Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Washington
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-20-2013, 11:54 AM
 
7,743 posts, read 15,871,819 times
Reputation: 10457

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rantiquity View Post
A grand total of six people have died in Washington State in tornadoes from, now get this, six since 1880 to the present present. The few tornadoes that have touched down in Washington have only caused minor damage. Like I said most people in Washington don't live on a flood plain and the floods we do get every few years cause minor damage mostly to pasture and farm land.
Oh, now you can admit we have had them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rantiquity View Post
McMickens Height is not in Seattle its in the city of SeaTac. Its quiet neighbor located between I-5 and the Airport.
... Yes... I know that. I never said otherwise. Not at all a desirable place to live.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-20-2013, 12:36 PM
 
43,011 posts, read 108,049,575 times
Reputation: 30721
Quote:
Originally Posted by rantiquity View Post
You're calling me rude and insulting when you make some stupid comment about Washington was the first state you marked off your list for retirement. Give me a break....
In the context of the thread topic, my comment was not impolite, insulting, or stupid. Alaska and Hawaii weren't on my list. Washington was at the top of my list and the first I researched. I quickly determined it was a financial disadvantage. That's why Washington was the first to be crossed off. Intelligent people do research. They quickly discover that it doesn't make financial sense. There needs to be other compelling reasons,. I haven't discovered any that offset the financial disadvantages compared to other areas of the country on my list.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2013, 09:02 AM
 
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,714 posts, read 58,054,000 times
Reputation: 46182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopes View Post
In the context of the thread topic, my comment was not impolite, insulting, or stupid. Alaska and Hawaii weren't on my list. Washington was at the top of my list and the first I researched. I quickly determined it was a financial disadvantage. That's why Washington was the first to be crossed off. Intelligent people do research. They quickly discover that it doesn't make financial sense. There needs to be other compelling reasons,. I haven't discovered any that offset the financial disadvantages compared to other areas of the country on my list.
Being a 'border' dweller in WA is about at good as it can get for a WA retiree (tho not adequate incentive / best choice for all). IF I can ever get my Property tax situation resolved, WA would be desirable, due to 20 min from PDX (I fly very frequently and don't plan on ceasing that activity). No sales tax in OR and LOTS to do + 1 hr to Beach, Mt St Helens, Mt Hood, and only a step out the door to be in Columbia Gorge.

Many local folks have decent taxes but none have the view I enjoy at the moment from the computer desk. (not worth $40.day...... I have only been home in WA 10 days since Oct...)

Gonna have to do something about this rain... (100" PLUS / yr, due to elevation / clouds having to UNLOAD on ME to get over the Cascades).

More critical is WA Healthcare. Currently our choices in SW WA are about the worst in the state (due to proximity to Portland metro reduces our WA options), Things are not looking any better. According to projections of rates with AFFORDABLE Health Care... Medical care / insurance dwarfs $14,400/ yr in property taxes. Pretty ugly. Not sure there will be a choice for many retirees to stay in WA. (except to go without health care and pay the fine if nabbed).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 08:19 AM
 
43,011 posts, read 108,049,575 times
Reputation: 30721
The views are beautiful there. And I LOVE RAIN!

I'm not going to worry about the "sky is falling" healthcare stuff yet. I'll wait to see how it all works out.

I just told hubby that we're shopping in Oregon!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2013, 03:39 AM
 
2 posts, read 2,707 times
Reputation: 14
Default Taxes in Washington

My husband and I own five acres west of Forks on the Olympic Peninsula... we bought the property about eight years ago... the taxes started out at around 800.00 a year and now are 1550.00 after eight years.. we have not even built a house yet so once that is done I am concerned that taxes will be an issue as we will be retiring there..I understand from talking with the county assessor that if you are over sixty five and live on the property there is a tax break... since neither of those apply to me now, but will in the future, it will be welcome..I personally love Washington and can hardly wait to retire there...I love the weather, have yet to meet an unfriendly person (try Los Angeles sometime for unfriendly) and the beauty of the state is simply stunning...I have lived in numerous states including Hawaii and all have their own beauty.. to pass through a gas station and claim that meth heads might possibly be in the area is just crazy.. there are meth heads everywhere... there is an internet map that shows the states where meth is a problem...the numbers go from 1 to 100 with 1 being the best and 100 being awful..Washington State is an 8.. California is a 76 and the mid west from Iowa to Illinois and down south is totally out of control...so a one stop impression is not really an acurate assessment..try slowing down.. breathing and looking around...maybe you can't see the forest for the trees...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2013, 11:08 AM
 
