patrick.net

Its really bs that prop 13 house can be put in trust and kept in a family forever at low tax rate, businesses I believe are even worse because the tax rate can be kept down as long as originator keep a small share.

Quigley says

I really don’t see why people should pay significantly different property tax rates based on how long they’ve been a homeowner.

Did your parents bring you here as a little kid, or birthed you here?

Or were you coerced to move to here with a gun to your head?

Just asking.

Quigley says

Yup that proposition passed.
I really don’t see why people should pay significantly different property tax rates based on how long they’ve been a homeowner. It’s really a “got mine, fuck the new guys” sort of rule. It might have begun with good intentions, but the super inflation of 1975-1985 changed it into something else entirely.

You weren't here during the tax revolt I take it. Shit was insane, unions wanted tax increases, while average Americans everywhere were foreclosing because they couldn't afford taxes to pay union pensions. That was fucked up.

Prop 13 nicely fixed that problem. You can at old age not worry about bullshit market speculation affecting your taxes. You shouldn't have to pay more taxes because someone is willing to overpay next door. It created stability for older folks. You get rid of prop 13 and you'll have homelessness and riots on the street.

Fortwaynemobile says

You shouldn't have to pay more taxes because someone is willing to overpay next door. It created stability for older folks.

Well said.

Sorry not buying it. There’s no reason for me to pay 4 times your tax for an equivalent home. The only exception I can condone for different tax rates for the same thing is a reduced rate for senior citizens (past 65), say 25% of normal tax. And no transfers.
We all need to pay the same tax if we are to feel right about it and be equally invested in the society.

Quigley says

Prop 13 is the reason LA unified can’t afford to pay more teachers to reduce class sizes down from 45:1. That and too many illegals.

FIFY

Kakistocracy says

New Jersey -

Property tax burden: 5.12 percent

Woo hoo, We're Number One! We're Number One!

We beat all you suckers on the property tax burden.

Now stop whining!

Go back in time and pay 30 years of taxes I paid into the system to help afford society and build it.
Your view of equality is very unequal.


Quigley says

Sorry not buying it. There’s no reason for me to pay 4 times your tax for an equivalent home. The only exception I can condone for different tax rates for the same thing is a reduced rate for senior citizens (past 65), say 25% of normal tax. And no transfers.
We all need to pay the same tax if we are to feel right about it and be equally invested in the society.

FortWayneIndiana says

Go back in time and pay 30 years of taxes I paid into the system to help afford society and build it.
Your view of equality is very unequal.


Quigley says

Sorry not buying it. There’s no reason for me to pay 4 times your tax for an equivalent home. The only exception I can condone for different tax rates for the same thing is a reduced rate for senior citizens (past 65), say 25% of normal tax. And no transfers.
We all need to pay the same tax if we are to feel right about it and be equally invested in the society.

That's fine but most probably even with all that pay-in take more out net-net than they paid in, the reason being the incredible inflation in local essential goods and services (Medicare etc.). Even though the millenials are stupid if they think they can vote in socialism and come out ahead when they're older they are worse off than the older generations. And then they have terrible work ethic on top of that, so it's a recipe for socialism.

Willing to bet Jazz's entire exposure to Q is from this article.

Fortwaynemobile says

You get rid of prop 13 and you'll have homelessness and riots on the street.

No kidding.

As if California's problems are that we aren't taxed high enough.

Quigley says

There’s no reason for me to pay 4 times your tax for an equivalent home.

hahahaha!

Then why are you doing it, Quigley?

Why did you pay too much and by doing so, lock-in too high of a tax assessment on yourself?

I didn't find your answer my previous question, just asking.... did your parents bring you here when you were a kid, or by birthing you here? Or were you coerced with a gun pointed at your head to come here and overpay?

Yeah it has been a pretty good larp. Qoomers still have faith and don't recognize it for what it really has been- a very successful stall tactic.

jazz_music says

A comprehensive counter-case to one of the more dumb conspiracy theories in history

Are you talking about that conspiracy of Russian collusion that's been going on for almost 3 years?

B.A.C.A.H. says

Quigley says

There’s no reason for me to pay 4 times your tax for an equivalent home.

hahahaha!

Then why are you doing it, Quigley?

