U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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 10-23-2010, 08:51 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
16,652 posts, read 22,064,100 times
Reputation: 8899

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider View Post
Just because I have not personally experienced a 33% hike in property taxes in one year does not mean that I lack the intellectual capacity to understand what that means to other people. I find your implication to the contrary insulting. Your reaction to my post is especially odd in that the point of that post was the large local variation in property taxes, as opposed to speaking as if there were state by state levels. So your example of a huge and sudden hike actually supports my thesis that we cannot generalize by state about property taxes, since they vary enormously by locality (city or county).

If the 33% hike you are talking about was indeed a state-wide hike where you live, that rebuts my thesis, of course, and I stand corrected as far as your state is concerned. Just out of curiosity, what political jurisdiction are you referring to (county, city, town/township, or other)?
In Arizona, where I live, I can freeze my taxes at what I am paying when I turn 65. Luckily I didn't mine have gone down each of the past 3 years
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-24-2010, 12:55 PM
 
Location: Near a river
16,042 posts, read 20,109,870 times
Reputation: 15725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider View Post
Just because I have not personally experienced a 33% hike in property taxes in one year does not mean that I lack the intellectual capacity to understand what that means to other people. I find your implication to the contrary insulting. Your reaction to my post is especially odd in that the point of that post was the large local variation in property taxes, as opposed to speaking as if there were state by state levels. So your example of a huge and sudden hike actually supports my thesis that we cannot generalize by state about property taxes, since they vary enormously by locality (city or county).

If the 33% hike you are talking about was indeed a state-wide hike where you live, that rebuts my thesis, of course, and I stand corrected as far as your state is concerned. Just out of curiosity, what political jurisdiction are you referring to (county, city, town/township, or other)?
I did not mean to be insulting, I was simply responding, after you said your taxes only go up slightly, that you and others don't understnad that these are not small tax hikes we're talking about in some places. They are huge. Over 12 years in my town, my taxes have doubled. Now, in one year, we are talking about a town budget shortfall so big that, had the override passed, we would have had a 33% hike. This is because there are only 1200 households paying taxes. In larger towns or in cities, the impact would have been less. This is not statewide. It's not county wide. It's the particular town. Two towns over, they haven't had an override in memory. That's because the town's school "costs" do not continue to rise to the point where they now comprise a whopping (almost) 70% of the entire town budget. If taxes have to rise so much in one year due to a "budgetary emergency" (to save the schools), what happens next year and the year after and the year after, as the overall economy either stagnates or sinks even further--? It means that the same 1200 households here are going to be the ones to foot the bill! That's all fine and good if you have two or more people in the workforce in the same household, making good money. But not so great for seniors. So those (not you) who are implying "we must do our duty and be good citizens and march to the town hall and cheerfully pay our taxes otherwise we're stupid or uneducated or greedy" don't understand, perhaps because of wehre they live, what some older homeowners are up against. I can only imagine that this situation could spread, and get worse year by year.

Last edited by RiverBird; 10-24-2010 at 01:12 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2010, 01:06 PM
 
Location: Near a river
16,042 posts, read 20,109,870 times
Reputation: 15725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
Seriously, I am very confused how you can be all "smaller government" and don't spend spend spend but here you are suggesting more services (collections) to put the costs of collection on you and me instead of the non-paying party.
In the several NE towns I have lived in, I have walked into town hall to pay taxes to see administrators, to put it kindly, not killing themselves on the job. How many people in one small town are going to default anyway? How did they handle tax debts in the past? They didn't bring on extra employees I'm sure. They dealt with it, within the course of their duties. I am talking about relatively small towns, and am not speaking about cities. But even there, I know 6 or 7 city employees that are none too stressed on the job. If banks are going to take on property tax debt collections, why do you imagine they're so willing to do this? What is the LTC going to be, not to mention the endless red tape and waste and overblown profit. How are the defaulting homeowners going to be able to negotiate all this complication? If the economy gets to the point where some elderly have to choose between eating and paying their taxes, for those who have no family willing to help them where will they go? They will end up on some form of public welfare, public housing. Guess who pays....we, the taxpayers. What was gained???
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2010, 01:55 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles area
14,017 posts, read 18,934,403 times
Reputation: 32439
To Newenglandgirl: Thanks for your clarification. Now I understand your reaction to my post. I cannot blame anyone for voting against a 33% hike in property taxes. To me, something is radically wrong if that sort of hike is "needed" in a given year.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2010, 02:06 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
16,652 posts, read 22,064,100 times
Reputation: 8899
Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl View Post
I did not mean to be insulting, I was simply responding, after you said your taxes only go up slightly, that you and others don't understnad that these are not small tax hikes we're talking about in some places. They are huge. Over 12 years in my town, my taxes have doubled. Now, in one year, we are talking about a town budget shortfall so big that, had the override passed, we would have had a 33% hike. This is because there are only 1200 households paying taxes. In larger towns or in cities, the impact would have been less. This is not statewide. It's not county wide. It's the particular town. Two towns over, they haven't had an override in memory. That's because the town's school "costs" do not continue to rise to the point where they now comprise a whopping (almost) 70% of the entire town budget. If taxes have to rise so much in one year due to a "budgetary emergency" (to save the schools), what happens next year and the year after and the year after, as the overall economy either stagnates or sinks even further--? It means that the same 1200 households here are going to be the ones to foot the bill! That's all fine and good if you have two or more people in the workforce in the same household, making good money. But not so great for seniors. So those (not you) who are implying "we must do our duty and be good citizens and march to the town hall and cheerfully pay our taxes otherwise we're stupid or uneducated or greedy" don't understand, perhaps because of wehre they live, what some older homeowners are up against. I can only imagine that this situation could spread, and get worse year by year.
Our School District asks for an override every year, I think they are getting used to having them turned down. I don't mind the money as much as I mind them asking every year. They need to learn to live within their budget or budget more money.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2010, 04:57 PM
 
