89
submitted 9 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

After 33 years and four children, Baby Boomers Marta and Octavian Dragos say they feel trapped in what was once their dream home in El Cerrito, California.

Both over 70, the Dragos are empty nesters, and like many of their generation, they’re trying to figure out how to downsize from their 3,000-square-foot, five-bedroom home.

“We are here in a huge house with no family nearby, trying to make a wise decision, both financially and for our well-being,” said Dragos, a retired teacher.

But selling and downsizing isn’t easy, appealing or even financially advantageous for many homeowners like the Dragos family.

Many Boomers whose homes have surged in value now face massive capital gains tax bills when they sell. This is a kind of tax on the profit you make when selling an investment or an asset, like a home, that has increased in value.

Plus, smaller homes or apartments in the neighborhoods they’ve come to love are rare. And with current prices and mortgage rates so high, there is often a negligible cost difference between their current home and a smaller one.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ComradePorkRoll@lemmy.world 27 points 9 months ago

Feels like the crux of this whole thing is that housing shouldn't be an investment.

[-] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Good luck changing that. Housing has been a promised vehicle for wealth growth to multiple generations.

[-] Pringles@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago

Or build more apartments maybe? The entire housing crisis in the US could be easily solved by adding sufficient apartments in the right places.

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 0 points 9 months ago

How could it be changed so it wouldn't be?

Land is mostly a set resource with new developments and cities slowing. Home development follows land and while there's been a boom, overall it's been slowing. As there are more people, demand for housing increases.

All of this drives cost of homes up. So the longer you are in a home, the more it and/or the land it worth. Usually outpacing inflation. So when you sell, it's worth more. It's an investment by default even for those people who own 1 normal-sized single family home. It was an investment even when housing prices were reasonable decades ago.

[-] pruwybn@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 9 months ago

How could it be changed so it wouldn’t be?

I watched a video a while back that talks about how in Tokyo housing is seen as more of a consumer good than an investment, and explains why:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6ATBK3A_BY

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 3 points 9 months ago

Interesting. So there's 2 main reasons and 1 knock-on effect on why Tokyo (not Japan, just Tokyo) has affordable housing.

  1. They build a LOT of housing. Tons of dense housing which most other countries don't match.
  2. 55% inheritance tax, no exemption. Meaning generational accrual of wealth from houses can't happen.

The first one is achievable nearly everywhere and would be quite popular. Except with those who already own homes. Building high-density housing will lower housing prices for those nearby. The video covers this well.

The second isn't going to work in the US. Homes are the #1 generational wealth is accrued and how people rise in economic standing. From paycheck-dependent to stable, etc. Trying to take that away without some other way to build wealth and especially without a national retirement system is going to be deeply unpopular.

Another aspect I found very interesting: Tokyo demolishes and rebuilds every house on average every 30 years. That's wild to me. They build for safety but not longevity. No one wants a pre-owned house. Couple this with the inheritance tax and I imagine most older people will just sell their homes or pass down only a small amount. Japan's Public Pension System makes this feasible as well and without that I can't see this becoming viable in America.

I also wonder how wasteful that kind of demolition ends up being.

[-] Blooper@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Extremely wasteful - and that's to say nothing of the obvious climate impacts from said waste. It's one hell of a drawback to what I would otherwise describe as a system that works pretty well.

[-] betheydocrime@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Public housing would be a step in the right direction

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 2 points 9 months ago

We've had that in the US and they're referred to as "the projects."

[-] betheydocrime@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago
[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 1 points 9 months ago

That it was an abject failure of an idea and most of these places were torn down. I'm not arguing that public housing is bad but I don't think we're capable of implementing it in a good way here in the US.

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 1 points 9 months ago

It could be changed to penalize or disincentivize people from owning multiple homes through taxes. Like maybe tax the shit out of anyone that owns more than two in order to allow the middle class the chance to purchase a rental property but stop the ultra wealthy from from buying up entire neighborhoods.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

The way my town does it is everyone pays the same rate, but you get a huge exemption on your primary home, so effectively higher taxes on investment properties

this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2024
89 points (78.0% liked)

News

23271 readers
2880 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS