Letters: Prop 13 isn't what's keeping older homeowners from downsizing. Here's the real reason
As a 78-year-old who has been tempted to downsize from the four-bedroom home we have lived in since 1997, I can say that Prop 13 is the least of the obstacles.
The big one is the capital gains tax.
The value of our home has increased substantially. But so has every other home in the area. If we sell, the combined federal and state capital gains tax of over 32% takes a huge dent out of any profit, making it impossible to purchase a smaller home of equal quality.
There was a time when any gain put into the purchase of a new home was exempt, but that was replaced in 1997 by $500,000 limit for couples. That sum has never been adjusted for inflation and is a drop in the bucket in expensive areas, especially California, which has one of the highest capital gains taxes in the country.
So we will stay put for the duration, over-housed and aging in place. And some young family that could benefit from a home like ours will end up moving elsewhere.
Blame Hamas
The Oct. 7 attack was a long-term plan, and Hamas amassed hundreds of millions and spent it to build terror tunnels instead of improving living and economic conditions in Gaza, the U.S. Treasury Department said in 2022.
'Hamas maintains a violent agenda that harms both Israelis and Palestinians,' the department said.
Moreover, Hamas' goal was and still appears to be the destruction of Israel, as it refuses to disarm, and said weapons 'cannot be relinquished until our full national rights are restored, foremost among them the establishment of a fully sovereign, independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital,' according to an Al-Jazeera report this week.
Israel does what it must to avoid being destroyed, despite letter writer Harry Chomsky's disapproval.
Julia Lutch, Davis
Outlaw gerrymandering
Regarding 'How the Supreme Court enabled the Texas-California redistricting fight' (Politics, SFChronicle.com, Aug. 1): Republican-led states gerrymander their legislative districts far more than Democrat-led states, which slants Congress in favor of the GOP and misrepresents the will of the people.
Now, Texas is threatening more gerrymandering with new redistricting ahead of schedule. California and other blue states should definitely play the gerrymander game in response.
At the same time that blue states announce their unapologetic gerrymandering, Democrats should also introduce a bill in Congress that would outlaw all gerrymandering for state legislative and congressional districts. Democrats should unanimously support banning gerrymanders while also matching Republican efforts to do it.
If Republicans are offended by blue-state gerrymandering, then they should support the abolition of all gerrymandering.
We can't have some states playing fair with nonpartisan districting rules while other states continually cheat. All states need to play by the same redistricting rules.
Dennis Dowling, San Francisco
Legalize sex work
Why not emulate policies in Amsterdam and other places that provide a safe and clean environment for the oldest profession in the world?
Give sex workers access to health care, security and freedom from pimps.
Nigel Phillips, San Francisco
No RV parks in S.F.
Regarding 'Make room for RVs' (Letters to the Editor, Aug. 3): The letter writer suggests creating a $60 a night recreational vehicle park for tourists at Crissy Field and Sunset Dunes in San Francisco.
'There are many RVers who pay more than $60 in less spectacular places all over the U.S.,' he states.
They should feel at home, then, because putting RVs at Crissy Field would be a sure-fire way to unspectacularize the world-class vista at East Beach.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
22 minutes ago
- USA Today
The clock is ticking for Trump's Education Department
The Education Department has less than a year to implement big changes to student loans and college oversight. The man in charge of it all is adamant the agency can do it – even with half the staff. There's no time to spare at the Education Department. No, not because the agency is going away anytime soon – actually, its plate just got even fuller. When President Donald Trump signed his massive domestic policy bill into law on July 4, the agency's workload ballooned. Now, with its usual staff cut in half, it has less than a year to implement major reforms to college financial aid and oversight. Big Beautiful Bill 101: What you need to know about the new law That process began in earnest on Aug. 7, when the department hosted a public hearing to begin implementing the White House and Congress' mandates. Facing a July 1, 2026, deadline, the agency has a long to-do list. It must create new plans for student loan repayment, revise accountability rules for universities and establish new types of Pell Grants. And the workload keeps growing: The White House just announced plans to reform its main database for higher education information (though the data-gathering arm of the Education Department has been reduced to just a handful of people). Despite those obstacles, leaders at the Education Department insist they can meet the deadlines. In his first interview on the job, Nicholas Kent, the top official overseeing higher education at the department, was optimistic about the agency's bandwidth. He pointed to one provision in the law – an exclusion of family farm and small business assets from financial aid calculations – that is already being rolled out months ahead of schedule. He said that change will be included in the latest version of the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA, which will fully launch this fall. Read more: Does the new FAFSA actually hurt farm families? Republicans say yes. "We are off to the races in implementing this historic legislation that's going to make higher education work better for the American people," Kent said. "We are confident that we will be able to deliver it on time, or earlier, than what is required." Read more: Senate confirms former for-profit college exec to oversee higher ed Yet skeptics, including former Education Department officials, worry that the agency lacks the staffing it needs. After the department reduced its workforce by half in March, college financial aid offices have struggled to get in touch with the Federal Student Aid office. The National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators has reported widespread communication breakdowns and processing delays, leaving students without answers they need to get help paying for school. At the Aug. 7 hearing, Melanie Storey, NASFAA's president and a former Education Department official, urged the agency's leadership to include the financial aid community as it moves forward with putting all the new changes in place. "Ignoring the financial aid community's operational expertise," she warned, "creates a significant risk of implementation failure." Trump administration hits 200-day mark As the administration hits its 200-day mark, higher education reform has emerged as a centerpiece of Trump's domestic policy agenda. After freezing billions in federal funding for academic research, the White House has pushed a growing number of universities into unprecedented agreements. Those deals have included multimillion-dollar fines, commitments to handing over data on student enrollment and promises to prohibit transgender women from playing collegiate sports. Critics have derided those efforts as historic encroachments on academic freedom. Kent, a former for-profit college executive, instead views the recent agreements as examples of a "lot of success." "Stay tuned," he said. Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@ Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @
The Hill
22 minutes ago
- The Hill
5 questions looming over potential Trump-Putin summit
President Trump is eyeing a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin as early as next week as he pushes for an end to the war in Ukraine, a potential face-to-face meeting that carries huge risks and rewards for the White House. Trump has grown increasingly frustrated with Putin in recent months as Russia pounds Ukraine despite U.S. calls for a pause in the fighting. The administration on Wednesday announced tariffs on India over its purchases of Russian oil, and additional sanctions on Russia are expected Friday. Much is still unknown about the meeting, including when, where – and even whether – it will happen. Here are five questions hanging over the potential Trump-Putin summit. When and where? Both the White House and the Kremlin have indicated the meeting will take place soon, potentially as early as next week. But officials did not offer details on where it would take place, how long it would last or who would be involved. Trump told European leaders on a call on Wednesday that his idea was to meet with Putin and then have a trilateral meeting with Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. It was not clear if all parties would agree to such a set up, or who else might attend. Trump told reporters Thursday Zelensky's attendance was not a prerequisite for him to meet with Putin. Possible venues could include Turkey, which has served as a mediator for U.S.-Russian prisoner swaps. The United Arab Emirates has also mediated between Russia and Ukraine for prisoner swaps. Qatar is a mediator the U.S. has relied on heavily in negotiating between Israel and Hamas and between warring parties in Africa. Trump's 2018 summit with Putin in Helsinki, Finland served to provide neutral ground at a time of heightened U.S.-Russia tensions, after Russia's interference in the 2016 elections. Helsinki holds historic significance as hosting talks easing tensions during the Cold War. In 2022, Putin and then-President Biden met in Geneva, Switzerland, long a diplomatic hub due to its neutrality on the global stage. Putin has restrictions on his travel, barred from going to countries who are party to the International Criminal Court, possibly compelling them to arrest him on a warrant from the court over allegations of abduction of Ukrainian children. Putin cancelled a trip to South Africa in 2023 over concerns he could be arrested. But Mongolia flouted the court's orders in September 2024, rolling out the red carpet for Putin. The court later reported Mongolia to its oversight organization for failing to arrest Putin. What involvement does Ukraine have? One key piece of any potential summit is Ukraine's role. Trump indicated to European leaders that his idea would be to meet with Putin, then host a meeting with Putin and Zelensky. The Kremlin had earlier dismissed a meeting between Putin and Zelensky unless negotiators had reached the final stages of a deal to end the war. Zelensky has not publicly commented on a potential meeting with Putin, and such a meeting would be the first time the two leaders have come face-to-face since the war began in 2022. 'Russia now seems to be more inclined toward a ceasefire – the pressure is working. But the key is to ensure they don't deceive anyone in the details – neither us, nor the United States,' Zelensky said in a statement Wednesday after speaking with Trump and European leaders. Zelensky has been adamant that there should be no decisions about Ukraine without Ukrainian input. And while Trump spent his first few months back in office railing against Zelensky and saying Ukraine had no leverage in peace talks, he has focused his frustration on Putin and agreed to provide more weapons to Kyiv. Russia has reportedly floated an air-truce over Ukraine absent a deal on a total ceasefire. A majority in Ukraine want negotiations for an end to the war as soon as possible (69%), according to a recent Gallup poll, up from 52 percent the year prior. But 68 percent believe it is unlikely fighting will come to an end in the next year. What are the risks for Trump, Putin? Such a high-stakes meeting could yield a historic diplomatic win for Trump if he stops the war – but it also carries risks for all parties involved. Trump has repeatedly demurred on whether Putin is stringing him along, and an in-person meeting could buy the Russian leader more time without producing concrete results toward a cease-fire in Ukraine. White House officials have indicated they are going into the potential meeting with eyes open about Putin's lack of commitments thus far. 'This potential meeting will not be a meeting for the sake of a meeting. This will only be if the president feels that Vladimir Putin is committed to doing what the president has promised on day one, which was ending this war once and for all,' White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said Thursday on NewsNation. 