Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-02-2012, 10:23 AM
 
2,479 posts, read 2,214,660 times
Reputation: 2277

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by wall st kid View Post
You know the saying "the ones with the guns make the rules".

If you purchase a house and the land, i was just wondering why a land owner has to pay 'property tax' on a monthly basis for the life of the home? Why is purchasing land different from purchasing a car? If you buy a car, you pay tax when you buy it and that's it.....but for a home, you're paying month after month.

Seems like its similar to paying a bully at school 'protection money' so that he will let you eat your own lunch.

The 'tax' sort of tells me that you really dont own the land, you're just 'leasing it' from big brother.

Before there was a country, the colonies taxed everything and anything.

If you had a golden watch fob you were taxed, a milk cow, your profession. That's called personal property taxation (I pay a yearly tax on the value of my car) and the above poster knows about realty taxes.

"Death and Taxes." It's the American way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-02-2012, 01:46 PM
 
6,326 posts, read 6,593,850 times
Reputation: 7457
The first thing George Washington did - killed a few Ohio Valley farmers who took revolutionary rhetoric of liberty and no taxes way too seriously.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2012, 08:24 AM
 
1,835 posts, read 3,267,962 times
Reputation: 3789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jukesgrrl View Post
I'd say yes, they do. Just in general, I look at what kind of a footprint each of us leaves on the earth. Much of that footprint is due simply to HOW we live. How modest (or not) is our housing? How wasteful are we? Do we make an attempt to conserve natural resources? How much fossil fuel do our vehicles consume? Etc., etc.

Now it's certainly possible that very wealthy people could make a small footprint. Howard Hughes was incredibly rich but for most of his life he was a hermit. Not such a big footprint. The Duggars have a ton of kids, therefore they need an enormous house and multiple vehicles. They consume mountains of food, they use more clothes, appliances, electronics, toys, etc., so their footprint is enormous — although they probably aren't what I would call rich. But in general the bigger footprint is using more infrastructure and resources.

Look at all the things wealthy individuals have and use (and even claim they "need") because of the mere fact they are rich. I had a boss once who had memberships in a whole passel of very expensive country clubs. He claimed he "needed" them for entertaining clients. But couldn't his clients all have been entertained in the same country club over and over? Similarly you can only drive one car at a time, but does that stop people from buying multiples when they can afford them? You can only live in one house at a time, but rich people often have many. John McCain wasn't even sure how many his family owned.

All of the resources we make use of — or totally consume — are tied to the things that are paid for by our income taxes. The biggest item in our national budget is the military. We fight wars because we need oil. We would need less oil if people had fewer cars and they were carbon neutral vehicles (something that could happen if we actually had the will). When you have a lot of houses you are using way more electricity per person than poor people are using, requiring infrastructure growth. When we consume tons of goods they have to be shipped all over the country, requiring a more elaborate highway system than we might need if we weren't such dedicated shoppers and consumers. In general, the rich are using more of these things than the poor. They should pay more taxes.

First-world consumers want new, new, new all the time. Our Federal income taxes pay for science and technology development. We need an educated populace. Some of these taxes go to education, especially higher education. We always want medicine and hospitals to cure our diseases. Our Federal taxes pay for improvements in medical care. In general, the more money someone has the more likely they are to be using those resources. Rich people usually get more education. They use more technology. They live longer than poor people for a reason: they get more medical attention and more and better drugs. Again, they should pay more taxes.

Federal income taxes go to national parks. I don't know too many kids of low-income families who get to see them. When corporations or very wealthy people are crime victims, aren't they more likely to get more Federal law enforcement assistance than individuals we never heard of?

Just think about one very high profile family we got to know recently. They have dressage horses. It takes some serious infrastructure to build their stables and provide these expensive animals with care: roads, water systems, electricity systems, etc., paid for by tax dollars. One of those horses was shown in the Olympics, an event funded in part by U.S. taxpayers. Do I have dressage horses? No. So the owners of dressage horses should have to pay more income tax than I do.

I believe that sales taxes are among the fairest of taxes, so long as food and essentials are exempted. People who buy a lot of stuff can afford a lot of stuff. Luxury taxes are especially fair in my opinion. A yacht leaves a footprint on our waterways. People who can afford a yacht should pay extra taxes to compensate for the damage they are doing. If you buy a Ferrari your sales tax will be more than someone who can only afford a Ford Focus. That seems fair to me. Yet in our current system, someone who owns a private jet gets a tax BREAK. Fair? Not in my opinion.