Location: Northwest Peninsula
6,225 posts, read 3,409,932 times
Reputation: 4372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cathrynoo View Post
My husband and I own five acres west of Forks on the Olympic Peninsula... we bought the property about eight years ago... the taxes started out at around 800.00 a year and now are 1550.00 after eight years.. we have not even built a house yet so once that is done I am concerned that taxes will be an issue as we will be retiring there..I understand from talking with the county assessor that if you are over sixty five and live on the property there is a tax break... since neither of those apply to me now, but will in the future, it will be welcome..I personally love Washington and can hardly wait to retire there...I love the weather, have yet to meet an unfriendly person (try Los Angeles sometime for unfriendly) and the beauty of the state is simply stunning...I have lived in numerous states including Hawaii and all have their own beauty.. to pass through a gas station and claim that meth heads might possibly be in the area is just crazy.. there are meth heads everywhere... there is an internet map that shows the states where meth is a problem...the numbers go from 1 to 100 with 1 being the best and 100 being awful..Washington State is an 8.. California is a 76 and the mid west from Iowa to Illinois and down south is totally out of control...so a one stop impression is not really an acurate assessment..try slowing down.. breathing and looking around...maybe you can't see the forest for the trees...
There is only a property tax break if you are disabled, low income or a widow of a vet.

Of all the communities on the Peninsula Forks has the highest concentrate of meth usage. Not saying meth usage Forks is high compared to other areas in the US but that is the area that is the highest on the Peninsula. Take it for leave it, its the truth. PTs tri-city area is probably a close second.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2013, 11:17 AM
 
1,950 posts, read 3,527,752 times
Reputation: 2770
most retirees are "low income" since they no longer work. Savings are not tallied into the tax break.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2013, 07:01 AM
 
1,006 posts, read 2,215,925 times
Reputation: 1575
Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthRabbit View Post
but I got crossways with the assessor and went to court a few times. So they are beating me into submission.

Taxes on my most recent WA home WERE $1000/yr when I bought it (last yr). This yr they jumped to $1500 (assessor chose to value it 2x what I paid, and argued that I got a good deal, so my purchase price does not matter.

Well pissing people in power off is never a wise idea

Of course purchase price isnt considered in all cases. If it was, then everyone would be lowering their purchase price on paper, just like is currently done on cars.

I would be curious to know if your neighbors pay similar rates?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2013, 10:34 AM
 
Location: Northwest Peninsula
6,225 posts, read 3,409,932 times
Reputation: 4372
Quote:
Originally Posted by west seattle gal View Post
most retirees are "low income" since they no longer work. Savings are not tallied into the tax break.
If your income is below $35K, than yes you may be eligible for a property tax break.
I dispute your statement that 'most' retirees are low income. Take a drive around the Dungeness valley of Sequim and see that the vast majority of houses are not low income dwellings, not even close.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2013, 11:08 AM
 
Location: Quimper Peninsula
1,981 posts, read 3,151,872 times
Reputation: 1771
Quote:
Originally Posted by rantiquity View Post
If your income is below $35K, than yes you may be eligible for a property tax break.
I dispute your statement that 'most' retirees are low income. Take a drive around the Dungeness valley of Sequim and see that the vast majority of houses are not low income dwellings, not even close.
Think about what income is as reported on a tax return. Just because someone has invested in a $750K home does not mean they have an income over $35K!

I think you would be surprised if you looked at the tax returns of those folks, just because they have money invested houses, stocks, bonds bla bla bla. Does not mean they have income. They may have a high net worth but not a high income.

Plenty of property rich, money poor folks in the world, my self included. (Farmers often have every dime in land, and make very little money..)
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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 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 > Washington

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:18 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top