patrick.net

marcus says

Actually what you want is closer. Under soviet style communism, members of the party got special treatment.

Not all of them, only members of the Inner Party ("nomenclatura"). Here in the US we are now creating the new nomenclatura with the help of bloodsucking unions.

I'm in one of the biggest of those so called blood sucking unions. We haven't had a raise in pay since 2006. In fact we only just had our pay get back up to that 2006/2007 level last year, it was cut from 2009 - 2011.

MEanwhile inflation of about 10% (total) over that time period. Is a pay raise on our unions radar ? Not as far as I know. We're just trying to get class sizes back down to a reasonable level, because of all the teachers that were laid off since 2008.

Yeah, real blood suckers we are.

we are now creating the new nomenclatura with the help of bloodsucking unions

Right, unions are on a real growth trajectory. Dictating their demands to government. Destroying everyone elses chance to make a living. It's out of control.

marcus says

still1bear says

Medicare and SS sinkholes are created by the unstoppable tendency of the liberal nuts to grow any gov't program out of control.

This is nonsense.

Here are two of the biggest issues, having nothing to do with liberals.

Here you get in the neverneverland. They have everything to do with the liberals.

Like all the libs you are too smart for your own good, so you see the details but miss fundamentals.

It is the libs that push expand *any* gov't program except defense. SS would never be a problem if it stayed an insurance program as it originally was. But no, now it is everybody's retirement program.

The same with medicare, there is no limit to entitlement creep. Even rinos (GW Bush) joined to push new medical benefits, because everybody wants to live at the expense of everybody else.

marcus says

I'm in one of the biggest of those so called blood sucking unions. We haven't had a raise in pay since 2006. In fact we only just had our pay get back up to that 2006/2007 level last year, it was cut from 2009 - 2011.

Compare it to losing your job, like many real workers do. An than learning new skils and taking a lower paying job. An keep making property tax payments w/o income to make bloodsuckers happy.

You definitely live in neverland. Get a real life.

still1bear says

It is the libs that push expand *any* gov't program except defense. SS would never be a problem if it stayed an insurance program as it originally was. But no, now it is everybody's retirement program.

Typical right wing nonsensical jibberish.

It was called social insurance, but it was an income stream to be received from retirement age on, from the very beginning.

still1bear says

like many real workers do

still1bear says

making property tax payments w/o income to make bloodsuckers happy

We're talking about governemtn jobs. The same as they've always been. If it's such a wonderfull path to riches why didn't you commit to life in a government job when you were young ? You could have become a cop or a mailman or any one of those many non-"real work" government jobs.

The right wingers who are intelligent, know that their ideology is based on lies and BS. That's why we never hear from them around here. They are all just trying to get along without even thinking about any of this stuff. MAybe tune in to newscorp or talk radio every now and then, to get that warm fuzzy liberal hating feeling renewed.

If you were to argue with them they would put their fingers in their ears and say "i cant heeear you lalalalalallalala lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes "

Blurtman says

Granny is not getting evicted, but her deadbeat heirs are seeing their gravy train evaporate, and that is what Prop 13 is really all abou

no... Prop 13 is applying a market value NO ONE CAN manipulate ..

you forget Prop 13 was created to fight govt corruption in the Assessors offices..

slip 100 bucks to the assessor who shows up to view your home... and he lowers

it to save you a thousand dollars in taxes...

and the assessor moves to the next house to collect 100 and so on and so on...

on the otherhand.. the fixed market value when sold CANNOT be manipulated.

marcus says

still1bear says

like many real workers do

still1bear says

making property tax payments w/o income to make bloodsuckers happy

We're talking about governemtn jobs. The same as they've always been. If it's such a wonderfull path to riches why didn't you commit to life in a government job when you were young ? You could have become a cop or a mailman or any one of those many non-"real work" government jobs.

We are not talking about "government jobs" in general. We are comparing apples to apples. Teachers in private schools are no worse than the ones in the public schools, but they get much lower salaries and no luxury benefits. If they got the same salaries and benefits, their schools would not survive. Talk about bloodsuckers.

