Texas Needs a Permanent, Progressive State Income Tax

[clarksvillemom]

Not all born and raised Texans believe the way below poster does. Turn Texas Blue!

PS: Texas believe that the government shouldn't be providing things like health care for all, subsidized childcare, cultural institutions, etc. Such things are personal responsibility.

[Yellow pool of piddle]

Originally Posted by lepoisson

This is how Florida does things. They have no income tax and lower property taxes.

But charging fees for using the library and going to school makes matters a LOT worse. You'll end up with poor people being even more uneducated because they won't pay. I do not have children, and it's sometimes irritating knowing that most property taxes go straight to schools. But it's also a good feeling that schools help make society better.

What about the fire department and ambulance? Imagine them saying "sorry, we didn't receive your fees last month, I guess your house can just burn".

Some user fees are fair (like road tolls), but others are not.

Schools don't have to be expensive. The way I divide the true American two party system up is Democrat and Republican lawyers on one side and fewer nd fewer Democrat and Republican lawyers on the other.

We need as little government as possible.

[Slowpoke_TX]

Originally Posted by lepoisson

This is how Florida does things. They have no income tax and lower property taxes.

But charging fees for using the library and going to school makes matters a LOT worse. You'll end up with poor people being even more uneducated because they won't pay.

So Florida doesn't educate the children of people who don't pay?

Originally Posted by lepoisson

What about the fire department and ambulance? Imagine them saying "sorry, we didn't receive your fees last month, I guess your house can just burn".

Have you ever seen a sign in front of the fire dept that says "you come to our fundraiser dance, we'll come to your fire"? Where I grew up, the FD and ambulance were funded by donations; $200 was the customary amount when they had to be called out. But that's not practical in big cities where professional (paid) departments are the norm. Thus, I'd prefer that local sales tax fund things like police/fire/EMS as well as the general budget of the county and municipal governments. That's why my previous post said "user fees, for the most part."

Originally Posted by lepoisson

Some user fees are fair (like road tolls), but others are not.

What's unfair is making people pay for services they don't use. Those of us who are childless should not be paying for schools. Those who don't drive should not be paying for roads. And so on.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX

So Florida doesn't educate the children of people who don't pay?




Have you ever seen a sign in front of the fire dept that says "you come to our fundraiser dance, we'll come to your fire"? Where I grew up, the FD and ambulance were funded by donations; $200 was the customary amount when they had to be called out. But that's not practical in big cities where professional (paid) departments are the norm. Thus, I'd prefer that local sales tax fund things like police/fire/EMS as well as the general budget of the county and municipal governments. That's why my previous post said "user fees, for the most part."




What's unfair is making people pay for services they don't use. Those of us who are childless should not be paying for schools. Those who don't drive should not be paying for roads. And so on.

You DO use the schools even if you do not have children (and never attended public school yourself). When my children were in school, each attended public school, but they also attended private schools for a large part of their education. Thus I was in the position of paying taxes for public schools and private tuition simultaneously. However, I'm smart enough to realize that public schooling, even when I don't have children or am sending my kids to private rather than public schools, benefits me in a myriad of ways because it means that we have a more educated populace that works with and for us. Plus, a more educated populace puts us as a country on a more level playing field with other countries, and the world is getting ever smaller in that regard. Unfortunately, we used to be top dog as far as education is concerned, but we're down around 12th now, which means there are 11 other countries with a population that is more educated than ours and that can thus take advantage of us if they wish.

You need to look at the big picture.

[Milton Miteybad]

Originally Posted by earthisle

Property tax is regressive because a millionaire buys a $1 mil house, and a $50kaire buys a $500K house.

There are two salutary aspects to the property tax:

1) It's largely voluntary as to how much you pay. You can pay more if you wish to own more real estate, and if you wish to pay less, you can always dispose of real property so as to offload the responsibility for those taxes onto the new buyers.

Of course, if you avoid buying too much house for your budget, you can handle the property taxes fairly easily. If you buy a $500K house with an income of only $50K/year...well, there are those who might say you deserve whatever happens to you.

2) The property tax is actually progressive in its impact for a very simple reason: It is assessed against those who actually own wealth in the form of real assets that can be taxed. Those who have the most property are those who pay the most in ad valorem tax, as a general rule. Those who own less in the way of real assets pay less. You just can't any more equitable than that.

[Trainwreck20]

There is no way to hide or 'off-shore' your property - if you own property, you WILL pay tax on it. No tricky tax loopholes to use off-setting losses, etc. That 'millionaire' who owns a million dollar house will pay $25k in taxes, give or take. The millionaire that owns the $10 million house will pay a quarter million in taxes. Pretty much no ifs, ands, or buts.

Assuming you mean someone making $50k per year (as opposed to in the bank but making more per year than that?) is unlikely going to buy a $500k house (~$12k in taxes) but may end up in one with appreciation. In that case, they can cash-out and buy a $200k house, invest the rest, and cut their tax bill without every changing their income. Completely within their control.

[ikoolu]

you people should be very careful what you wish for - you complain about property taxes but you do use services provided by the cities - counties

your concern should be about the increases each year -as property values drop the rate go up - elected officials are all the same all over this country - they can't live with less -

i suggest you elect officials who are very conserviitive in financial matters

in calif they fee you to death or use the propositions or bonds to keep or increase the real costs of taxes. At least in Texas there is no income taxes which greatly offsets the property taxes - and most areas of don't not have wild property values increases - austin does etc

be more concerned how they spend it and especially on long term locked in times like employees, maintenance, new construction etc and make your voice heard about fiscal matters - or you will wake up and see the libs start adding on these hidden costs like bonds, fees etc

thats why we bought a house to retire in texas as this state fees, bonds, taxes you every where you turn - be careful people

[shortel]

why did someone have to reopen a 5 year old thread?

[happycrow]

Because elections bring out the goofballs, Shortel.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by shortel

why did someone have to reopen a 5 year old thread?

Because this, which City-Data puts on all oldish and older threads: