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.
Despite all the money spent we have more homeless and poor people than ever before. Let me guess, your solution would be for us to pay even more taxes. What was it that Einstein said, "Doing that same thing over and over and expecting a different result is crazy?" Perhaps things haven't worked because most of the tax money don't actually go into educating people, but rather into the sky-high pensions and benefits of politicians and public employee unions. Regardless, if it's selfish not to want to waste my money on the corrupt system which you are a part of, then I am fine with that.
No thanks Mr. Government employee.
I am not sure what the correct level of taxation is. I can point to several examples that contradict your point that the whole thing is a futile effort.
First, the Great Depression ended largely because of increased government spending. Part of that was public works projects, part of it was WW2. Either way, the economy boomed as a result of government spending, which Mick started the private econ9my, which resulted in an economic boom that persisted into the 1970s.
Secondly, Kansas recently cut taxes and slashed government spending, which resulted in an economic crash not experienced by its neighboring states.
Third, European democracies generally have a higher standard of living than Asian/African countries with lower tax rates.
Plus, it is stupid to think that just because you spend money on something for a period of time the need is eliminated. I bet you spent money on food last month, and I bet you will spend money on food next month. Do you consider either money wasted, or have you received value for money?
Come on people, look at the excellent results from the 100 million from Zuckenberg and the several billion pumped in through the Abbott funding into the Newark school system.
so I got this in the mail that they town is sending some jackboot thug to examine my house. I told my wife not to let anyone in the see the house. will they just move on and leave me alone or are there any negative consequences for my lack of cooperation?
In my experience, if you do not let them in, they will leave a note saying they came and: (A) you can call them to schedule another time; or (B) they'll try again on _____.
If you don't call or you don't let them in on the next visit, they'll move on. They'll go with whatever info they have on the property record and assume your finishes are "average." So if you have recently renovated to a point you have more value than your neighbors, you might benefit by not letting them in. If your home is in less valuable condition than your neighbors, you may lose out. Once you get your letter explaining your new assessed value, there's usually a period of time in which you can challenge the assessment, if you feel it was incorrect.
They'll go with whatever info they have on the property record and assume your finishes are "average" ... Once you get your letter explaining your new assessed value, there's usually a period of time in which you can challenge the assessment, if you feel it was incorrect.
I find that they assume your finishes are "high end", and if you do not let them in, are you even allowed to challenge the assessment?
Your taxes are based on your house's estimated value, which is directly related to its condition. If you have two identical houses, one neglected for the last 50 years and the other one completely modernized and updated, finished basement, big patio, etc., the second one is going to be worth more. If the second house has more bathrooms than the first house, it's also going to be worth more.
I understand that is the way it works.
My question still remains, why is that a logical way to assess taxes. (I omitted the use of the word "fair")
So there are 2 houses, everything is the same except for the condition. One is updated and new the other is older and not new.
The family that spent money to update the home pays more in taxes? Why?
What is the logical reason behind it?
Why would updating your home cause you to pay more in taxes than the neighbor that does not or cannot update their home?
I think everyone appreciates an area of homes that has been taken care of by the homeowners. I would think it benefits everyone. So why hit those homeowners with an up-charge for doing so. Thats the part that is not logical.
Do I think any of this makes a difference, no. I just wanted some feedback, other than, "that's just the way it works" or "it has to be based on something, so it's based on the market value of your home"
I find that they assume your finishes are "high end", and if you do not let them in, are you even allowed to challenge the assessment?
I'm only one data point, but this year I didn't let them in and after their second failed visit they left a card with a checklist for various finishes/attributes, and they wrote their assumption, "average," next to each.
Yes, you can challenge, even if you didn't let them in. I don't know how you challenge their assumptions about interior finishes without agreeing to an inspection, but my neighbors challenged based on land value and got their assessed value reduced.
i have decided to just not let them into my house if they come by. im not going to proactively call them to not come on my property since that will draw unwanted attention to me.
I understand that is the way it works.
My question still remains, why is that a logical way to assess taxes. (I omitted the use of the word "fair")
So there are 2 houses, everything is the same except for the condition. One is updated and new the other is older and not new.
The family that spent money to update the home pays more in taxes? Why?
What is the logical reason behind it?
Why would updating your home cause you to pay more in taxes than the neighbor that does not or cannot update their home?
I think everyone appreciates an area of homes that has been taken care of by the homeowners. I would think it benefits everyone. So why hit those homeowners with an up-charge for doing so. Thats the part that is not logical.
Do I think any of this makes a difference, no. I just wanted some feedback, other than, "that's just the way it works" or "it has to be based on something, so it's based on the market value of your home"
H.
The best I can do is that everyone benefits from a well-maintained town with good services. Look at the difference in house prices and appreciation between, say, Maplewood and Irvington. If we put more of the tax burden on lower-income people, more people won't be able to maintain their property, the appearance of the town will deteriorate, and values will drop. Yes, this is progressive, redistributive taxation. Having been on both sides of the equation at various points in my life, I'm okay with that. To me, it's logical.
I think everyone appreciates an area of homes that has been taken care of by the homeowners. I would think it benefits everyone. So why hit those homeowners with an up-charge for doing so. Thats the part that is not logical.
Do I think any of this makes a difference, no. I just wanted some feedback, other than, "that's just the way it works" or "it has to be based on something, so it's based on the market value of your home"
H.
There's no other way to do it, in the current system, other than market value of the home
As far as condition, it's not like you get dinged for putting in a new carpet. Most homes that are occupied would fall into the "Good" condition category.
I think they are more looking for thing like finished basements that didn't get permits. We got snagged for a deck once (that the previous owners built without permits)
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.