What's also not fair? Incredibly wealth corporations that pay NO income tax. From 2008-11, 30 wealthy companies were Federal income tax negative (meaning some even got refunds), despite $205 billion in pretax U.S. profits. Overall, those 30 enjoyed an average effective federal income tax rate of –3.1% over the four years. General Electric, Boeing, Verizon, and Amazon are just a couple of them. But they sure do have enough money to pay lobbyists and make campaign donations.
You have drank the cool-aid. Tax those who have - give it to those who dont! Its fair b/c they have more than I do...forget the fact that I am lazy and have no ambition...just take it from those evil polluting rich people!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2012, 08:37 AM
 
3,020 posts, read 8,617,748 times
Reputation: 3284
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post
Ownership of land is intimately related to the repressive apparatus of the state that supports your claim with using all deadly arsenal of the state. You have no natural right to own land just because you have a piece of paper, paid money for it, or you say it's yours. SAME with a car and your underwear. You pay sales tax, do you? That's your "protection" payments. In the past ownership of land was communal, but even tribes had to fight to protect their turf (and grab other'). Animals must use their claws and teeth to protect their turf, until finally old age/injury/starvation etc. would allow competitors to "move in".

To put it simply, ownership of land is expropriation of the common resource that no human being can accomplish on his/her own. You either have an army of the private thugs protecting your claim (can't support that on 5 acres) or you pay protection money to the state that holds monopoly on the legalized violence and death. Simple and kinda fair.

Just imagine I own not 19 acres but 1,900,000 acres and I say to everybody else "get lost, it's mine forever tax free". Is it fair? More "philosophical" question - is ownership of large chunks of land fair even if you pay tax? Under "fairness" I understand natural order of things. No person can own 1,900,000 acres in the "wild" using his own teeth and claws. So if you own huge chunks of land, the rest of society is working hard to protect your claim, society is working hard so we (society) would have 1,900,000 acres less to use and enjoy. That's not only unfair, it's stupidly unfair.
Spoken like a true communist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2012, 09:56 AM
 
4,565 posts, read 10,659,872 times
Reputation: 6730
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
Without property taxes in my area, there would be no schools, Police, Firefighters, EMTS, parks/recreation, library, municipal buildings, mosquito abatement and more.
On a more basic level, without property taxes, there would be no roads, to get to your property.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2012, 10:52 AM
 
3,041 posts, read 7,937,491 times
Reputation: 3976
You truly never own the land and home,it is under control of government,be it state,federal or county,to day tax,tax or permits,you do not have control of your property.
I am fortunate to be in a county in North Fl that takes care of retired property owners with exemptions,also from state.
We would like to move to Ct to be with family,not many years left.We could buy proprty but cannot afford all of the taxes.No exemptions for seniors,cost to live there at least $4,500 plus for taxes,they tax everything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2012, 04:36 PM
 
Location: Boise, ID
8,046 posts, read 28,484,462 times
Reputation: 9470
You may not pay property tax on your car (although some states do), but you do (I assume) have to pay to renew your registration every year or two, which is basically a tax on your car. In my area, it costs more for newer cars, so again, not a flat tax.

So "owning" land isn't really any different than "owning" a car, in regard to taxes. They call it something different, but the end result is the same.


As for the other discussion taking place, as someone with no kids, I have no issue with a large part of my property taxes going to schools. I am very pro-education and think every child deserves the chance to better themselves, regardless of how lazy or hardworking, rich or poor, dumb or smart, their parents are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2012, 05:18 PM
 
Location: Cary, NC
43,309 posts, read 77,142,685 times
Reputation: 45664
I don't suggest anyone come to my home and tell me I don't own it.
There would not be a philosophical or political conversation of great detail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 02:22 AM
 
Location: Florida
23,173 posts, read 26,207,141 times
Reputation: 27914
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish View Post
I don't suggest anyone come to my home and tell me I don't own it.
There would not be a philosophical or political conversation of great detail.
Issue that threat to the the municipality if you don't pay your taxes.
However,your home?Sure you own that.
If your land property is being confiscated for taxes, you can move your 'owned' house.
Try to defend that lot and see who comes out ahead.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 04:43 AM
 
Location: Cary, NC
43,309 posts, read 77,142,685 times
Reputation: 45664
Quote:
Originally Posted by old_cold View Post
Issue that threat to the the municipality if you don't pay your taxes.
However,your home?Sure you own that.
If your land property is being confiscated for taxes, you can move your 'owned' house.
Try to defend that lot and see who comes out ahead.
Why would I not pay property taxes on the land I own?
Are you saying I can move land if there are no taxes due? Novel thought, but color me skeptical.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top