U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 07-29-2007, 07:44 AM
 
Location: California, Bay area
153 posts, read 291,208 times
Reputation: 122
Default Tahlequah

I looked up Tahlequah to compare it to SLO county. It has a higher than average crime rate, only 80% high school grad rate, over 30% American Indian population, summer average high in the mid 90's with high humidity, only 1 tiny hospital, and tons of lead and copper water tainted violations in town. Thier average income is much less than the state and Oklahome is one of the least paying states in the nation.
I prefer SLO County. The only bad thing SLO has its it housing prices. That cant compare to the lack of culture, education high crime etc you get in Tahlequah and other areas of the country

 
Old 07-30-2007, 11:55 PM
 
Location: Newark, CA
22 posts, read 56,525 times
Reputation: 19
Have you checked out the high school graduation rate for much of California? Or the pollution levels?

BTW - who do you think you are - Chivington or Custer? The tribes speak English, are hardworking, and don't consider that receiving welfare is a virtue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmarg View Post
I looked up Tahlequah to compare it to SLO county. It has a higher than average crime rate, only 80% high school grad rate, over 30% American Indian population, summer average high in the mid 90's with high humidity, only 1 tiny hospital, and tons of lead and copper water tainted violations in town. Thier average income is much less than the state and Oklahome is one of the least paying states in the nation.
I prefer SLO County. The only bad thing SLO has its it housing prices. That cant compare to the lack of culture, education high crime etc you get in Tahlequah and other areas of the country
 
Old 07-31-2007, 09:05 AM
 
Location: livin hi in no az
216 posts, read 432,895 times
Reputation: 89
great write up, will definitely check it out!! thank you
 
Old 07-31-2007, 01:04 PM
 
414 posts, read 1,106,147 times
Reputation: 155
We moved from NY to Thousand Oaks, CA in 2001 for my husband's job. When he retired in '06, we moved to Ashland, Oregon. Our kids are 23 (married and living in Santa Ynez), 19 (with us for now going to community college but moving in with boyfriend in Malibu in '08), 15 (living with us and happily attending a private school in Medford, going to sophomore year).

The problem I have is that my kids' lives are in California and we are all the way up here in OR. The youngest kid is hoping to go to UCLA and live with one of her sisters after graduating. There isn't a whole lot in terms of job opportunities up here. So we are talking seriously about returning to CA, possibly to Arroyo Grande or Nipomo. I hope it doesn't totally wreck us financially. CA isn't a retiree-friendly state.

I miss California although we are not unhappy with Oregon. There's no place like California.
 
Old 07-31-2007, 01:15 PM
 
414 posts, read 1,106,147 times
Reputation: 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidt1 View Post
Don't blame Prop 13. Without it, seniors, low-income families and even middle-class folks would be taxed out of their homes. Just to make a comparison, a $600K home in Texas would cost you around $18K in property taxes annually. Why so much? Because there is no Prop 13 over there to keep property taxes from getting out of control. As for the cost of housing in CA, more and more people are finding out they don't have to pay $600K for a house. And when enough people refuse to pay inflated prices, something amazing happens -- prices are coming down.
David, I strongly disagree. The reason property taxes are so high for people moving into a new home is because the services have to be paid for, whether or not it's police, fire, schools, road maintenance, etc. People benefiting from Prop 13 are NOT PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE so the burden is shifted to newer people.

Case in point: Someone we know bought his wife's parents house and retained title in the wife's name. They put four kids through the school system and their property taxes were.... drum roll please... seven hundred dollars a year. The new neighbors were paying fifteen grand.

Prop 13 may have begun as a noble idea but has disintegrated into yet another tax-dodge game and is hurting California.
 
Old 07-31-2007, 01:57 PM
 
13,802 posts, read 25,240,737 times
Reputation: 8009
Default It's been 30 years and Prop 13 still gets the blame?

Yes... no question about it...

