Comments 1 - 3 of 43 Next » Last » Search these comments
Oh you kids just never see anything beyond your own situation. Think of others for a moment here.
It is this way because old people live on fixed income they can't afford increases in taxes. Increase taxes and you'll throw millions of old people overboard. That is inhumane and WRONG to do. That is what propelled prop 13 in the first place, money hungry government kept on spiking pensions and salaries and demanded more property taxes always. That was hurting old folks.
I do think property taxes should be lower, but I can live with 1% of the purchase price being fixed.
We should not throw old folks overboard.
Fort Wayne, this is a Bay Area centric website, created and maintained by a Middle Westerner who has immigrated to the Bay Area.
Thank you for your opinion, but if you're not a voter here, your opinion doesn't matter. Unless you wanna make big outta state political donations like the Prop-8 backers did.
Wait, so those are "old people on fixed incomes" and not "wealthy long-time owners who bought for next to nothing?"
And ya, prop-13, pfft.
Comments 1 - 3 of 43 Next » Last » Search these comments
I'm looking at my most recent tax bill and see the following:
- Mosquito Abatement
- CSA Paramedic
- CSA Vector Control
- City Emergency Medical
- City Paramedic SRV
- School Measure G
- Oak Fire Prev Dist
- BART/AC Transit (public transportation)
- City library service
- EBMUD (water)
- East Bay trail
- Flood benefit
- Park safety
- City landscape
- Underground utility
- Land & Improvements
Comes out to a total of 1.4112% in Alameda County (I know, unbelievable!).
Anyway, buyers typically just accept that 1.X% of the home price will be going towards property tax. It's just the way it is, right? Well wait a minute. When it comes to mosquitos, schools, paramedics, public transportation, land, park safety, fire, etc, wtf difference does it make if I've lived in my house for 15 years or 1 year? Why does the old retired couple who bought 30yrs ago pay less in property tax than their young neighbors who just moved in and are starting a new family? Is one less likely to need the fire department? Is one less likely to experience flood? Is one less likely to need a city paramedic? You can probably argue that the young couple may benefit from the schools more so than the older couple, but I don't see anything else on the list above that clearly favors one over the other.
When it comes to land value, if both parties above have the same amount of land in the same location, the valuation of that land should be identical.
I can understand price being locked. Whatever you paid for your house is what you paid. But conceptually why are we all using the items listed above yet paying so differently for them?