I just luv gubmint

[smokingman]

Most of them were elderly who I bet had paid off their homes and then let the insurance lapse.

As their income dropped and they could no longer afford it...due to property taxes and inflation of everything they needed to live.

 

[smokingman]

How did they buy without a mortgage but don’t have money for insurance? Wow!

When I purchased my home with cash on 40 acres, with a sawmill and 8 other buildings I had no homeowners for almost the first month. Without having a loan no insurance company wanted to insure it at what I considered a reasonable amount. I eventually found one though, that involved separating sawmill operations and buildings with a different policy from the home and garage.

From day one though I had to pay property taxes of $2880 2x a year, that increased about 8% per year I lived there.

I saved (and sold another home) to buy that place. There is no reason I should have had to lease it from the state.

 

[phylodog]

When I purchased my home with cash on 40 acres, with a sawmill and 8 other buildings I had no homeowners for almost the first month. Without having a loan no insurance company wanted to insure it at what I considered a reasonable amount. I eventually found one though.

From day one though I had to pay property taxes of $2880 2x a year, that increased about 8% per year I lived there.

I saved (and sold another home) to buy that place. There is no reason I should have had to lease it from the state.

In the end, you're only allowed the fantasy of ownership so long as you're able to produce for the state. Once you can no longer serve, you can no longer own.

 

[Ingomike]

Why not base that system on sales tax? Those that consume more resources of the society would pay more, those who work to own something could actually own it.

I can tell you the answer back from those that differ with your opinion, not mine, but what they would say:

”You got yours now you want to shift the tax burden to those starting out that need everything and tax them making it harder for them to get what you already have.”

 

[smokingman]

I can tell you the answer back from those that differ with your opinion, not mine, but what they would say:

”You got yours now you want to shift the tax burden to those starting out that need everything and tax them making it harder for them to get what you already have.”

It is like an abusive relationship. The cycle needs broken. That is something they would understand. It would also give them hope that they could actually work toward owning something in their life, vs "you will own nothing and be happy"

 

[tim87tr]

I disagree. I am not for anarcho-capitalism. I am for not having to lease my home from the state. In short I want to be able to own something for my labor. Under the current payment system that is impossible. You actually own nothing already. This from the perspective of a real-estate broker. You pay for the right(via cash or loans) to buy a lease from the state.

I do think services funded(most not all) by property taxes should be funded by society as a whole. I do not believe property taxes is how it should be done. Why not base that system on sales tax? Those that consume more resources of the society would pay more, those who work to own something could actually own it.

I agree with you in theory. Anarcho capitalism is only part of my post as a comparison. I don't think there's even a 1% chance the system will ever change. Doesn't seem like it's a have your cake and eat it too situation. Only viable path out is to find ways to minimize one's property tax burden, increasing income, reducing or eliminating debt, or savings in other aspects of one's life.

 

[firecadet613]

I agree with you in theory. Anarcho capitalism is only part of my post as a comparison. I don't think there's even a 1% chance the system will ever change. Doesn't seem like it's a have your cake and eat it too situation. Only viable path out is to find ways to minimize one's property tax burden, increasing income, reducing or eliminating debt, or savings in other aspects of one's life.

This is likely the best answer to my earlier question.

 

[mmpsteve]

My folks down south have a million dollar property, 300K house and 140 Acres of pine forest. 12 acre bass pond, Etc. They pay about $500 taxes. Of course the high schools don't look like college campuses with olympic size pools either. Just saying.

I think their sales tax down there is 10%, IIRC.

.

 

[KLB]

My folks down south have a million dollar property, 300K house and 140 Acres of pine forest. 12 acre bass pond, Etc. They pay about $500 taxes. Of course the high schools don't look like college campuses with olympic size pools either. Just saying.

I think their sales tax down there is 10%, IIRC.

.

They obviously aren't paying their fair share for all of the multitude of services they are consuming

 

[firecadet613]

My folks down south have a million dollar property, 300K house and 140 Acres of pine forest. 12 acre bass pond, Etc. They pay about $500 taxes. Of course the high schools don't look like college campuses with olympic size pools either. Just saying.

I think their sales tax down there is 10%, IIRC.

.

Sounds like paradise!

What state?

 

[Ingomike]

My folks down south have a million dollar property, 300K house and 140 Acres of pine forest. 12 acre bass pond, Etc. They pay about $500 taxes. Of course the high schools don't look like college campuses with olympic size pools either. Just saying.

I think their sales tax down there is 10%, IIRC.

.

Do you know what the $500 covers? I lean toward schools being removed from property tax but have not figured out how to fund them so that control stays local.

 

[mmpsteve]

Sounds like paradise!

What state?