'The president is obviously frustrated. We see Putin not willing to engage in proper diplomacy with the president,' Fields added. Putin, meanwhile, risks further angering Trump and consolidating support for Ukraine if he embarrasses the U.S. president during a summit that yields no results. 'In this case [Trump] is faced with an experienced KGB officer who is specifically trained to manipulate people in person. Unfortunately Putin is known to be quite good at it,' said Maria Snegovaya, senior fellow for Russia and Eurasia with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. 'We don't want the 2018 Helsinki scenario to be repeated. It's not going to be a win for Trump,' she said. At that time, Trump sided with Putin over U.S. intelligence agencies in dismissing Russian meddling in the 2016 elections. Will Trump delay Russia sanctions? The White House is expected to announce a fresh round of sanctions on Russia on Friday after Trump shortened the timeframe for Moscow to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine. A senior administration official said sanctions would go into effect at the end of the week, despite a positive meeting between Steve Witkoff, the special envoy for peace missions, and Russian officials. But it's not clear what actions Trump is considering. Some experts argue for narrowing tariffs on countries purchasing Russian oil to the actual amount of money being paid to Moscow. The effect could discourage large purchases of Russian oil and generate revenue that could go toward assistance for Ukraine. But Democrats are raising alarm that Trump has already undermined U.S. commitment to sanctions by holding back on any new penalties on Russia over six months into the administration, even for tightening penalties on sanction-evaders, according to a report released Tuesday by the minority staff of the Senate committees on Foreign Relations and Banking. The administration said imposing new sanctions would undermine their ability to negotiate with Russia. Trump has in the past delayed sanctions threats against both adversaries and allies, while also questioning the impact of additional penalties on Russia. The prospect of an imminent meeting with Putin and a chance to make gains in negotiations could lead the president and the White House to hold off on new sanctions if they feel it would undermine progress. Will it lead to a ceasefire? Trump's ultimate goal is to immediately halt the fighting between Russia and Ukraine, having long railed against what he views as needless death and destruction. While initially pressuring Zelensky and framing him as an obstacle to a ceasefire, Trump has more recently described Putin as deceitful, saying he would have a 'nice phone call' with the Russian leader and then 'the missiles are launched into Kyiv.' 'The talk doesn't mean anything,' Trump said on July 14, after his sixth phone call with Putin. But Snegovaya said Putin is in a strong position going into talks, with his economy squeezed but not on the brink of catastrophe, the Russian military making slow but steady gains on the frontline, and the increased military production allowing for punishing aerial attacks on Ukraine that are depleting Kyiv's defenses and resolve. 'The best strategy seems to be the one he [Putin] adopted since the start of negotiation effort: Continuously engage with the US administration, try not to provoke it while simultaneously pushing into Ukraine further, gaining additional territory,' she said. 'It's clearly a diplomatic win for Putin, I think it's almost a cliché at this point to repeat this – he is ending international isolation and meeting, arguably, the most powerful person in the world, without giving any major concessions on Ukraine,' she continued. 'And that would have been consistent with his original premise that the West will crack and come around eventually.'
The Hill
22 minutes ago
- The Hill
Texas Democrat decries rhetoric over quorum break: ‘Words have consequences'
One of the Texas Democrats who fled her state over a GOP plan to draw new state House district lines said rhetoric from the right is putting a 'dangerous target' on state lawmakers' backs. 'I'm terrified at the rhetoric coming from both my colleagues, the governor, the attorney general and the president. It's putting a dangerous target on our backs,' Democratic state Rep. Mary Gonzalez said on a call with reporters. 'Words have consequences. And in a moment in time like right now, when you're saying 'Hunt them down. Here's [their] location. Go get them,' what do they think is going to happen?' More than 50 Texas Democratic state legislators broke quorum over the weekend, depriving the state House of the numbers it needs to move forward with a redistricting proposal backed by President Trump. The Democrats fanned out to blue strongholds, including Illinois and New York, to try and wait out the ongoing 30-day special session in the Lone Star State. But Republican Sen. John Cornyn (Texas) announced on Thursday that the FBI had approved his request to help law enforcement locate and arrest the quorum-breaking Democrats. Gov. Greg Abbott (R) later said that the FBI is 'tracking down the derelict Democrats,' who would be taken to the Texas Capitol. Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) has said 'we should use every tool at our disposal to hunt down those who think they are above the law.' The participating Democrats each face a $500-a-day fine, as well as potential removal and Abbott's threat of bribery charges. 'Fifty very different people from very different parts of the state said we have to at least stand up and put our livelihood at risk – the $500 a day fine is not a joke – to put our seats at risk, to put our health and safety at risk, to put our families … everything we have at risk. I'm just proud we did that,' Gonzalez said. Gonzalez made her comments on a call with other Texas Democrats who blasted Republicans for focusing on redistricting instead of aid after devastating floods hit Texas last month, hitting back at GOP arguments that Democrats' quorum break is stalling aid progress. 'We have spent an astronomical amount of time on racial illegal gerrymandering and redistricting that absolutely is going to allow politicians to pick their people instead of the other way around,' said Democratic state Sen. Molly Cook.
