this post was submitted on 15 May 2025
464 points (100.0% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

12933 readers
940 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 320 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

Yeah some serious boomer logic going on here.

"We thought that if we kept the foundation and the outer walls of the house and we just took the roof off, it was our understanding that we were going to preserve our Save Our Homes and our homestead,” says Debbie."

"the renovations—removing the roof, adding a second floor —ultimately triggered a full reassessment of the home’s value. Under Florida law, once a property is deemed substantially improved, it can be treated as new construction, removing the protections that had capped the home’s assessed value for years."

[–] [email protected] 284 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Boomer logic ..... "I want all the benefits, entitlements and supports of society and none of the responsibilities."

[–] [email protected] 75 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Can you imagine the pain of having to pay fairly for what you own... Disgusting.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I mean, bullshit strategies and apparent entitled attitude aside, she does have a point. $90k is an absurd property tax rate for a single family home.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Did you see the photo in the article? It's a 'single-family home' in the way a Mercedes SUV is a minivan.

I mean, yah, housing is way too fuckimg expensive. But that is very definitely not a no-frills family home.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The house is valued at $4.4 millions.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If it costs $90k for a $4 million home then a $1 million home would be taxed at $22.5k. That's still half a years salary at median wages for an average priced home in many markets. Don't let your hatred for rich people lead you to advocating for shitty policies.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

a $1 million home [... is ...] an average priced home in many markets

I'm going with this is the actual problem.

Also, your math assumes a flat tax rate, and any decent tax system is progressive. I don't know how Florida's works, but again, actual problems.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Inflated home values are a huge part of the problem. That's a large part of the point I'm making. At face value it seems fine to say "they have a $4 million home, they can afford the property taxes" but if you apply the same rate to the homes that average people have to buy you're going to end up in a shitty spot. If taxing the rich is the goal we shouldn't be talking about property taxes on single family homes unless it's specifically related to second and third homes.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Seeing as most homes increased by about 400% in the last 10-15 years in that area, while wages increases negligibly, I feel they have a point. On the other hand, it is difficult for most people, myself included, to garner sympathy when you see someone with a 4.4 million dollar home.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If the land your single family home is sitting on is suddenly worth four million dollars, that's a sure sign that that plot of land should NOT be used for single family zoning. It's doubtlessly some of the most valuable land in the city, close to job centers and lots of community resources. That kind of land should be used for multi family housing. Quit hoarding it so you can live your Leave it to Beaver fantasy in the middle of a built up urban area.

Not quoting you specifically here but the general vibe of this owner:

"But I want to live as a rancher in the middle of Manhattan. I demand we warp the tax laws to enable it."

Get the fuck out of here, you entitled fuck.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

But if you built your house in a relatively undesirable place and the area gets gentrified due to no fault of your own, now you have to get out of the way because richer people decided they like your land after all?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

but if you apply the same rate to the homes that average people have to buy you're going to end up in a shitty spot

And that's why you don't do that and instead make progressive taxation a thing.

If taxing the rich is the goal we shouldn't be talking about property taxes on single family homes unless it's specifically related to second and third homes.

Nah. It is good and correct to tax extremely large/valuable single-family homes at high rates even if they're primary residences.

(Of course, another aspect of the issue is that single-family houses in very high-demand areas should lose their zoning protection so they can be bought out and replaced with multifamily buildings. Reasonably-sized single-family houses should never have gotten to unaffordable valuations in the first place.)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Not that it changes your point, but Florida's property tax is not progressive in any of the areas that I lived.

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

I don't think it matters what the house looks like. That's a ridiculous amount for any single home. I understand the desire to tax the rich but there are better ways to accomplish that than jacking up property taxes for everyone, especially when inflationary housing costs are a simultaneous concern.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

The solution is to demolish the home and build multi-family housing there. Low density single family zoning has no place in an area where the land values are that expensive. Keep that kind of development on the urban fringe where it belongs.

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

So is a single family home worth 4mil

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Alright, so you're a young gen z family and you buy your first home, which is all you can afford right now, you're young and you're starting your careers and your family.

In 10 years, property values have increased dramatically, and you've had a child and you're thinking about your second. Your careers are going well, and you think we should maybe get a bigger place for our expanding family. But oh no, there's an unsustainable housing marketing bubble that refuses to burst, so you can't afford a bigger place anywhere near your job. So you build UP, like they do in every multi-generational home culture, you expand your living space as your family expands.