Why did you pay too much and by doing so, lock-in too high of a tax assessment on yourself?

I didn't find your answer my previous question, just asking.... did your parents bring you here when you were a kid, or by birthing you here? Or were you coerced with a gun pointed at your head to come here and overpay?

If you sell your house, will you sell it at market price $$MM or 1970s $100k. Hope you can answer your own question.

Fortwaynemobile says

You get rid of prop 13 and you'll have homelessness and riots on the street.

You mean, just like every other state out side CA where there are no Prop 13 victims in every neighborhood.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Why did you pay too much and by doing so, lock-in too high of a tax assessment on yourself?

I paid the going rate. You can argue that it was too much, and i wouldn’t disagree, but it was the price of becoming a homeowner here.

I came here for work. Of my own volition 16 years ago. My job is here and so here I must live. I don’t want to be homeless, so I must participate in the housing market in some capacity. And renting sucks. I could rent my house instead but my rent would be very close to my payment now. And my only guarantee is that it would keep going up.

Sorry, the argument that “I paid 30 years of taxes” means nothing. EVERYONE who is a homeowner pays taxes! You’re not special! And I’d argue additionally that your 30 years of taxes will be equaled in real dollars by my own contributions in approximately 5 more years. So what now?

Prop 13 is a dinosaur, past its time or usefulness, and will shortly be shuffling off to go extinct.

Life is unequal. Your view of equality is unequal. My 30 years of taxes funded the state for 30 years, and it was a lot even then.

In 30 years your rate will be low too by ca standards, and you’ll be old too. That’s how it was designed to work.

Quigley says

B.A.C.A.H. says

Why did you pay too much and by doing so, lock-in too high of a tax assessment on yourself?

I paid the going rate. You can argue that it was too much, and i wouldn’t disagree, but it was the price of becoming a homeowner here.

I came here for work. Of my own volition 16 years ago. My job is here and so here I must live. I don’t want to be homeless, so I must participate in the housing market in some capacity. And renting sucks. I could rent my house instead but my rent would be very close to my payment now. And my only guarantee is that it would keep going up.

Sorry, the argument that “I paid 30 years of taxes” means nothing. EVERYONE who is a homeowner pays taxes! You’re not special! And I’d argue additionally that your 30 year...

Quigley says

I came here for work. Of my own volition

You and everyone else who jacked up the cost of living for by paying too much.

You knew what you signed up for and made your choice. Bellyaching about it won't change that reality.

I think we both know the solution for you. It's the subject of a different thread on Patrick's web site.

B.A.C.A.H. says

You and everyone else who jacked up the cost of living for by paying too much.

You seem quite anti-immigrant. I mean rabidly so. Apparently anyone who wasn’t born in California should GTFO. Not just the illegals, not just the legal immigrants, but also Americans who were born in other states! Are these your true feelings? Pretty harsh for someone who regularly leaves touchy feely liberal comments and wants others to be cool with his alternative lifestyle.

FortWayneIndiana says

Life is unequal.

No argument! My dad told me when I was a lad, “son, life’s not fair!” And that stuck with me. Life is truly not fair. But do we want our government to treat us unfairly and unequally as well? I guess you definitely do. It’s what we have.

Quigley says

Prop 13 is a dinosaur, past its time or usefulness, and will shortly be shuffling off to go extinct.

Prop 13 is the only thing preventing the last of the middle class from fleeing California and keeping the morons in Sacramento halfway sober. Just imagine how much worse the State's finances would be after the last recession of California politicians pegged their tax revenue to the volatile housing market?

I am not interested in turning California into the Illinois shithole where people are locked in their homes with crazy high property taxes and shitty government services so the Democrats running the State can keep fluffing up their obscene pensions.

If we got rid of or dramatically reduced our income and sales tax, maybe I would be willing to look at Prop 13. But I am not going to agree to raise our taxes yet again so millennial coders in Silicon Valley can buy a house.

Quigley says

anyone who wasn’t born in California should GTFO

No. Just the people who paid too much, bellyaching about it all the while, and so doing jacked up the cost of living for everyone else.
Most of my friends, my homies from East SJ, are not white. Yeah, Latino, Nisei (lots of those from this area), Chinese from a previous waive of immigration. Maybe I'm even married to one of those.

