Comments on: Realtors’ initiative could boost home sales, limit property taxes

By: SeeSaw

SeeSaw — Sun, 17 Dec 2017 06:39:03 +0000

In reply to Phil. Instead of getting rid of the Prop.13 beneficiaries, why don't we go back to affordable pricing for houses! Who can pay $400,000 for a box with 3 bedrooms and two bathrooms in order to live in it themselves? We don't have resident owners any more. We have owners who are running motels in residential neighborhoods!

By: SeeSaw

SeeSaw — Sun, 17 Dec 2017 06:32:00 +0000

In reply to Phil.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Do some research on what the tax rate was prior to 1978 and then figure out what you taxes would be now if Prop 13 had not passed. I was one who voted against the proposition. I still live in the same 55-era tract house–but if no changes had been made in the property tax law, and if my house were being taxed now at the rate that was in effect then, my property taxes would be $12,000. As for this proposed initiative–I am against it. You are not going to get rid of me and my 1978 taxes, until the day I die!

By: ken

ken — Thu, 07 Dec 2017 11:58:03 +0000

In reply to Phil. Cal is full of govmnt agencies and oversite boards and commissions that not only not do their jobs but make what they were supposed to fix worse. Ex: They werent just friendly with, but the PUC were partying with PGE when they blew up San Bruno. And now they made wine country look like the land of mordor. Between the 2 incidents 0 jail time and no mention of Firing PGE and putting the contract out to bid.

By: Ulysses Uhaul

Ulysses Uhaul — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 17:41:56 +0000

In reply to Dallas.

Tech improvements have made real estate marketing more relevant for consumers…..buyers and sellers should be able to negotiate costs of marketing, transaction nuances and misc third party obscene fees……the real estate kabal needs fresh air and price cuts galore…

By: Dallas

Dallas — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 14:08:14 +0000

A diversion of the state-sanctioned real estate monopoly at a time when the absurdity of taking a 6% commission on a transaction that should cost 1% or less with the increase in housing inflation.

They have legal control over the listing and can effectively block competition from cutting the buy/sell spread. All the competition is getting listings and customers and none is in reducing transaction costs.

By: Ulysses Uhaul

Ulysses Uhaul — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 05:57:47 +0000

Biggest real estate earthquake is every town building a mall…..cities get part of the sales taxes. Now we have tons of junk property wanting for customers. Sales tax collections waning…..commercial blight just around the corner…..

Special credits or incentives run amok and now give seniors a tax break……ugly.

By: eck

eck — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 03:45:07 +0000

In reply to Michael. Maybe that's there only interest. But so what? It's mainly about keeping the state from screwing (mostly) seniors.

By: eck

eck — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 03:42:07 +0000

“the equal treatment clause of the constitution”. You obviously don’t have a clue as to the Constitution. It’s not about a pays more than b. It’s about the rules of who pays what.

By: Phil

Phil — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 00:52:00 +0000

I’ve got a better idea. Cap property taxes but get rid of Prop 13 beneficiaries. It violates the equal treatment clause of the constitution to have two side-by-side neighbors paying radically different real estate taxes. I can’t think of anything more unfair in America.

By: Michael

Michael — Sat, 02 Dec 2017 23:36:08 +0000

This article should be titled “Realtors initiative to boost falling sales”. I am sure that’s their only interest