Wait to buy in Philly after AVI? (Darby: for sale, HOA fees)

[Debbie1125]

Originally Posted by mancat100

I want to believe. I really do. But I just don't.

At least that $500k homeowner is paying his legally required taxes. That's more than can be said for many others (1 in 6 to be exact).

I hate to be so negative because I love Philly, but I just don't believe it.

I'm with you on this.

[Cnote11]

PlanPhilly | City leaders send stark message to Nutter: Collect taxes

[Cnote11]

Originally Posted by mancat100

I don't mean any disrespect, but I'm assuming by your statement that you are not a homeowner who is about to get a major buggering made all the more painful by the fact that 1 out of 6 properties are tax delinquent and most of those will get off scot free.

I'm not exactly sure why you would assume that, when the largest percent of homeowners (38%) are actually seeing a decrease in property taxes and an additional 27.7% seeing less than a $250 increase. I'm assuming that you're over this and will be part of 26.3% group. You're in the minority here, and chances are majority of Philadelphia homeowners won't have a big problem with AVI because it benefits them or doesn't have a big impact on them. That accusation of not being a homeowner is complete rubbish in the face of the statistics.

I still stand by what I said about how people would find something else to complain about if not the tax delinquencies. Perhaps it is a genuine issue with you, but you see a similar pattern with every single tax raise ever.

[rotodome]

So because someone is in the statistical (though substantial) minority of people who are getting acute sudden tax increases means that their concerns are invalid and should justifiably be shouted down?

Seems to me that that's exactly the kind of thing that good laws are meant to protect people from.

[Cnote11]

That argument doesn't even logically follow what I posted. I clearly stated that his assumption that someone is not a homeowner because they are not upset about AVI or think it is overblown does not fly in the face of the statistics. That was the only thing I was addressing in that entire post, aside from the general impression that a fair amount of people would be finding someway to complain about it merely because they view it as a tax hike they don't want to pay, and that was about everybody, not just the minority. Everybody = even the people having to pay 5 dollars extra a year.

However, nowhere in my post did I say that the minority has no right to complain about an acute sudden tax increase. The only conclusion I drew from the minority statistic is that it would be inaccurate to paint the portrait that if you're not morbidly upset about AVI, you probably aren't a homeowner, seeing as most homeowners are actually benefiting or are hardly being affected from AVI.

[rotodome]

I'm fine with how I fared, thanks.

Reread your own posts and note how you're coming across.

[Cnote11]

My argument was

Mancat believes that if you're a homeowner, you must be upset about AVI
AVI statistically favors the majority of homeowners
Therefore, it is more likely for a homeowner to not be upset about AVI

You turned it into (from my perspective)

Mancat believes that if you're a homeowner, you must be upset about AVI
AVI statistically favors the majority of homeowners
Therefore, the minority has no right to complain

But in the end I will actually admit that I wronged Mancat, as I didn't read his post properly. He stated that "you are not a homeowner who is about to get a major buggering " which I originally read with the connotation that homeowners will be majorly screwed under AVI IN GENERAL. Reflecting on his post, I believe he may have only been referring to the minority I pointed out that will be getting taxed a greater amount. If this is indeed true, then it is a misstep on my behalf. Perhaps you noticed this yourself and thereby interpreted my post somehow as an attack on the minority, but as a singular entity, it certainly did not in discernible way, as I did state the argument within my post. If my original interpretation is correct, then my argument stands in its entirety. Also, I would like to see what percentage is actually getting "buggered" and by how much relative to various metrics, but since I do not have that data available and anecdotal evidence is abound, it isn't a very worthwhile subject.

Actually, in the end, I blame this on Frank.

[GraysFerryB4]

Wait til they get the crime and thugs under control, too. On Sunday past, I dropped off my parents to a flash mob of NO LESS than 125 ATV's, motorcycles and mini bikes making some kind of "we own the streets" statement throughout Grays Ferry and the surrounding area. This did not even make the news despite how many of us called. The police had to just follow and ignore it but I have never seen anything like it in my life; on the pavements and everything. My parents were petrified. This massive gang of thugs show me how the city just tolerates this type of scumbag control and how they do nothing about it.

Disgraceful

[pman]

a good number of people ARE upset since a large segment of the beneficiaries are commercial properties whose valuations were less out of whack. I think it's a little naive to write off the concerns of north, south, and west philadlphians as being a small "minority." council president clarke's district is getting hammered. the fact that someone's home might be able to sell for $500k is little consolation for someone who wants to live in their home and bought it when it was a middle class neighborhood and whose taxes will triple. if this is what it takes for the city to do its job and sell off the vacant property it owns, collect property taxes from deadbeats, and maybe even value land appropriately then that will be the biggest beneficiary of AVI, not something to be written off callously.

[Cnote11]

I'm certainly not writing off that, as I've stated numerous times in various threads that those are indeed important issues and that I'm not completely for everything enacted underneath AVI. I can't think of anybody on this board who is actually doing so otherwise.