Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
remember guys, business never pays any taxes, or suffer from the cost of rules, regulations, and red tape, they pass it on to you..or they go under..help yourself by helping them. throw out these clowns in Washington.
you do know the 90% or more of the tea party favor returning American to the sliver/gold back currency would have more buying power and end most types of inflation.
Ouch that's painful, I hate getting wood slivers in my hands.
Homeowners with fixed-rate mortgages are immune from P & I increases - the bulk of a mortgage-holder's expenses - going up. Those without mortgages already enjoy much lower housing costs than those with mortgages.
Property tax increases for homeowners are limited or capped in many states, including California and Michigan.
Since renters have only half the median income of homeowners, and landlords charge what the market will bear, rent increases are limited only by the upper limit of what renters can afford to pay.
Don't blame me, I voted Republican - I definitely do not want my electricity rates to "necessarily skyrocket".
That's a load of bunk.
There are more states that do not cap or limit property taxes.
And they don't count school taxes with property taxes. I pay twice as much in school taxes as I do in property taxes for both of my houses.
Where do you get this bs that all landlords are the evil overlords of the world.
Again, patently false.
Are some, sure, but some renters are the dregs of the earth, too.
We can all play the gross generalization game.
While I've been overseas, I've rented my 2,400 sf, 6 bedroom house for $550 + utilities.
I rent my 1,200 sf house for $700+.
These cover my taxes, wear and tear and very little else.
So, come off your high horse and the demonization of home owners.
It comes off as petty and juvenile.
Last edited by chielgirl; 05-10-2013 at 03:07 AM..
Raising the minimum wage puts people OUT of work. A small business can only afford so much. If it costs him twice as much to hire people, he cuts back on the number of new hires. It's not difficult. Higher the minimum wage, the fewer people get jobs. More unemployed, more poor people.
No, it does not.
There are numerous studies that disagree with your opinion.
The Job Loss Myth | Raise The Minimum Wage Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment? (2013) reviews the past two decades of research on the impact of minimum wage increases on employment: this study concludes that the weight of the evidence points to little or no effect of minimum wage increases on job growth. The study also finds that a review of the minimum wage literature commonly cited by minimum wage opponents is flawed because it is subjective, relies in large part on studies of wage increases in foreign countries, and fails to consider the most sophisticated and recent minimum wage studies
In most counties all property is taxed at the same rate. They don't care if you live in or rent it, the owner pays the tax.
Or did you mean the federal income tax deduction for home owners? Yes, the federal government encourages home ownership with a tax deduction for those who purchase homes.
Only while you are paying a mortgage.
There is no tax benefit for property owned outright.
That's a load of bunk.
There are more states that do not cap or limit property taxes.
And they don't count school taxes with property taxes. I pay twice as much in school taxes as I do in property taxes for both of my houses.
Where do you get this bs that all landlords are the evil overlords of the world.
Again, patently false.
Are some, sure, but some renters are the dregs of the earth, too.
Wer can all play the gross generalization game.
While I've been overseas, I've rented my 2,400 sf, 6 bedroom house for $550 + utilities.
I rent my 1,200 sf house for $700+.
These cover my taxes, wear and tear and very little else.
So, come off your high horse and the demonization of home owners.
It comes off as petty and juvenile.
I would guess that about half the states have some sort of property tax cap or limit. When homeowner property taxes become egregious, voters correct the problem. (When landlord property taxes become egregious, homeowners shrug and keep voting for their preferential lower taxes.)
Mom and Pop landlords are not the problem, but there is an ongoing trend toward professionalization and consolidation among landlords - markets today are being increasingly driven by big landlords, while Mom and Pop are becoming less and less relevant in rental markets. (I'm on your side, but you're in a dwindling minority today.)
Michigan demonstrates why homeowners should be demonized - homeowners are responsible for higher property taxes on rental property, and for NIMBY and related regulations which drive up costs for landlords and those who rent from landlords.
Michigan created a steep "nonhomestead tax" on rental property, dedicated to local schools, and thereby subsidizing the much lower school property taxes paid by homeowners. At the same time, they created a small (up to three mills) transitional "enhancement" school property tax with a three-year sunset.
Most school districts, fearful of homeowner backlash, didn't even bother asking voters for the tiny enhancement tax (levied on ALL homes), but all asked voters for the much larger (18 mills) nonhomestead tax (from which owner-occupied primary residences are exempt). The school districts which asked for enhancement mills generally also placed the nonhomestead request on the same ballot. So what happened?
Most school districts saw voters reject tiny temporary enhancement millages AT THE SAME TIME voters passed by huge margins the much larger and much longer (up to 20 years) nonhomestead millages.
So yeah, sometimes homeowners deserve to be demonized.
??? In half the states. rental property (esp apartments) are taxed at higher levels than owner-occupied homes, it's usually called a omestead deduction. In Michigan, the school property tax rate on rental property is four times the rate on owner-occupied homes, thanks to a "nonhomestead tax".
I don't think you understand the homestead tax reduction and it's really not that significant.
It is a REDUCTION of taxes for a primary home that you live in.
Why shouldn't you be taxed more on property that you own and are not living in?
It's a business.
I think the issue is we are seeing lies come to fruition rather than "dealing with tough times." My generation the "dreaded" milliennials were told goto college (as well as gen X and now gen Z), "it helps you have a better life." Many of us post 2008 graduates have guess what, not seen the benefit at all. 50% of recent college graduate can find work, even if it is underemployment. We have been lied to and mortgaged our futures on an education "we needed" but yet we can't do anything with them. Re-read SteelCityRising's post. She is stating the truth. The fact is while it may have been hard for 20-somethings, it is unbearable to 20-something now. Crushing debt, low paying jobs if you can find it and worse off, people who just don't understand saying "Oh we all had tough times, put on your big boy/girl pants."
We did have the same problems.
Look at the economy in the 70s and early 80s.
You do need to put on your big girl/boy pants and figure it out.
We all have to/had to/will continue to do so.
Are you saying that no one else was lied to about the world?
Most of us were in the same position you are now.
I don't think you understand the homestead tax reduction and it's really not that significant.
It is a REDUCTION of taxes for a primary home that you live in.
Why shouldn't you be taxed more on property that you own and are not living in?
It's a business.
Why should my home that I'm living in be taxed more because I don't own it?
That extra tax ($1500 per year) increases the rent I have to pay.
That extra tax also distorts the market and reduces the supply of rentals, thereby increasing rents even more.
Renter median income is half median homeowner income, so why are those least able to pay taxed the most?
Exactly. And it's creating a drag on the whole economy.
People can't buy things or save for houses when their "high paying" job only provides enough money to get by. Say you go to school and rack up $50,000 in debt to get an employable degree. Now you get a job in a city that pays, let's say, $80,000/year. By the time you pay rent, food, transportation, and the student loan payment, you've got very little leftover. You've got practically nothing left over if you're being halfway fiscally responsible and trying to set money aside for the future.
That's a lot of money, it's more than I make and I've been in my job (middle management) for over a decade and I have some very specialized skills.
Do you really expect to be making that right out of school?
Hardly.
Really, you need to get your head out of the clouds on your earning ability.
Also, if you can't make it on $80k, then you're the problem.
So you live with others, we all did it.
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