The longer you own your California home the greater your Property Tax Savings... and still... long time retired Home Owners are leaving California...

Most of the Elderly Retired paid to have the schools and roads built to begin with... if anything, I think they "Paid Forward" into the system for the future generations...

I pay $9,000 in property tax on my 1700 sq ft home and my neighbor pays $1,200 for the 2100 sq ft home THEY built in 1955. I don't begrudge them one bit and I expect to have the same benefit when I've lived in my home 50 plus years as they enjoy now.

The most important aspect of Prop 13 is predictability... both existing Home Owners and New Home Owners benefit by knowing how much their property taxes will go up each year. I have to live on a budget and the same is only fair to ask of my Government

My city has NEVER refused additional taxes or bonds for the public schools... Depending on the issue, that either means 50% + 1 voted for the measure of 66% voted in favor...

I find that most people that complain about Prop 13 don't understand how it works or have moved to California from other states...

The previous poster mentioned a Daughter that pays her Mothers low Prop 13 tax... Prop 13 does not give that privilege to anyone... the voters of California gave that right in another proposition passed several years after prop 13.

The intent was to allow the family to continue to own and not have to sell the family farm or home because of huge increased assessment when a parent moves or dies and a child takes over the "Homestead"
 
Old 07-31-2007, 01:59 PM
 
Location: Lompoc,CA
1,167 posts, read 2,940,982 times
Reputation: 1027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kathleenh54 View Post
David, I strongly disagree. The reason property taxes are so high for people moving into a new home is because the services have to be paid for, whether or not it's police, fire, schools, road maintenance, etc. People benefiting from Prop 13 are NOT PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE so the burden is shifted to newer people.

Case in point: Someone we know bought his wife's parents house and retained title in the wife's name. They put four kids through the school system and their property taxes were.... drum roll please... seven hundred dollars a year. The new neighbors were paying fifteen grand.

Prop 13 may have begun as a noble idea but has disintegrated into yet another tax-dodge game and is hurting California.
I totally agree with this! Wish it would change to help new couples
buying,etc!!! Prop taxes are a pain and take a large chunk of a mortgage.
 
Old 07-31-2007, 03:51 PM
 
Location: Newark, CA
22 posts, read 56,525 times
Reputation: 19
Default Sorry, I disagree

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kathleenh54 View Post
David, I strongly disagree. The reason property taxes are so high for people moving into a new home is because the services have to be paid for, whether or not it's police, fire, schools, road maintenance, etc. People benefiting from Prop 13 are NOT PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE so the burden is shifted to newer people.

Case in point: Someone we know bought his wife's parents house and retained title in the wife's name. They put four kids through the school system and their property taxes were.... drum roll please... seven hundred dollars a year. The new neighbors were paying fifteen grand.

Prop 13 may have begun as a noble idea but has disintegrated into yet another tax-dodge game and is hurting California.
Sorry, I have to disagree. At the corner of Mayhews Landing road there used to stand a beautiful, historic farm house. The widow lost the farm, and the house, because here taxes went up astronomically, and then they began to tax her at the "best use" - read suburban sprawl - rate. The land had been the home of the family for generations. They lost it all because of the taxman.

I have talked to literally *dozens* of people who took in Mom/Grandma/Dad/Grandpa after they lost their homes to the rising tax rates before Proposition 13. The former tax rates not only dispossessed the elderly and the working poor, but they also contributed to urban sprawl as properties were taxed at the so-called "best use" rate.

A one bedroom condo here easily costs a quarter million dollars which would makes "downsizing" from the million dollar three bedroom two bath house a bad joke in the absence of Prop. 13.

BTW, if wifey left it in her parents' names, that is tax fraud. You should have reported her. If you didn't, then don't complain because you *knew* about a fraud, and rather than supporting the existing laws, you would rather pass new laws because you are lazy.
 
