for owner occupied is 0.74%. His house would be worth approx 1.6 million dollars. To to be clear he is whining about paying the appropriate and legal tax on his fully owned 1.6M cash hoard. This is a great problem to have.

If its that burdensome he can cash out and even with rent payments for the rest of his life live great even if he has no other savings of any sort.

Looks like about $5800 a month gradually increasing with inflation for at least 25 years.

If he has another $400,000 which seems super likely since I don't think he's actually living in his 1.6M house on $12,000 a year it could be more than 7500 a month.

If we add a little realism and only include another 15 years he could probably actually withdraw about 11,000 a month.

https://www.kiplinger.com/retirement/social-security/average-monthly-social-security-check https://www.tax-rates.org/taxtables/property-tax-by-state

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I think it's the moral issue of having to cash out your own property to afford to live in something you built and already own

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Property tax funds important things like schools, emergenct services, etc.

if he was destitute otherwise would already have sold it. You are arguing in favor of a tax break for some rich prick probably worth north of 3 million not paying the taxes that pay for your kid to get a decent education because basically feels.

Its no more immoral than you giving up your income.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There is no way you can convince me that gentrification is actually good for kids. Property tax funding education does nothing but punish poor families.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Property taxes funding education, in a state like Texas where school districts are seized by the state and systematically dismantled by private equity interests operating in state-appointed positions, is a fucking joke.

This isn't strictly an issue of taxation. Its an issue of (un)representative governance forcing people into a privatized model by leveraging the pain caused through dysfunctional public services. "Oh oh! Crimes up! We need even more cops! Oh oh! Schools are failing! So we need more... checks notes football stadiums and administrative offices."

It's deliberate mismanagement intended to destroy confidence in public institutions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

For those who want more info on this, here's the wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I argue that we should replace property taxes with income taxes because property taxes lead to disparities in outcomes between different jurisdictions. Then an old man can be secure in his own property without depriving the public of funds.

And I disagree with your premise that property taxes pay for a decent education. We don't have decent education in the United States and I truly believe that no amount of money will fix that

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

The wealthy often have near zero or net negative income. It's one reason why income taxes are optional for them but property taxes ultimately aren't.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

Property taxes on your first house should not be steep. On your other houses on the other hand...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

1.6M cash hoard

Cash is liquid, the theoretical home in question is not.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

It trivially is in any hot market

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Seconded. This is inaccessible net worth. It is useless to someone who cannot take advantage of it. Sale would incur capital gains, which would be significant, and finding another property to live in would be just as unaffordable.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No. Capital gains taxes are not taken from your residence.

...does anyone in this thread actually own a residence or at least conduct a basic level of research before forming strong opinions?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Capital gains absolutely apply to primary home sales. You're just allowed to exclude the first $250k of gains, or $500k if married filing joint.

https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc701

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Lets suppose he lives in CA where the annual rate for owner occupied is 0.74%. His house would be worth approx 1.6 million dollars.

That's largely due to the property inflation from the tech sector and not consistent across the state. You could be in San Fransisco and see your land 10x in value as the city explodes around you or you could be at the ass end of Oakland or the rural east end and still live in a slum.

This guy could also be from Texas - in the exurbs of Austin, Dallas, Houston, or El Paso - and be looking at closer to 1.5-2% annual rates. Very possible he acquired some dirt cheap land in Beaumont or Bexar County only to see his $5k plot balloon to $100-200k over the course of 20 years.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Either way for California he wouldn't be affected because Californiamnproperty taxes are effectively snapshotted at time of purchase and grandfathered for people like him. If he truly bought or built 50 years ago and ows it outright then prop 13 has long capped what he pays decades ago.

People like him, in California, are subsidized by the modern generation who don't get capped by prop 13. And when he sells that house it's value gets assessed at current market value and full taxes are due from the buyer.

Put shortly, his story is likely bullshit if he's from California. And people without houses and salty about it need to do some research.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

If this was so it wouldn't be half his ss in property taxes. Average ss is 1900 a month