1,679 posts, read 2,730,563 times
Reputation: 1293
Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl View Post
Property taxes should be an equal, across the board gradated percentage of household income. The way it is now, with taxes spiraling up every year, you can see the writing on the wall.
You are basically saying replace the property tax with an income tax? That would hurt renters and people without children. It would also hurt high income earners.

How about you just pay for you own child's education, not having taxpayers pick up the bill?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2010, 05:33 PM
 
1,679 posts, read 2,730,563 times
Reputation: 1293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
1) Banks are no different than any other business or most people for that matter. I would wonder what success rate i would get approaching random strangers and asking them to wash my car for free.

2) Can you explain to me how banks are selling something (tax bill) that they do not own? I am going to claim this is some sort of myth and you can always just pay your own property taxes directly which is what I do.

I fail to see how it's the banks fault if you don't pay your taxes.
I think the problem is that the banks can take anyone's house.

And this has nothing to do with a loan were an agreement was made, this has to do with taxes. Taking the home should not be legal. Its like saying, you forgot to pay 1000$ in taxes, were going to fine you 1500, charge you 18% interest now you owe 3000K. So were taking your house?

No, maybe they can garnish wages, or elect some kind of payment plan.

Think about it, even if you file for bankruptcy, you generally get to keep your house, this rule is completely out of line IMO.

Worse it is completely destructive economically.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2010, 10:53 PM
 
48,508 posts, read 88,754,735 times
Reputation: 18192
Basicallyt the lender has a interest in teh home and tax enaties have taxing power and abilty to act when the taxes are not paid. The lender is only lookig after his interest and possible action. Likely it is speeeld out in the mortgage what you agreed to o taxes. the amount is between you and the government ;not the bank.hey just expect you to do what you agreed to on payig the Taxes when they allowed you to avoid them collercting and doing it.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 12:33 PM
 
Location: Near a river
16,042 posts, read 20,109,870 times
Reputation: 15725
Quote:
Originally Posted by hartford_renter View Post
You are basically saying replace the property tax with an income tax? That would hurt renters and people without children. It would also hurt high income earners.

How about you just pay for you own child's education, not having taxpayers pick up the bill?
You can call it an income tax, if you want. In my little idea, the taxes would vary only slightly and by broad general category of household income. A 2-person household bringing in $200K/year, their property size would be compared to a little old lady living in the same size property on $12K a year (let's add that she has to have been living there for X number of years). A slightly higher tax amount for the higher income households would help offset the tax amounts for the very low income households. Some will jump on this for sure, but just putting out an idea. I realize the idealism in this and the bureaucracy, but someone could come up with some idea that would adjust taxes so the poorer elderly an stay in their homes.

Your second P: Have to think about that. But how many households in a small town, with children, can pay for the entire school budget (which is generally spiralling out of control)--? And, you are talking about private or home schooling, subject of another thread and not at all a bad idea.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 01:12 PM
 
59,508 posts, read 46,477,037 times
Reputation: 36883
Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl View Post
In the several NE towns I have lived in, I have walked into town hall to pay taxes to see administrators, to put it kindly, not killing themselves on the job. How many people in one small town are going to default anyway? How did they handle tax debts in the past? They didn't bring on extra employees I'm sure. They dealt with it, within the course of their duties. I am talking about relatively small towns, and am not speaking about cities. But even there, I know 6 or 7 city employees that are none too stressed on the job. If banks are going to take on property tax debt collections, why do you imagine they're so willing to do this? What is the LTC going to be, not to mention the endless red tape and waste and overblown profit. How are the defaulting homeowners going to be able to negotiate all this complication? If the economy gets to the point where some elderly have to choose between eating and paying their taxes, for those who have no family willing to help them where will they go? They will end up on some form of public welfare, public housing. Guess who pays....we, the taxpayers. What was gained???
Why do you keep dragging the argument back to a topic we've already agreed upon?

What is the last word in the thread topic?
Rate this post positively 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 $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, 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