Bama. 770 miles due south from where I sit right now, impatiently working towards the day I can spend more time down there. And yes, it is paradicial (sp?), except for the heat and fireants, rattlesnakes, etc... A little harsh, but it keeps the riff-raff away!

20 minutes from the nearest town, but they have county water, go figure. If they were a tiny bit further west, they'd have oil wells on their place, but no such luck so far. Between the timber plantations and oil wells, there's a lot more money in the area, than the land looks like when just driving through.

.

 

[bgcatty]

As to the title of this thread:
Knock on the front door - Good Morning Sir, We are here from the Government to help you!
Response: Sure you are and the door slams shut!
Pretty much sums up our country today!

 

[CHCRandy]

I think I know one way we could eliminate property taxes, and I am about to **** off a bunch of people. We start taxing farmland the same as all other property. Let's say you own 35 acres that you bought 15 years ago for $350,000, and is now worth $500,000.......that is just an open tillable field. In Hendricks County they will assess that at about $2,000 an acre and your taxes will be about $850 a year. But yet a man with $600,000 house on 1/4 acre will pay $6,000 a year in taxes, or 7-8 times what the farmer pays for the same value of property. In Hendricks County, we have probably 60-70% of land that is taxed as farm land and them people pay very small amount compared to a home. I think farmers should be taxed on property value, just like the rest of us......and we would have such a surplus rates could be capped at .25% of assessed value, instead of 1%. Can someone tell me why a 35 acre farm is assessed at $60,000 when we all know it would sell for $500,000+??

 

[bobzilla]

I think I know one way we could eliminate property taxes, and I am about to **** off a bunch of people. We start taxing farmland the same as all other property. Let's say you own 35 acres that you bought 15 years ago for $350,000, and is now worth $500,000.......that is just an open tillable field. In Hendricks County they will assess that at about $2,000 an acre and your taxes will be about $850 a year. But yet a man with $600,000 house on 1/4 acre will pay $6,000 a year in taxes, or 7-8 times what the farmer pays for the same value of property. In Hendricks County, we have probably 60-70% of land that is taxed as farm land and them people pay very small amount compared to a home. I think farmers should be taxed on property value, just like the rest of us......and we would have such a surplus rates could be capped at .25% of assessed value, instead of 1%. Can someone tell me why a 35 acre farm is assessed at $60,000 when we all know it would sell for $500,000+??

Well that's one way to close down all but large corporate farms and turn every inch of country into suburbs. I mean, if that's what you want, go for it. I'm outta here in 3 years. y'all continue to destroy rural Indiana all you want.

 

[phylodog]

We gave 30 billion dollars to Ukraine between 2022 & 2023 yet we can't possibly come up with a viable alternative to forcing old people off of their property to feed the machine. It's pathetic and infuriating but unfortunately just par for the course in this country. Our politicians have led by stupid for so long that we're apparently now trapped in that mindset.

How about we tax corporate owned farms at 7% per acre per year. That might level the playing field. That might provide increased revenue which could (if anyone actually gave a ****) allow people to be secure in their homes long after they're no longer able to pay an existence tax. We won't do that though because our government supports corporations tenfold over individuals.

 

[Ingomike]

How about we tax corporate owned farms at 7% per acre per year.

How about we tax our food at an additional 7%…

 

[phylodog]

How about we tax our food at an additional 7%…

What if we didn't? What if we didn't allow that? What if we actually held corporations feet to the fire like we do old people?

Nah, can't do that. Corporations donate more money back to politicians.

 

[bobzilla]

What if we didn't? What if we didn't allow that? What if we actually held corporations feet to the fire like we do old people?

Nah, can't do that. Corporations donate more money back to politicians.

They only way you're going to be able to raise a companies tax burden and not allow that to be passed onto the consumer would require a gov't take over of the industry with strict price caps. Considering gov't is what got us into this mess to start with, I don't believe giving them control over our direct food supply is an intelligent move. In fact, if you're going to do that, then they should also control fuel costs/distribution, manufacturing, sales, etc because some "evil corporation" might actually make money.

 

[phylodog]

They only way you're going to be able to raise a companies tax burden and not allow that to be passed onto the consumer would require a gov't take over of the industry with strict price caps. Considering gov't is what got us into this mess to start with, I don't believe giving them control over our direct food supply is an intelligent move. In fact, if you're going to do that, then they should also control fuel costs/distribution, manufacturing, sales, etc because some "evil corporation" might actually make money.

How do they not have direct control over our food supply now? Which industries in this country do people actually believe the government does not have control over? The government controls everything in this country and in near every situation the wellbeing of corporations is prioritized over that of citizens.

I'm going to have to stop trying to participate in these conversations. I no longer possess the ability to look at everything in a vacuum and justify ******** policies to keep the status quo.