ctindel

ctindel t1_j35kcbw wrote

The only true solution would be determining a maximum number of cars we want in manhattan at any point in time and increasing the toll to enter towards infinity as the car count approaches the limit. When people start seeing $50, $100, $500, $1000 whatever tolls they’ll turn around.

It’s a fucking island controlling the number of cars present is very straightforward. Catalina does it to a smaller scale but the idea is the same. All entry points to the island have cameras already so counting the number of cars is easy.

0

ctindel t1_j31x2br wrote

I remember trying guava nectar for the first time as an adult when I went to Hawaii. I had never tasted anything like it. There’s no way someone could have described it to me in a way I’d really understand without having tasted it myself.

I dunno maybe great therapists can imagine what guava nectar tastes like without having tasted it, but I really doubt it. The most they could do is ask “how did that make you feel when you drank it?”

2

ctindel t1_j2fr09u wrote

Sure, right. The inability for California to price people out of houses they own by cranking their property tax payments to unaffordable levels is absolutely a terrible thing that California should reverse right away and definitely no other state should implement such a wildly popular program to help the middle class and elderly.

3

ctindel t1_j2ey0ji wrote

It’s not moving the goalposts I said up front I’d be fine with amending it. Every law has unintentional side effects and very rarely is the solution to throw the law out, you just change it to minimize the side effects while keeping the main benefits. Every once in a while you run into something so dumb like the 18th amendment or making abortion illegal where the solution is a 180 degree reversal but usually you just fix the problem with small changes.

1

ctindel t1_j2e5ork wrote

Society doesn’t need to be built assuming old people will downsize plenty of people want to live in their house forever (and that’s fine) or pass the house on to their children (and that’s also fine) and it sure as shit shouldn’t tax them to the point where they have to sell their family house.

I’d have no problem with a law that allowed people over 55 to keep their old property tax payment if they sell a primary residence and move to a smaller residence that would have a higher tax burden. But I don’t think it would make as big of a difference as you think it will, but who knows until we try.

Anyway if there’s anything society should be subsidizing it’s helping middle class families and old people become and stay home owners. In a world where housing prices are going up because giant corporations and REITs are just starting to move into SFH as investments this should be on the top 5 of government priorities.

1

ctindel t1_j2dozjp wrote

Just because someone has wealth in a house doesn’t mean they can afford increased property taxes. Taxing income and cap gains is the only thing you know people can actually afford. Though I’d have no problem with property taxing stock portfolios of millionaires because at least we know you can sell some stock to pay the tax without going homeless.

−5

ctindel t1_j2co326 wrote

I don’t care about that the referendum have done far more good than harm. Keeping people from getting priced out of their home when property values rise, legalizing weed and mushrooms, giving tax payers a bill of rights so they can vote on whether they want to pay more taxes or not and get a refund of the tax estimates were too high.

Let us recall some corrupt motherfuckers while we’re at it. I’m all for a much more direct democracy especially on the most important questions of the day. Let the bureaucrats manage the bullshit that nobody wants to talk or think about.

7