U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [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: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-25-2009, 01:18 PM
 
Location: Montgomery County, PA
2,771 posts, read 3,689,312 times
Reputation: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by doc1 View Post
There have been links posted before on how much local taxpayers contribute to the costs of running their cities.

It's been single digit per centages in some cases.
I'm sorry, I still don't understand what point you are trying to make here.

FYI, the subsidies come out of state taxes, not property taxes. Anyone who earns a substantial amount of income pays income tax, whether or not they live in the suburbs.

If it's true that the poorer neighborhoods see an influx in high income earners, these towns are going to receive less tax subsidy as property tax revenue increases.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-25-2009, 02:04 PM
 
Location: Monroe, NC
2,539 posts, read 3,876,146 times
Reputation: 1258
Quote:
Originally Posted by doc1 View Post
There have been links posted before on how much local taxpayers contribute to the costs of running their cities.

It's been single digit per centages in some cases.
So many people who live in the suburbs believe that their local property taxes are collected ...sent to Trenton, and they are getting back a much smaller percentage while the rest is sent to the cities. This is totally untrue! State income and sales tax money is actually what funds Abbott Districts. Money that a town collects for property taxes actually stays in that town, minus the proportion of the bill which comprises the county portion.

I can see suburban taxpayers being resentful of seeing their state income tax money being used for Abbott districts but they are mistaken that any of their property tax money is used in this process.

doc1 - You are absolutely right about the percentage of local taxes in cities covering the cost of education. Let me give you an example.

In Paterson, where I used to live up to 2005, the education budget is (and I'm rounding off the numbers slightly ) ~ $500,000,000. There are ~ 25,000 houses in the city. To cover the entire cost of education, each Paterson house would need to come up with $20,000 in taxes. This does not include other municiple services. If we allocate a 70/30 mix of property taxes to cover education and other services the average Paterson house would have a tax bill of $28571.

My old house there, one of those ubiquitous Cape Cods built in 1940 is assessed at $293,000. Since the tax rate is $1.75 per 100, the current owner would have a tax bill of $5127.50 So you can see that the average taxpayer is paying nowhere near what is necessary to fully cover the costs of the city of Paterson. I'm sure the rest of the Abbott districts have similar financial pictures. That's the effect that state money has in relationship to Abbott districts.


It's sad, in that, when I went to school there from 1957-1969, there was no state income tax or sales tax for that matter. I guess the taxes fully covered all the services back then. My father told me when he bought the house off my grandmother for $8000 in 1950, the property taxes were $144 a year! How times have changed!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2009, 02:16 PM
 
1,235 posts, read 2,347,471 times
Reputation: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by elflord1973 View Post
Thank you. It is yet another sloppy attempt to perpetuate the myth that Abbott funding comes out of property taxes.
I never, ever said that. Now you're just resorting to making stuff up. I clearly stated that I was referring to state revenue. Again. The households in the Abbott districts are receiving more state revenue via Abbott than they contribute.

You have this knee-jerk reaction to anything regarding Abbott, which is fine, but you're not even honest in how you debate which makes it boring.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2009, 02:19 PM
 
1,235 posts, read 2,347,471 times
Reputation: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEmissary View Post

I can see suburban taxpayers being resentful of seeing their state income tax money being used for Abbott districts but they are mistaken that any of their property tax money is used in this process.
Suburban taxpayers get it. They are funding their own schools, in some case almost entirely through property taxes, as well as paying state income taxes. However, they receive little aid back from the state for their schools.

Therefore, the state funds for education are disproportionately given to Abbott districts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2009, 02:26 PM
 
Location: Montgomery County, PA
2,771 posts, read 3,689,312 times
Reputation: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckyshoes View Post
I never, ever said that.
To assert that specifically suburban tax payers subsidize Abbott suggests that whether or not you subsidize Abbott beneficiaries depends on which town you reside in. Which taxes depend on your town of residence, state or property ?

It might surprise you to know that even though I do not live in a suburb, I pay state taxes. Indeed, I almost certainly pay more in state taxes than the average dimwitted suburban bigot, as my income is above the median in all but the most upscale towns and I don't have much in the way of exemptions or credits.

Quote:
Now you're just resorting to making stuff up. I clearly stated that I was referring to state revenue. Again. The households in the Abbott districts are receiving more state revenue via Abbott than they contribute.
Which households ? It certainly isn't true of my household, and I reside in an Abbott district.