Obviously, not all union members are bloodsuckers, but quite enough of them are to drive cities and states to bankruptcy.

marcus says

The right wingers who are intelligent, know that their ideology is based on lies and BS. That's why we never hear from them around here. They are all just trying to get along without even thinking about any of this stuff. MAybe tune in to newscorp or talk radio every now and then, to get that warm fuzzy liberal hating feeling renewed.

If you were to argue with them they would put their fingers in their ears and say "i cant heeear you lalalalalallalala lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes lowtaxes "

As a former Marxist I can only tell you that it's the other way around, the lefties are the real big liars. But you seem to be stuck with your song. good luck in the Neverland.

still1bear says

Teachers in private schools are no worse than the ones in the public schools, but they get much lower salaries and no luxury benefits.

Actually they often are worse than the ones in public schools in terms of credentials, degrees and experience. They are paid less because the job is way easier. Small class sizes and students who for the most part are driven to succeed because they know that their parentsare paying a lot for this and have high expectations.

still1bear says

If they got the same salaries and benefits, their schools would not survive.

THat's only true to the extent that many private schools charge less than what the government pays per student for school. You can argue that it shouldn't be that way, but that's opening up a more complicated discussion.

Trust me, some private school teachers are paid as well or better than public school teachers.

still1bear says

It is the libs that push expand *any* gov't program except defense.

History shows the greatest spending increases in the past 50 years happened under republican administrations.

marcus says

still1bear says

It is the libs that push expand *any* gov't program except defense.

History shows the greatest spending increases in the past 50 years happened under republican administrations.

Yet another liberal fallacy. You seem to be full of them. Just to remind you, it is the house that sets the budget, not the senate or president.

Take Reagan as an example. You can see that the liberal house forced the budget on him. He could either veto it or accept it. Veto and gov't shutdown would mean guaranteed loss at the next election. He hardly had any choice. The same with Clinton. His "spending cuts" had 2 main reasons: a) the peace dividend : unlike "the war on poverty" the cold war was actually won thanks to Reagan b) republican house.

Whenever house and president are from the same party you have huge increase of spending (GW Bush, Obama before 2012).

Strange usage of words for the title, using a double negative

Why not just state that prop 13 IS inherently FAIR?

marcus says

Actually they often are worse than the ones in public schools in terms of credentials, degrees and experience. They are paid less because the job is way easier. Small class sizes and students who for the most part are driven to succeed because they know that their parents are paying a lot for this and have high expectations.

Nonsense. I am familiar with at least 3 private schools. None of them has "easy" jobs precisely because of accountability. Not all the teachers there are good, but the bad ones don't stay for very long.

"credentials" and "degrees" mean nothing in the absence of standardized testing. Why do you need formal criteria for teachers if you don't have them for students?

FWIW, I know many people (engineers, not teachers) that work without any "credentials". In my own case none of my employers ever asked me about my credentials. They need work, not credentials.

still1bear says

None of them has "easy" jobs precisely because of accountability

Two points.

First, you might want to learn the difference between the word"easier" versus the word "easy." Easier does not imply easy. Maybe I should have said "less difficult" so that you might understand.

Second, you have no clue how much accountability and pressure exists in many public schools these days.

still1bear says

Why do you need formal criteria for teachers if you don't have them for students?

Actually public school have far more standardized testing than private schools. This is one of the advantages (for students) of going to a private school. Teachers are trusted to do what's needed and what's best for students. There is far less of what you would call accountability in private schools. But I'm not suggesting they aren't accountable (they are, mostly to themselves because of pride in their work and integrity - and because it would eventually become known if they didn't hold themselves and their students to a high standard).

marcus says

There is far less of what you would call accountability in private schools.

There is a whole lot more accountability in a private school. Pocket book accountability is the best kind. Poor can't opt out of the public school that protects perverts and child abusers more than it does children... so they can't keep it accountable.

I bet if they got rid of unions schools would be a lot more accountable and a lot better. Good teachers would be compensated well, and crapy teachers would be filtered out. But the system just keeps everyone down to the lowest common denominator in education.