Quigley says

“son, life’s not fair!”

Quigley says

wants others to be cool with his alternative lifestyle.

Ha!
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Some folks (apparently like you) who haven't seen me with my partner make some assumption like that.
That's kind of the point, isn't it?
My sexuality and that of others who are discreet is none of your f*cking business. Referring to my partner as my partner is part of the deal.
Welcome to The Liberal Left Coast. You might be surprised, maybe I am even tolerant of Evangelicals. Especially, they are grateful for what they have, and don't bitch about their neighbors' tax bills.

Now now B.A.C.A.H. - that's not keeping with the spirit of things.

Get on board the Trump train...they want to tell women what they can do with their bodies, must only attend churches that parrot the state approved religion with accompanying viewpoints (see Mike P and the wife on this one) send the kids to Betsyy DeVos "approved" schools, ignore science (all of it) and take the Bible at it's most literal meanings including the part about the 7 day creation and remember the Flintstones was actually reality television.

Actual belief in a God or religion not required - just be able to kind of sort of say a Bible passage/verse or two even if incorrect and if pressed, make one up and then challenge the other person to prove you wrong

If you go to church on Sunday - all is forgiven - you don't even have to really be sorry or ask for forgiveness - just show up, get noticed and as soon as you leave you're free to fuck up for another week.

B.A.C.A.H. says

FortWayneIndiana says

I came here for work. Of my own volition

You and everyone else who jacked up the cost of living for by paying too much.

You knew what you signed up for and made your choice. Bellyaching about it won't change that reality.

I think we both know the solution for you. It's the subject of a different thread on Patrick's web site.

I think there is a bug, you quoted Quigley, but it shows my name up there instead. Weird

Quigley says

FortWayneIndiana says

Life is unequal.

No argument! My dad told me when I was a lad, “son, life’s not fair!” And that stuck with me. Life is truly not fair. But do we want our government to treat us unfairly and unequally as well? I guess you definitely do. It’s what we have.

I think the taxes are robbery to begin with.

Prop 13 makes it fair. You want my tax rate, without paying into it for 30 years. THat's your entitlement. I've seen young people like you, they show up at work, 1st year on a job and want a salary of an engineer with 10 years of experience. Earn your tax rate. In 30 years I'll be dead, and you'll have a low tax rate as someone who bought 30 years ago. Inflation works out that way.

Your problem is you think because someone has a better rate, it's unfair. But it is fair, because they paid into the system for years. You want fair, go back in time when salaries were shit and no one had money, work and struggle through joblessness and horseshit that CA was when nothing existed here, pay into it, and then you'll have your entitled rate.

Fuck our minimum wage was under $4 back then too and if you made 40k you thought you did well, make it fair, go back in time and raise my salary retroactiely to what people make today so I can afford to pay what irresponsible people pay. None of us earn todays salaries, and now you want to kick old people out, because you are envious of their tax rate on housing. Pathetic Quigley, that's pathetic of you.

That’s ok gramps, I’ll support you getting some social welfare on your taxes. We should take care of the elderly, especially the ones who aren’t well off. Obviously you need it. Just don’t pretend you’re all self made and self sustaining when your lifestyle requires my tax dollars to fund.

Quigley says

Just don’t pretend you’re all self made and self sustaining when your lifestyle requires my tax dollars to fund.

Again, is your argument that California's middle class isn't paying high enough taxes to Sacramento?

You really think that raising property taxes to fund California's pension ponzi scheme is the secret to lowering property values so you can finally afford a house in Silicon Valley?

Quigley says

That’s ok gramps, I’ll support you getting some social welfare on your taxes. We should take care of the elderly, especially the ones who aren’t well off. Obviously you need it. Just don’t pretend you’re all self made and self sustaining when your lifestyle requires my tax dollars to fund.

I'm self made. It is you who is artificially pushing me to pay more taxes. It's not my fault you are willing to make irresponsible financial decisions. No one held a gun to your head and told you to buy whatever you bought. Every socialist always did the same thing that you are doing, tried to pull everyone down to equal sharing of misery. That is exactly what you are doing. You made choices, you knew what they meant, and yet you complain about how life is unfair. Whose fault is that Quigley?

