this post was submitted on 15 May 2025
328 points (89.4% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

12157 readers
1160 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 6 points 42 minutes ago

Having your home valued at $4,400,000 is what most of us would call a nice problem to have.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 39 minutes ago

So you were house rich but they never reassessed meaning last year you paid 15k on a 3.9m home nicw

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

You don't "own" your house, peasant! You must pay the landlord his rightful share - it's called ~~feudalism~~ Freedom!

[–] [email protected] 21 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

I'm not entirely unsympathetic since property values have skyrocketed ridiculously mostly due to the super rich and hedge funds buying up housing like it's candy.

However, these people got an assessment for doing some renovations without replacing the walls or a major overhaul of the property, then promptly added a whole second floor to the building when they said they were just replacing the roof. They gambled that the assessors wouldn't take note and lost.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 56 minutes ago* (last edited 55 minutes ago)

yeah, and the guy was professionally working in the real estate space... feels like they are in the "find out" stage.

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

they should know better if they are building in a disaster prone area.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

Yearly property taxes never made sense to me. So you supposedly bought and own something, except if you don't pay the government then they can just take it away.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 38 minutes ago

The alternative is much higher income tax.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

Taxes are the price of civilization. You pay taxes on your land, because if you don't, a gang of armed thugs will come and steal it from you and bury you under it.

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

In China 70% of the population pays no income tax, a very small sales tax, and there’s no property taxes at all. Who you tax is just as important as how much you tax. It is not necessary to tax everyone in a society to maintain a modern civilization.

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

Your leaving out a critical piece of information...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

That you can own the building, but the property is on a 75 year lease that can be extended two times for under a hundred dollars for a total of 225 years of that home being in your family for less than the cost of a single years property tax anywhere in the US?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 hours ago

Taxes are, but not necessarily property taxes - they're just one of the many possible ways to tax people.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

I see your point for general taxes, but if the federal and state government are already taking your income and many other things how come they're also taking so much in property tax? Many other countries seem to be able to protect you and give you what you need without property tax.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 37 minutes ago

Most modern nations have higher taxes especially on the rich

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Because collecting only one type of taxes would cause massive economic distortion and would inevitably burden people unequally. Different taxes have different properties. Some hit certain groups harder than others. Some hit certain types of businesses harder than others. Far better to have a whole series of modest taxes than one form of ruinous taxation. Do some countries not have property taxes? Yes, but they're small tax havens that aren't really a good model for the vast majority of nations.

But as far as optimization, consider some examples.

Property taxes also work best at the local level because the spending needs of municipalities don't swing heavily with economic conditions. The federal government has spending needs that vary wildly with the economic cycle. During a recession, the federal government needs to massively ramp up its spending. But at a local level, a recession doesn't mean you suddenly need twice the number of firefighters. Property taxes are pretty steady over time, so they're a good match for the needs of local government. The federal government's income tax revenue goes down during a recession, but that's ultimately fine, as the federal government controls the currency. They can afford to sustain massive deficits during bad years and make it up with surpluses in the good years. (Well, if the federal government was functioning as designed.)

Income taxes also make more sense for government entities whose jurisdictions are difficult to avoid. If you fund your city entirely with income tax and no property taxes, you may find your community completely overrun by retirees who want services like anyone else, but don't actually earn much taxable income to pay for them. If you fund your city entirely through a large sales tax, people can just drive and shop outside of city limits. It's much harder for people to avoid federal income tax simply by moving house. Unless you're leaving the country entirely, you're not avoiding the reach of federal income taxes. (And sometimes even that doesn't cut it!)

But property taxes? The only way to avoid those is to not live in the city at all. Which, from the city's perspective, is fine. If you don't live in the city, then you're not putting much burden on the city's infrastructure and services. But if you want to live in the city and enjoy all the benefits that come with living in a city, you have to pay the city's property taxes.

In short, different taxes have different properties, different benefits and drawbacks. Funding a society through a diverse arrangement of taxes allows much more efficient optimization of these taxes. It's a much more intelligent system than just trying to fund it all with one big dumb tax of a single type. That's more the way of Medieval head taxes, not modern nation states. We used to have simple tax systems. We stopped using them because we realized there were better ways to do it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (3 children)

Like almost every issue, property taxes aren't a binary issue - it's not a matter of either having them or not having them. There's the sub-issue of how the rates are set. Simply tying property taxes to home value isn't fair, because the burden a person puts on city services doesn't increase just because the perceived value of their home rises. You don't actually receive any of that value until you sell your house and leave, but you're taxed on it anyway. Being taxed when you sell the house would make perfect sense to me, because that's when you actually reap the benefits.

The argument that people in high-priced neighborhoods are rich and can afford or deserve to pay higher property taxes is unrealistic. Recent newcomers, yes, but not people who bought homes when they were still cheap because the area wasn't so desirable. Those people are no different from people who buy cheap houses today, they just did it a long time ago. But they get charged premium rates because the perceived value of their home increased. That way of assessing property taxes isn't fair, it's just bureaucratically easy.

I think property tax should be heavily weighted by the original price you paid for your house, and should go up with inflation and the cost of services. It should not be flatly tied to the price you would get for your house if you hypothetically sold it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I think property tax should be heavily weighted by the original price you paid for your house, and should go up with inflation and the cost of services. It should not be flatly tied to the price you would get for your house if you hypothetically sold it.

That is how you end up with California, where the old generations get wealthy, and the young generations are driven out of the state completely.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 23 minutes ago) (1 children)

Yes, the economic conditions in a state with 40 million people are probably due to one specific factor. Classic meme-level thinking!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 19 minutes ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 minutes ago* (last edited 11 minutes ago)

So are about a million other things that have happened in the 40 years since prop 13, yo.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

China is a small tax haven?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago

I suppose they haven't. But they are planning on doing so. And their lack of a property tax is a major reason their cities struggle financially.

Also, the key context here is that land in China is technically owned by the state. It's leased out on very long term ground leases, but it's all still owned by the state. In principle, the government doesn't need to add another property tax, as it's already leasing out the land. It would be like if a landlord also charged property tax to their tenants.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 hours ago

I don't know about where you live, but here the property taxes pay for the locality's services: streets, parks, city employes salaries, snow removal, garbage removal, summer camp, community center, etc. So this taxe is very useful. Now, it needs to be well managed and it's a whole other topic.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›