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.
And that's just how many of the posters who complain about their earning ability want it.
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.
This is so full of holes and your lack of knowledge (other than the low level understanding in order to whine) that it's pathetic.
You're talking one location in one part of the country.
Maybe if you put this much energy into actually improving your lot in life rather than whining about it, you'd find success.
Your choice.
You don't own it, it's a BUSINESS.
BUSINESS taxes are different from taxes where someone lives in their house.
It's a business.
Might I suggest that you find a nice tent to live in and quit moaning about everyone else in the world.
Why does "it's a business" justify higher taxes? If I earn $100,000 as an employee, I pay N income tax, and if I earn $100,000 from a business I own, I pay N income tax - there is no extra tax on my income because "it's a business".
So why is it okay to soak rental property with higher taxes?
Note also the market distortion here:
When a home goes on the market, it's more expensive for a landlord ($1500/yr or $125/mo) than it is for an owner-occupant to buy, so renters are being deprived of the larger supply of rentals which would exist on a level playing field.
How is any of this fair to renters, especially those who are not choosing to rent?
It's become nearly unlivable for middle class people in some parts of the country. I'm guessing most people here are already home-owners and thus haven't noticed it as much but it's nearly impossible for people starting out today. Lower CoL now!
There are just too many variables in your story line to make it a valid argument for adjustments in a cost of living. That is, a CoL other than your own. Anybody will tell you the three things real estate is all about are location, location, and location.
First - location. Homes are just going to cost more in a big city so a potential buyer can do without overspending on a home, find something less costly elsewhere, or rent.
Second - location. So a couple of friends, both newly weds, want to live near each other - relatively near, not across town. One makes big bucks, the other just started a small business with little income but big opportunity. It could be likely that they just aren't going to be able to get comparable loans for home purchase. Across town may need to be a reality for a while. Or rent.
Third, location. I spent a few decades in the big city, some in lots of square footage, some in the reduced square footage of apartments. Then I headed to a more rural area with nearby and easy access to the big city. I found a sweet 2/1 place for less than I'd pay rent in any place that isn't a ghetto. Need more square footage... I go outside.
So rather than it be a problem with cost of living, you might want to re-assess needs and wants according to the reality of ability.
??? 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".
Which means you can relocate to a state in the other half.
Why does "it's a business" justify higher taxes? If I earn $100,000 as an employee, I pay N income tax, and if I earn $100,000 from a business I own, I pay N income tax - there is no extra tax on my income because "it's a business".
So why is it okay to soak rental property with higher taxes?
Note also the market distortion here:
When a home goes on the market, it's more expensive for a landlord ($1500/yr or $125/mo) than it is for an owner-occupant to buy, so renters are being deprived of the larger supply of rentals which would exist on a level playing field.
How is any of this fair to renters, especially those who are not choosing to rent?
Find someone like me.
Share a house to get more for your money like thousands of others do.
Work to change the rules.
Quit whining.
You can't force me to do something with my property that I don't want to do with it.
You are a renter by your own choice.
You've made life choices that led you to where you are.
No one else made them for you.
Give me one reason why I would even want to rent to someone who did nothing but whine and blame others?
Imagine what type of tenant they'd be.
The same people complaining about wages and cost of living are the same people who vote for the party whose ideology is based on deficit spending and the resultant outcome.
Please explain to me how balancing the federal budget will decrease the cost of living.
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.