Cali Leading the Fight?Follow

You reap what you sow.

I mentioned absolutely nothing about immigration in my post. This is a non sequiter, and a non starter on a counter argument.

HOW is eliminating the escalating housing tax situation NOT a conservative principle? It's 100% flat tax policy. Everyone pays equal taxes on their property!

School me here. And leave immigration out of it; they don't have the jumbo mortgages in California, legal citizens do.

The reason for California's financial issues is the 2/3 requirement to raise taxes or pass a budget.

Ironically, this is partly a result of prop 13 (the tax part - not sure about the budget part). However, what prop 13 is famous for is the lowering of all property taxes to 1% - not a big deal - but it caps the growth of property taxes at 2% per year. So if your property valuates at 10% per year (the boom times) your property is worth a ton more then the government collects taxes on. It is not uncommon to buy a home from a long time owner and find out that their tax rate was based on a half or a third of what the market value of the home was. This has happened to me personally.

Since no other taxes could be levied, the state is virtually totally dependent on property taxes. Now this wasn't a problem until recently when the home prices crashed and the state is collecting way less taxes. You simply file a form and your home is re-valuated at the current market value. If this is less then it used to be, your property taxes go down. I have personally done this. But if my home price goes back up, the rate of tax increase is capped at only 2%.

The California state legislature patched together a bunch of proposals which would allow the government to effectively borrow money and remain solvent. These, by law, had to be approved by the people - and the people voted them down.

Kavek,



And this is the problem with Democrats. How can someone who knows everything learn anything new?

You've read every book in existence, have you?

Yeah, that 2/3 requirement is a pain in the *** for getting anything done.

As a result of Prop 13, Property Taxes are capped at 1% of fair market value. The value is only reassessed when the property is sold (or undergoes significant construction). This means that if you buy a house now and it goes up 300% in value, you will not have to pay 300% more in property taxes. (If you sell the house at that time, the next buyer will though.) The state can increase your home's valuation by a maximum of 2% per year to account for inflation. I've been in my house going on six years now and I don't think they've ever increased my liability.

As a homeowner, you can request a reassessment, but are only allowed to request every N years or something. A lot of people are doing this, myself included.

During the housing bubble, it was not uncommon for one guy to pay over $10K a year in property taxes with his next door neighbor to paying a few hundred bucks because he'd lived there so long.

California doesn't really consider property taxes as revenue because they're collected and used locally (county-level). However, with less money coming in from property taxes, the counties get less revenue and so need more money from the state, so it's still a pull on the budget.

That being said, property tax is not the only tax collected by the state. Income, sales, and use taxes account for about 75% of the budget.

Not that whole "red state vs blue state federal funding" argument again...

It's more correctly identified as "agricultural" versus "non-agricultural" states Joph. Farm subsidies are what make the numbers appear the way they do. They are massive in relation to the number of taxpayers in a given state. And they also overwhelmingly help out people living in states with high density population centers by keeping the prices of food low. Remove those, and it would hurt the folks in other states far more than it would hurt the folks living in the farming states. It was a lame argument the last two times you brought it up, and it's even more lame in the context of this thread.


As to prop 13, Yossarian is correct. It does not apply some arbitrary cap on the taxes based on property values. It simply sets the property taxes based on the value of the property when it was purchased. It's bad enough that we essentially tax something people already own. Making them pay more because that thing increased in value, when they gain nothing directly from that increase in value is absurd. Taxes should ideally be levied on some kind of economic event. Buying/selling something. Heck. Even if they just levied a tax when/if the value of your property increased would be fine. But you pay taxes each and every single year on your property regardless of whether it increased in value, or you sold it, or used it as collateral in a loan, etc.

Prop 13 is one of the few "sane" tax laws I've seen passed in my lifetime. If anything, it's a model for property rights which other states should be copying. Arguing that it's "bad" just because it prevents California from collecting as much taxes is a poor argument. We should not be assessing taxes based on how much revenue we can collect, but assessing taxes based on impact to those being taxed. Ideally, we should limit the impact as much as possible.


As Varus states, taxing what people *buy* is a reasonable approach. It ensures that you are never taxed just for having money, or making money, but based on the direct benefit you derive from that money. A flat sales type tax isn't a bad idea, but only if it can be implemented as a full replacement for income taxes, and it could be tweaked to avoid placing burdensome taxes on the lowest income earners (who consume most of their income).


As to the current cat and mouse game being played out in Sacramento? It's interesting to watch. Basically, the overwhelming result of the recent elections was that Californians do not want to pay higher taxes, but want our government to stop spending so darn much. Of course, the first round response to that is to threaten to cut spending for Fire Fighters, and Teachers, and Health Care workers. A tactic pretty obviously designed to engender a "Oh no! not <insert group here>!" response. I think most Californians are seeing right through this and are pushing for *real* budget cuts. And the rest of the nation is watching to take it's cue from us. If California makes real cuts in "benefits" based spending, and it works, the rest of you can expect to see the same sorts of things in your states. If California caves in somehow and protects its precious social spending, eco-friendly bike paths, and a host of silly and wasteful spending, and finds ways to raise revenue in spite of the massive unpopularity to any new taxes, it'll signal to the socialists around the country that they can do the same and we'll see a wave of tax increases the likes of which we've never seen before in this country, which will not be restricted to the states.


That's what's at stake here. Honestly, I fervently hope that they choose to bite the bullet and actually make massive spending cuts. We can really do without a whole host of stuff that we spend money on that isn't directly related to fighting fires, or stopping crime, or providing an education to our children.

Step: 1 Legalize weed, of courting to some judge on the young turk on youtube, that would save 1.3 billion dollars from keeping put smokers in jail

Step: 2 Tax weed, make another 2 billion dollars (same judge)

Step: 3 ....I just gave them a 3 billion dollar idea.....noone is paying me for this ****.

You can't shoot a drunk person either, its about being responsible.

Prop 13 was the result of taxpayer revolt..... people were being taxed out of there homes due to prices escalating so much.

There were cases of Prop tax bills being higher than the cost of the home,
so in effect, you were being taxed on profit (appreciation) EVEN IF YOU DIDNT SELL YOUR HOUSE !!!

Cali may in fact be leading the charge, involuntarily, due to being forced to confront their liberal policies. We have been so wealthy, for so long, not sure its possible without significant pain.

Illegal immigration is a huge part of it, but so is the massive entitlement structure, Union influence on GOVT jobs etc. (at the local county govt., you pay dues even if you dont join union, pretty sweet huh ?)

Bottom line, the gravy train has de-railed.

Before ya blast me, know 3 things : I live in Calif- I own my home- I have been in Business and worked with GOVT for years.

Even if this were true, farm subsidies were originally intended to help out small family farms and are now overwhelmingly used to fatten agribusiness.

FUCk agribusiness. Let 'em absorb their own COB. Regulate their prices. Goddamn leeches.



Edit: on a side note... "of courting"? Did you by any chance mean according? I weep for the future generations trying to communicate with each other.


Edited, Jun 9th 2009 6:01am by Samira