It's not a crime or a moral failure to upgrade your home, and you shouldn't jump at the opportunity to beat someone when they're down just because you don't empathize with this particular boomer homeowner.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (3 children)

This Boomer homeowner is why those Gen Z families can't find homes. If your single family home is worth $4 million, that is the market telling you that that single family home should not exist. The land is too in demand, too close to jobs, too close to amenities etc. to have that lot hoarded by a single selfish person. You want to live in a single family home on a quarter acre lot? Fine. Do it on the edge of the city where the land is cheap. This women's lost could provide homes for a dozen families, at prices that would be affordable to Gen Z families. Instead people like her vote to prevent such redevelopment.

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

Are you okay?

If your single family home is worth $4 million, that is the market telling you that that single family home should not exist.

Right, an unsustainable bubble, I said that. This boomer family bought a reasonably sized and priced house that's on the edge of the city, and now they're forced to sell it and not be able to replace it with a bigger home on their budget in the same part of town, they didn't fuck things up Zillow did!

The gen z family who buys today won't be about to upsize tomorrow, and you're gonna blame them.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Trumper logic, you don't own what you own, and you need to either pay more or give it up., and fuck you us wanting nice things

This is the type of shit destroying us as well.

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

See? Both sides are idiots( talking about political parties, not class)..

We have people who want to take too much from us and people who don't want to give, and both sides downvote truth.

If we want a better country, we have to be honest, not selfish

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago (5 children)

At the same time, that absolutely is a life altering change. Even the biggest idiots don't deserve to get their life upended. I don't know what the right solution is, but I can extend significant empathy to "I did a dumb thing and I don't know how to keep my home now without uprooting it".

I've only bought one home and it was recently. It was every bit as aweful as I expected but having seen what they are in for, they might not have the cash around nessicary to sell the home without getting scammed by predatory buyers.

The entirety of real estate is so fucked

[–] [email protected] 85 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

A professional tax attorney built a $4.4M home and expected to keep their original valuation?

That’s not a big idiot, that’s attempted tax fraud.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 month ago

They were trying to cheat their taxes and failed. Fuck em.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 month ago

Won't someone think of the poor multimillionaires?

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

I’ve only bought one home and it was recently. It was every bit as aweful as I expected

I've now bought two in my lifetime. I wouldn't call either awful for my experience.

What was bad about yours?

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

Lots of back and forth on inspection items. We wanted a lot fixed that should be fixed and they did do it as well as a lot of consolations, but if we had to sell this house right now, as I lost my job yesterday, I wouldn't have the cash to be able to fix stuff that needs it for another inspection

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

Lots of back and forth on inspection items. We wanted a lot fixed that should be fixed and they did do it as well as a lot of consolations,

That's fair. That's pretty common, and it usually sounds worse than it is. I think its also about setting expectations. If you have the expectation that you'll be looking at a perfect house and simply agree to the sale price, then you'll be surprised/frustrated. If you're prepared for that back and forth with the horse trading on what you'll fix vs what you won't (similar to buying a used car), then its not too bad.

but if we had to sell this house right now, as I lost my job yesterday, I wouldn’t have the cash to be able to fix stuff that needs it for another inspection

You aren't required to fix anything as the seller, however your buyer can walk away if it doesn't pass inspection. If you have lots of buyers, this can be the right choice sometimes. However, if you only have one buyer you're going to have to compromise. The middle ground here is that you can lower the cost of the house to cover the costs of the items needed to pass inspection. Buyers will usually go for that. So even if you don't have cash in hand to fix things, you can still sell.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They tried to apply the building code laws. In Florida, if you do a renovation and keep the foundation and one wall, you can build to the code at the time of construction. These "protections" never applied to assessment and tax.

Many houses in that exact area have been bought for cheap and flipped using this work around. They end up with a modern house but can avoid having to spend extra for upgraded storm mitigation, plumbing, and electric.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah that's the same rule up here in Jersey. You can use it to maintain a structure that goes against the current building codes (say the ordinance makes it so you can have as much, you still can). To think that a tax collector wouldn't be like "Hey, there's an extra 1500 square feet, two bedrooms, and another bathroom on this house" is foolish though. And you presumably pulled permits for it all and put it right on their radar.

The way to do it is piecemeal over several decades. Nobody is none the wiser.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Can't imagine adding a floor piecemeal.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

I'm sure it's possible to achieve those things if you know the right people.