And it really is Pathetic that you are jealous of retirees who are going to die soon anyway. That's like fucking being jealous of a McDonalds employee for their minimum wage. Just pathetic.

FortWayneIndiana says

Fuck our minimum wage was under $4 back then too and if you made 40k you thought you did well, make it fair, go back in time and raise my salary retroactiely to what people make today so I can afford to pay what irresponsible people pay. None of us earn todays salaries,

The problems aren't today's salaries vs salaries back then in nominal terms, it's inflation. Back then a single earner could support a family of 4 with the salary you mentioned, so just looking at the nominal salary doesn't tell you much. The problem is that if - for example - people on Medicare could only spend as much money on medical issues as they paid in - their coverage would be extremely limited. Even if you add a 3%-5% yearly inflation adjustment to the payout it would not be able to keep up with the double digits inflation the medical - or housing - sector has experienced for so many years now. And if you spend more than you paid in then by definition you are putting the burden on the future generations.

socal2 says

Again, is your argument that California's middle class isn't paying high enough taxes to Sacramento?

No, it’s that the upper class of landowners is not. No reason your beach house should cost a third in tax of my suburban one, for a hand wavey example.

FortWayneIndiana says

No one held a gun to your head and told you to buy whatever you bought. Every socialist always did the same thing that you are doing, tried to pull everyone down to equal sharing of misery. That is exactly what you are doing. You made choices, you knew what they meant, and yet you complain about how life is unfair. Whose fault is that Quigley

Try reading my post above. I very clearly explained that securing a residence is difficult due to high rents on the one hand and high house prices on the other. I didn’t create this mess, but I had to adapt to it. Bad financial decisions? I had to make a lot of extremely responsible decisions to save up probably five times the price of your house in 1978 just for a down payment. And my payment is affordable for me. That’s not the issue. It’s not about me, and it’s not even about you. It’s about equal treatment under the law, a concept upon which this country was established.

Quigley says

No, it’s that the upper class of landowners is not. No reason your beach house should cost a third in tax of my suburban one, for a hand wavey example.

I don't think the Bay Area has a huge population of old timers sitting it out in their million dollar starter shacks. Many of the homes in California have been bought in the last 20 years when prices were already very high compared to the rest of the nation.

I bought in 2011 and my house is apparently "worth" double what I bought it for 8 years later. Why should my property taxes double? I have not benefited financially and am not getting double the public services from the government. My school district still doesn't offer school bus services and they have to shut the library down 3 days a week because they piss so much money away on obscene pensions.

It is equal. 30 years from now you’ll die in comfort of your home without getting kicked into the street by taxes.

Your problem is entitlement of wanting low rate you haven’t earned.

You think that’s unequal, talk to income tax brackets.

Quigley says

FortWayneIndiana says

No one held a gun to your head and told you to buy whatever you bought. Every socialist always did the same thing that you are doing, tried to pull everyone down to equal sharing of misery. That is exactly what you are doing. You made choices, you knew what they meant, and yet you complain about how life is unfair. Whose fault is that Quigley

Try reading my post above. I very clearly explained that securing a residence is difficult due to high rents on the one hand and high house prices on the other. I didn’t create this mess, but I had to adapt to it. Bad financial decisions? I had to make a lot of extremely responsible decisions to save up probably five times the price...

NOT THE SAME JULY 4TH ARTICLE - THIS IS THE NEW PRICE INCREASE AND DOUBLE TALK

AT&T raises DirecTV Now price—again—after promising lower post-merger bills. Customers can keep plan and pay $10 more or buy new package with fewer channels.

AT&T is reportedly raising the price of DirecTV Now by $10 a month and notifying current subscribers that they will pay the new, higher price starting in April.

DirecTV Now packages today cost $40 to $75 a month before add-ons such as HBO, and current customers will reportedly pay $10 a month more regardless of which package they subscribe to, making the prices $50 to $85. News reports say AT&T is also reconfiguring its channel packages for new subscribers, adding HBO to basic packages while eliminating dozens of channels that aren't part of the AT&T-owned Time Warner Inc. New customers will reportedly be able to choose from two slimmer plans costing $50 or $70 a month.

The price hike and channel reduction are happening despite AT&T promising that its acquisition of Time Warner would lower prices for customers. When the Department of Justice tried to stop the merger, AT&T told a judge in a May 2018 court filing that the merger "will enable the merged company to reduce prices."