CL says

That said, why is it that we don't want an even playing field? Are we saying that we want some people to have unearned advantage? Isn't the very definition of fair "free from favor"?

It's fine if you want to be nice to Grannie, but wouldn't it be unfair to do it at the expense of the new homeowner? What if the new homeowner is your Grannie?

And on what planet is 0% fair? This is retarded, even for rhetoric.

Renters pay 0% in property taxes, so why is it fair when owners pay taxes and renters dont? So I think 0% property taxes is fair, and it should be for everyone.

And it isn't at an expense to a new homeowner. Raising taxes on previous owners, is not going to reduce your taxes. It's just left wingers always want to remove prop 13 so government could grow and start controlling who owns what. Tax assessors office would have plenty of corruption again if they were in charge of tax appreciation. Unions and corporations would appoint people there for political favors..

Luckely for CA, you communists are in a minority and prop 13 is still protecting Grannies, average homeowners, and small businesses from big government thuggery.

marcus says

You must have missed some of the stuff he's made up about "union thugs" a couple years back.

Unions were never tied to mafia or other organized criminals. Is that what your saying ?

FortWayne says

I bet if they got rid of unions schools would be a lot more accountable and a lot better. Good teachers would be compensated well, and crapy teachers would be filtered out. But the system just keeps everyone down to the lowest common denominator in education.

Yes, but we already knew your head was up your ass. You know even less about unions and education than you do about prop 13.

Tax is not a mutually agreed payment for service rendered. Most taxes have explicit or implicit means testing, just like robbery. Robbers know better than flat-fee robbing service.

John Bailo says

Stop living off other people's Property Tax and pay market rates, deadbeat.

Define what Market rates are ? So based even on your definition, many would be paying inflated taxes on inflated RE prices... wrongly and never getting refund for the bubble market values as they go down.. or would the Govt adjust "MV" as prices go down ?

John Bailo says

Aren't the police and firemen living in "inflated" new homes? Are they supposed to get 10% of fair salary because a bunch of longtimer deadbeats don't want to pay the same bills as everyone else does?

Unionized police/fireman salaries and benefit packages just don't go in the same sentence with "fair salary."

Or say I go into a realtor and say I want to buy a house BUT I can only afford to pay 10% of value. Sale or no sale?

Depending on how each of you decide. The transaction only takes place when both of you agree to the same terms. Taxation has nothing to do with mutually agreed transactions. It is armed robbery dressed up in legality. When you are robbed at gun point, you are not exactly getting a service called "being allowed to live." Duress makes the contract invalid. Taxation does not pretend to be a contract. Only morons would dream up "social contract" because they don't understand what "meeting of mind" is in contract law.

Get real, we need to kick these property tax deadbeats and Welfare Queens out along with the drug addicts and pushers and kiddie molesters!

There is no such thing as "tax deadbeats" if the lower rate they pay is allowed by the same arbitrary laws that make a particular type of armed robbery "legal."

Your neighbor paying more taxes does not that you would pay less; instead, it would just lead to more resources available to the enforcers for enforcement against you the next time.

Reality says

Unionized police/fireman salaries and benefit packages just don't go in the same sentence with "fair salary."

ha-ha. Yes, let's worry about the salary of the guy who risks his life to save people's lives, but look the other way at the guy who makes 10-50 times as much to sit on his ass behind a desk.

Apart of the fact that commercial should not be part of Prop13, one of the biggest issue with Prop 13 is that it locks people to their house until they die.
The people who bought in family friendly environment won't release the house to the market anytime soon (especially due to the fact that the kids can continue benefiting from Prop 13 as well...).
We should allow people to move to a different place of equal or lesser value than their current house (maybe in same county) and not charge them more than the current taxes they were paying on their home. It will allow retired people to downsize without financial penalty, and free up inventory where schools, work, etc. is.
THe fact that this privilege is inherited should also be reviewed... While I understand the reason behind it, it gives a huge advantage to people who bought property and investment property in the old days.

thomaswong.1986 says

Blurtman says

Granny is not getting evicted, but her deadbeat heirs are seeing their gravy train evaporate, and that is what Prop 13 is really all abou

no... Prop 13 is applying a market value NO ONE CAN manipulate ..

you forget Prop 13 was created to fight govt corruption in the Assessors offices..

slip 100 bucks to the assessor who shows up to view your home... and he lowers

it to save you a thousand dollars in taxes...

and the assessor moves to the next house to collect 100 and so on and so on...

on the otherhand.. the fixed market value when sold CANNOT be manipulated.

