2/ BUT it's conceptually crazy that we tax new housing construction to do it, 40 yrs into regional housing shortage.https://twitter.com/DarwinBondGraha/status/674672846031880192 …
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler
@kimmaicutler The argument that developers are being over-taxed is flawed, I think.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DarwinBondGraha
@DarwinBondGraha They are still buying land at the peak of the land cycle, which only gives them a certain margin. Would rather tax land.4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
@kimmaicutler Of course taxing land price gains is a better policy, but attaching fees to offset impacts of development is reasonable.3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @DarwinBondGraha
@DarwinBondGraha that's the point I'm trying to make.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
@kimmaicutler I'm with you 100%, but fees still seem good to me in the short to medium term. Everybody pays fees for all kinds of stuff.2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @DarwinBondGraha
@DarwinBondGraha@kimmaicutler Challenge with fees is project needs rents high enough to support them. Fees that are too high kill projects.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @SFHAC
@DarwinBondGraha@kimmaicutler San Francisco adds all kinds of fees to new housing, and look where we are...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SFHAC
@SFHAC@kimmaicutler When was the last time a developer in SF said, "nah, the fees are too high." SF is booming with the fees.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@DarwinBondGraha @SFHAC the point isn't no fees. The point is that it lets us escape the larger question of land, property taxation.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.