you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 24 points 5 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    You use the carrot or the stick. Using both at the same time makes no sense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Don’t use a carrot and stick.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Name anything that's not either one or the other... 🤷🏽‍♀️

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)
  • I know you are trolling but let me get on the same pedantic level.

    A pizza riding a rat could be either a stick or a carrot. It's a stick to those who hate rats and are lactose intolerant. It's a carrot to the plebs that think a pizza party is a bonus. Hell is coming with entertainment. It's riding a rat.

    Try again.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -15 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    Because a property tax hike only hurts the middle class

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    Are there middle class property owners in New York city?

    I feel like middle class would all be renters there and upper class wealthy the only actual owners.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago* (2 children)

    Just like every other cost related to owning and maintaining a rental: property taxes get passed down to renters.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Do you suppose a wealth tax wouldn't also be passed on to renters? Should we just not tax the rich at all since they'll just pass the cost on to their tenants?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    There is one way a wealth tax probably wouldn't be passed down to renters.

    If everything over a certain point is taxed at 100%.

    Including stocks and all that stuff that rich people typically store their money.

    That way it doesn't matter if they increase the rent they still won't get more money out of it so there's no point in increasing it.

    They may be incentivized to sell properties in that case to bring property values down and therefore rent.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    Wrong. Renters already pay what the market is able to bear.

    Landlords aren't like "we'll leave money on the table just because our renters were suckers and didn't vote for people that will raise our taxes."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    You have fallen for propaganda, this simply isn't true.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -12 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Please enlighten me how a property tax increase doesn’t hurt the middle and lower class disproportionately. I’d love to hear this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    Someone replied fifty minutes ago with an answer. You have no interest in learning why you're wrong, stop pretending to give a shit.

    For everyone else, in NYC the middle class disproportionately rents. It is the wealthy who own.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 5 months ago* (3 children)

    the middle class disproportionately rents. It is the wealthy who own.

    Just like every other cost related to owning and maintaining a rental: property taxes get passed down to renters.

    This tax hike disproportionately affects middle and lower class individuals.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    No, this is just what the landlords say, like how they say raising wages would impact jobs. It's just not true. Landlords already charge the maximum people are willing and able to pay, they can't really pass those costs on. Just like how in fact companies hire based on how many employees they need to fulfil their contracts, and it's only affected marginally by the wages.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    When a cost goes up for all owners at once, this leads to everyone raising rent prices at the same time. There is no opportunity for a renter to jump ship to a cheaper property, they all went up. The maximum changed.

    Yes, this will price out many people from being able to afford housing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    That would leave properties empty with high taxes, pretty bad financial decision for a landlord. Leaving properties empty to land bank works if they don't have to pay anything but it would be ruinous in this scenario. They will lower prices.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    That would leave properties empty with high taxes

    Welcome to New York City. This is already the case.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    No, it's not. Currently taxes are not nearly high enough to impact the value proposition of doing that while you expect significant capital gains. Increased property taxes additionally lower property values and exactly counteract that. Those properties are not empty for funsies, their owners expect to make a profit doing that. With stagnating or falling prices and high taxes they will be quickly motivated to sell or rent, at a price a middle class or lower class person is actually able to pay.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    No, it’s not.

    Vast numbers of empty properties in NYC are the current reality. This conversation will not be able to continue if demonstrable facts are being denied.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Not if paired with a rent freeze. Obviously. But you knew that already. You're just here to agitate for the bourgeoise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Economists of all stripes agree rent control doesn't work. A mere 2% think it has positive effects, according to a 2012 survey by the IGM Forum.

    The analysis of rent control is among the best-understood issues in all of economics, and – among economists anyway – one of the least controversial. In 1992, a poll of the American Economic Association found 93 percent of its members agreeing that 'a ceiling on rents reduces the quality and quantity of housing.


    NYC renters have suffered enough. Why would you subject them to failed policies like rent control?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 5 months ago*

    Rent control isn't rent freeze. But rent control is also a great thing, even if it, like many efforts to support the working class, is consistently derided by the capitalists.

    You are bad at agitating. Find a new mark, pussy.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    It really sucks having so many useful idiots looking out for the people taking advantage of them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago

    You don’t understand basic economics. You are poor and blame everyone else and want others to needlessly suffer. There are several 100k homeowners in NYC that will have their mortgages raised by 9% and will be forced to sell their homes and displace their families. Rich people do not pay these taxes. They write them off under business expenses because all their homes are under LLC.

    These types of taxes disproportionately hurt middle class. It’s doesn’t hurt lower class because y’all don’t own homes anyway but it increases the threshold for the buy-in so that some of yall can start building wealth with your first home but you ask for property tax increases so it keeps you poor. But ya blame the middle class some more.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    Like most taxes it's possible to do a progressive property tax, where the more your properties are collectively worth the higher rate of tax you pay. This doesn't sound like what is being proposed here, but it is very-much possible and hopefully it gets changed before it's passed.

    Done right this will leave owner/occupiers in the same state they are in now, mildly reduce the profitability of small time landlords and make large scale landlords financial nonsense viable forcing them to sell.

    The actual risk is that because it lowers house prices by artificially reducing the demand it won't encourage housebuilding which is the only real solution when more people want or need to live in a place than there is housing.

    That said, I am optimistic this increases supply enough by forcing sales of under occupied properties to offset the reduction in built supply.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    I'm pretty sure property taxes aren't progressive and I'm baffled as to why.

    Make it so like the first 100k is taxed low, and then ramp up so people with millions of property pay through the nose.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    What the fuck is a "middle class?" We don't have one of those anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    I'm increasingly of the belief that we never had a middle class, just a fiction of one

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago*

    It depends who you ask, but I tend to hold that the middle class is somewhere between plumbers with a sole proprietorship and petit-bourgeois family businesses up to a point. They do still exist, but it's such a vanishingly small class I'm not exactly sure why I as a worker should be expected to defend their interests when they so rarely defend mine.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    I'm considered middle class despite being something like in the top 10% of earners in the US and I don't own any property. I don't know if I could afford to own property with their current prices. I'm not certain property taxes hit the middle class as much as they might have back when my parents were in their prime. Of course it still hits a percentage of the middle class, but I'm suggesting that percentage is shrinking and smaller than the revenue it would generate from the rich.

  • source
  • parent