Nonsense. It is they very definition of manipulation. And I lived in SF when the ad campaign was in full swing for Prop. 13, and it certainly was all about Granny getting evicted because her $40k starter was now worth $1 million. Hey Granny, take out a HELOC.

marcus says

We haven't had a raise in pay since 2006. In fact we only just had our pay get back up to that 2006/2007 level last year, it was cut from 2009 - 2011.

Do you even realize what happened in the rest of the non-unionized private sector world that is paying taxes to pay your salary? Nobody had any raises, many lost jobs or took lower paying jobs. You have nothing to complain about. Be happy you didn't lose yours like many people did.

Blurtman says

Nonsense. It is they very definition of manipulation. And I lived in SF when the ad campaign was in full swing for Prop. 13, and it certainly was all about Granny getting evicted because her $40k starter was now worth $1 million. Hey Granny, take out a HELOC.

Granny should not be forced to become a victim of a local bank. People should not be forced into HELOC's or reverse mortgages to pay the government racket. Bankers, realtors, and you anti prop 13 communists are just the worst kinds of envious people.

Property taxes go up 2% every year already, that's consistent with inflation and pension increases. Prop 13 works, leave it alone. Keep your communist style envy in check please. Communists and socialists are free to move out to Kent, WA.

Reality says

Taxation has nothing to do with mutually agreed transactions. It is armed robbery dressed up in legality. When you are robbed at gun point, you are not exactly getting a service called "being allowed to live." Duress makes the contract invalid. Taxation does not pretend to be a contract. Only morons would dream up "social contract" because they don't understand what "meeting of mind" is in contract law.

There are tax takers and tax givers. Most ANTI prop 13 are communist tax takers. Occasionally there are just some jealous young who don't want to work for anything, and just whine that their neighbor has more than they do, such as evilmonkeyboy. But mostly it's just envy.

>Renters pay 0% in property taxes, so why is it fair when owners pay taxes and renters dont?

Renters pay rent. Owner of rented property pay property tax. Do you think two entities (renter as well as owner) pay property tax for one property?
Have a clear thinking.

Blurtman says

it certainly was all about Granny getting evicted because her $40k starter was now worth $1 million. Hey Granny, take out a HELOC.

My own grandmother - God rest her soul - was forced, FORCED, to live in a $650,000 home in Santa Monica which had only appreciated 9000% from her initial investment.

Though she had paid off the $6500 mortgage by 1970 - a hard sacrifice over the first 20 years of owning - well she knew that Jerry Brown and his moll Linda Ronstadt were as good as parked in the street in front of her home, with fedoras, cigars, and tommy guns.

Prop. 13 saved her from not having to do anything, since she was easily paying her 1978-level property taxes (how the ghost of Stalin must have smiled at the thought of such rates) on her modest pension.

Never forget: choosing individuals for lenient tax treatment is not the same thing as just writing a check to those individuals; totally different thing, so stop saying that. Writing a check to one person, using money paid for by other taxpayers, is completely different from just not taxing that person: the first is totally welfare, while the second is not. Every conservative understands this, because it is a fundamental principle of the constitutional mind. Conservatives have the capacity for strategic and constitutional thought which enables them to understand this distinction, a constitutional principle those of less constitutional minds do not grasp. Another example: all government spending is waste, but the Pentagon is not the government. Constitutional. Sober. Prudent.

I have Prop. 13 to thank for saving Grandma from dirty liberals and immigrant union thugs.

Onebuyer says

>Renters pay 0% in property taxes, so why is it fair when owners pay taxes and renters dont?

Renters pay rent. Owner of rented property pay property tax. Do you think two entities (renter as well as owner) pay property tax for one property?