AGAIN, the beneficiaries of Abbott funding are families who send their children to public schools in Abbott districts, and they are subsidized by state tax payers who may or may not live in suburbs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2009, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Monroe, NC
2,539 posts, read 3,876,146 times
Reputation: 1258
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckyshoes View Post
Suburban taxpayers get it. They are funding their own schools, in some case almost entirely through property taxes, as well as paying state income taxes. However, they receive little aid back from the state for their schools.

Therefore, the state funds for education are disproportionately given to Abbott districts.
luckyshoes - Well, I know you get it, but I'd change "disproportionately" to "overwhelmingly"! The sad thing is, that throwing all that money into the Abbott districts has produced so little in the way of tangible results. I look at the test scores and SAT scores of my old schools and to be charitable....they're in the toilet. That alone, keeps any re-gentrification process, that could revitalize NJ cities, at a glacial level!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2009, 02:50 PM
 
Location: Montgomery County, PA
2,771 posts, read 3,689,312 times
Reputation: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckyshoes View Post
Suburban taxpayers get it. They are funding their own schools, in some case almost entirely through property taxes, as well as paying state income taxes. However, they receive little aid back from the state for their schools.

Therefore, the state funds for education are disproportionately given to Abbott districts.
I don't follow this at all.

Is the argument that public schools should be funded by state income taxes, and the burden transferred towards the higher income earners ?

Or is this about some kind of hatred and rage that they feel towards those who live in the Abbott districts (e.g. is it not that they aren't getting enough, but they resent that those in the Abbott districts have it too easy) ? Given the utter contempt and the tendency to look down on those who don't live in the 'burbs, maybe that's it ...

Or is it that state income taxes are too high ? (but I seldom hear complaints about state income taxes -- complaints about high property taxes are much more common)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2009, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Monroe, NC
2,539 posts, read 3,876,146 times
Reputation: 1258
Quote:
Originally Posted by elflord1973 View Post
I don't follow this at all.

Is the argument that public schools should be funded by state income taxes, and the burden transferred towards the higher income earners ?

Or is this about some kind of hatred and rage that they feel towards those who live in the Abbott districts (e.g. is it not that they aren't getting enough, but they resent that those in the Abbott districts have it too easy) ? Given the utter contempt and the tendency to look down on those who don't live in the 'burbs, maybe that's it ...

Or is it that state income taxes are too high ? (but I seldom hear complaints about state income taxes -- complaints about high property taxes are much more common)
I think what luckyshoes is pointing out is that a much larger percentage of state money, whether it is from lower or higher income residents of any given municipality ends up in Abbott districts. I'm sure if say, Ridgewood residents got back a lot more state money or any at all, in that town's case, they could lower their property tax rate to the cheers of their residents.

BTW, even here in NC, the top tax rate (nearly equal to NJ's) starts at around $60,000!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2009, 03:08 PM
 
Location: NJ
171 posts, read 360,583 times
Reputation: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by FBone View Post
I agree with both of these posters.

Whatever happened to young couples buying a starter home in a mixed neighborhood to start the housing ladder?
Starter home doesn't involve in buying in a bad neiborhood in a rundown building. Unfortunately with 150k a house that is 350k already taken up 40% of the takehome after taxes and/or condo fees. For the conservatives like me and my SO, we want to save at least 15 to 20% of our income on retirement and savings, that just make it borderline impossible.

I think alot of people in my generation is feeling the pinch in this great state of ours. My parents want us to buy in New York, but I just wasn't feeling it. Buying in NJ might make us mortage our child's future. I think eventually, we'll simply move down to NC or Texas, even with 20 to 30% lower pay, we'll live more comfortably than we do here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2009, 03:26 PM
 
Location: Montgomery County, PA
2,771 posts, read 3,689,312 times
Reputation: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEmissary View Post
I'm sure if say, Ridgewood residents got back a lot more state money or any at all, in that town's case, they could lower their property tax rate to the cheers of their residents.

BTW, even here in NC, the top tax rate (nearly equal to NJ's) starts at around $60,000!
That would work pretty well in some very rich towns.

However, the median NJ household earns about 80k, so even if they paid no income taxes, their net tax bill would be enormous. It seems they want it both ways -- they want redistribution, but not to other people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



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 > New Jersey
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