Old 07-31-2007, 04:10 PM
 
Location: Newark, CA
22 posts, read 56,525 times
Reputation: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by YakimaBelle View Post
Sorry, I have to disagree. At the corner of Mayhews Landing road there used to stand a beautiful, historic farm house. The widow lost the farm, and the house, because here taxes went up astronomically, and then they began to tax her at the "best use" - read suburban sprawl - rate. The land had been the home of the family for generations. They lost it all because of the taxman.
I failed to mention that the farm was still income productive and supporting the family; unfortunately it couldn't pay for all the little piggies who wanted more development, more schools, and more goodies for civil servants.

If I hear one more teacher complain about being underpaid for a nine month, eight hour a day job, I am going to vomit. If income were that big an issue, I suspect that my local school district wouldn't have to import teachers from other districts to teach summer school - at an inflated salary rate.

To be honest, I have little respect for most so-called "educators", and none at all for almost all of the bureaucrats. The people who dropped out of the more difficult college majors, such as engineering, science, nutrition, and nursing in order to party back when I was at University seemed to all gravitate to the School of Education; and the only bunch with a lower average SAT score were the "ethnic studies" majors. As an engineer I have spent years working fifty-sixty hour weeks without overtime as California law exempts engineers from overtime provisions of the labor code. My neighbor down the street is an RN; she works like a dog, twelve months a year. Neither of us are particularly impressed by the complaints of civil servants who cannot be fired, receive benefits beyond our wildest dreams, and spend their spare time complaining about their income levels to us while insisting they can't teach summer school because they "need a break" or are "offended" because they were asked to stay fifteen minutes late at their bureaucracy office job without at least twenty-four hours written notice to help finish a project. I particularly liked the bad spelling and grammar on some of the picket signs at a not very far away school's teacher strike. Then there was the supervisory staff member in Oakland who insisted that "less than one percent" of the teachers in her district were African-American - after giving totals of all district teachers and all African-American teachers that made it clear that she was an order of magnitude off in her assessment. (Helpful hint, the percentage of African-American teachers in her district was far more than 10%, let alone 1%.) Needless to say, she is a leader in opposing both the C-Best for teachers and the high school graduation examinations.

You should have heard the laughter up and down the street here when one public employees group went on strike; people who initially supported them changed their minds when they found out what they were *already* getting, let alone what they now wanted.

As for the alleged "percentage of high school graduates" enjoyed by California over some other states, I can assure you that when interviewing applicants for assorted non-engineering positions in high technology I found quite a few alleged "high school graduates" who could not read the application form, and a number of resumes with numerous errors in spelling, grammar, or both. A significant number were unable to communicate in English, and expected me to learn whatever language they spoke; the most disturbing part of the language barrier was that for some English was allegedly their L1.
 
Old 07-31-2007, 10:04 PM
 
Location: CA Coast
1,900 posts, read 164,613 times
Reputation: 350
Yakima, it is hard to respond to your post. The level of anger/hate/ignorance is phenomenal.

Most teachers chose teaching because they care about people. If you think teachers work an 8 hour day nine month year then you know very little about the realities of teaching.

If you think a standardized test demonstrates what either a teacher knows about teaching or a what a student has learned in school then you know very little about education.

Now, since you obviously got such a great education that you can pick on teachers, you can work the ratios. A computer science grad from Cal Poly or a nursing grad works more weeks per year, but perhaps not more hours per week, that computer grad will start at around $70,000 per year, after four years. That nursing student can start at $80,000 per year at the California prisons after 4 years. A teacher will start around $30,000 a year after a 5 year program.

Work the ratios see what you can figure.

That you might be able to work the ratios, that you can read this, means some teacher somewhere, got through to you, say "Thank You".

And finally, you don't want a teacher teaching your children who only gets two weeks vacation a year.

If you have a problem with gaps in interviewees larnin' blame the parents, teachers have the students 6 hours a day, parents..; 18.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 

Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top