Have a clear thinking.

Yeah, even though I rent I'd assume that the property taxes are somewhat passed into the rent (if still affordable), so there's no easy escape just by renting ;)

FortWayne says

marcus says

We haven't had a raise in pay since 2006. In fact we only just had our pay get back up to that 2006/2007 level last year, it was cut from 2009 - 2011.

Do you even realize what happened in the rest of the non-unionized private sector world that is paying taxes to pay your salary? Nobody had any raises, many lost jobs or took lower paying jobs. You have nothing to complain about. Be happy you didn't lose yours like many people did.

I wasn't complaining. I was just pointing out what your supposed union bloodsucking actually looks like.

Onebuyer says

>Renters pay 0% in property taxes, so why is it fair when owners pay taxes and renters dont?

Renters pay rent. Owner of rented property pay property tax. Do you think two entities (renter as well as owner) pay property tax for one property?

Have a clear thinking.

Property taxes are paying for government services, not for a privilege of living in a house. Benefits everyone enjoys. Besides most "owners" are paying mortgages... it's not exactly free. We paid cash for ours, but we saved for years in order to do that. No one gave us all that cash.

I'm not advocating renters pay taxes on what they rent. I was just using it as an example because some of those communist agitators on this site scream "life is unfair" when they don't want to work for it, and see their neighbor pay less in taxes.... they just want everything given to them. Their version of fair is beating everyone else who has more into poverty, like Bolsheviks.

marcus says

I wasn't complaining. I was just pointing out what your supposed union bloodsucking actually looks like.

Fine. But what about those BART stikers? Putting the state in jeopardy just so they can strong arm beat down taxpayers into giving them more money. In a normal world they would all be fired for destructive stunts like that.

We don't have any prop 13 here in pennsylvania, and the old aren't displaced by burdensome prop taxes increases.

Commie bastards

errc says

We don't have any prop 13 here in pennsylvania, and the old aren't displaced by burdensome prop taxes increases.

Commie bastards

Starbucks-sucking Stalin-loving fruitbats, the lot of them. I hope their Birkenstocks stick under their Subaru brake pedals and they all crash into those trees they love to hug so much.

What Pennsylvania has become would make even Karl Marx vomit.

FortWayne says

But what about those BART stikers?

I don't know much about it, but I know the cost of living is very high up there in SF.

You have to realize, that without collective representation, workers would not get raises often enough. Sure nobody including most union employees have received pay increases since 2008. Maybe Bart employees were overdue for a raise in 2008. Again, I don't know. But you can be sure that if they are willing to go on strike (if they vote for it) in this economic environment and with the current public perception of unions and govt workers (in some corners), then they probably deserve to receive some serious negotiations.

John Bailo says

Bay Area homes are sky high because of Prop 13, forcing people to rent in urban density.

The wouldn't be anywhere near a subway if they could get real homes.

There are plenty of real homes near a subway. Walnut Creek or Pleasanton are not exactly models of "urban density".

Here, I found this.

$80,000: Median pay for BART employees, according to the Los Angeles Times.

$80,703: Income required for a single parent with two kids “to attain a secure yet modest living standard” in the Bay Area, according to the Economic Policy Institute.

You can argue that it's excessive, or not fair if all similarly skilled jobs don't pay the same. But this is 2013 in SF.

The biggest thing you miss is that this affects other jobs. Without govt jobs holding the line on what is a fair pay level, everyones standard of living collapses even faster.

What I always hear you rooting for is a faster collapse and disappearance of the middle class.

You don't need to repeat the same old line about taxes - I get it - there are two sides to this. THat's why the median pay for govt workers isn't much higher. The question is where is the balance ? What's best for everyone ?

Sorry if I'm making it too complex. I know you prefer the overly simplified "unions and government workers are bloodsucking scum." Sorry if it's too late for you to learn anything or to appreciate the more subtle and complex aspects of most important questions.

I know that black and white is easier. "These are the good guys and these are the bad guys." It would be so much easier to understand the world if things were more like this. But unfortunately seeing the world in that way often involves dishonesty.