But AT&T raised the base price of its DirecTV Now streaming service by $5 per month in July 2018, just weeks after completing the merger. Now AT&T is imposing an even bigger price increase.

DirecTV Now is the online-only version of DirecTV, delivered without a satellite hookup. AT&T had 1.6 million DirecTV Now subscribers as of December 31, 2018 after losing 267,000 subscribers in the quarter, an AT&T earnings report said. AT&T said that many subscribers on heavily discounted plans didn't keep the service when they had to pay full price.

Current DirecTV Now subscribers will be alerted to the $10 increase in email notifications today and will pay the new price on or after April 12, Cord Cutters News reported. AT&T employees provided documents with this information to Cord Cutters News, the article said.

The new prices for existing customers will be as follows, according to Variety: "Current DirecTV Now customers will see their monthly rates increase $10, while they will continue to receive the same channel lineup. Those are Live a Little (65+ channels), rising to $50/month; Just Right (85+ channels), going up to $65/month; Go Big (105+ channels), which increases to $75/month; Gotta Have It (125+ channels), going to $85/month; and Spanish-language package Todo y Más (90+ channels), increasing to $55/month." For current customers, HBO is a $5-per-month add-on.

The new package information was briefly posted on DirecTV Now's website but was then taken offline, Variety wrote.

Smaller channel lineup in new plans
While current subscribers will reportedly continue receiving the same packages with 65+ to 125+ channels, the packages for new subscribers or people who switch to the new plans will have just 40+ to 50+ channels.

"The new packages are DirecTV Now Plus ($50 per month for 40-plus channels) and DirecTV Now Max ($70 per month for 50-plus channels including regional sports networks and other sports channels), both of which will include HBO," Variety wrote. These new packages will "not include any networks from A&E Networks, AMC Networks, Discovery or Viacom," though "both include channels from AT&T-owned Turner and HBO."

Cord Cutters News published a list of all the channels that will be in the Plus and Max packages. The loss of networks will remove channels such as Comedy Central and BBC America from the basic packages.

Channels that aren't in the new DirecTV Now packages may become available in a new, streaming version of DirecTV, but at higher prices than customers pay for DirecTV Now. It's not clear why AT&T would unveil another streaming version of DirecTV that's separate from DirecTV Now. But here's what Cord Cutters News says about the forthcoming option:

You will now have the option to get DirecTV packages as a streaming package, but the pricing will reportedly be the same as the satellite version.

According to our sources, AT&T will be selling a 65+ channel streaming version of DIRECTV for $93 a month, an 85+ version of DIRECTV for $110 a month, a 105+ channel version of DirecTV for $124, and a 125+ channel version of DirecTV for $135 a month streaming online.

The DirecTV satellite service lost 1.24 million subscribers in 2018, ending the year with 19.2 million subscribers.

We've asked AT&T for details on the various price and channel changes and will update this story if we get any new information.

AT&T and other pay-TV providers have generally blamed TV price increases on rising programming costs. In online streaming, big companies such as AT&T have found that it's expensive to compete against Netflix, according to a Bloomberg report this week.

DirecTV already raised prices for satellite customers in January. AT&T also made it more expensive to cancel DirecTV with a new policy to charge customers for the full month after they cancel service, instead of providing a prorated credit for the final month.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/03/att-raises-directv-now-price-again-after-promising-lower-post-merger-bills/

FortWayneIndiana says

I think there is a bug, you quoted Quigley, but it shows my name up there instead. Weird

Sorry about that. I fixed it. Maybe I quoted Quigley from an entry where you quoted Quigley.

Quigley says

I had to adapt to it



No you didn't. You didn't have to.

Unless you were active duty military and assigned to here, you made a choice to come here, a choice to work here, a choice to live here, a choice to overpay here, a choice to buy-in for a different assessment than your neighbors.

You can make a choice Fix Things For Yourself by leaving, like Nuttboxer and Joshuatrio did on the other page.

Or you can stay here and bitch about your neighbors' taxes which, like my sexuality, is none of your f*cking business. Some or most of them older ones of your neighbors, who you may think are "rich", can only afford to stay because their assessments don't go up to the market rate that the Greater Fools are setting.