#31
|
|||
|
|||
Depolicing the US
On Sat, 25 Jul 2020 18:38:12 -0700, sms wrote:
Net worth, when you include the inflated value of your house, is pretty meaningless unless you're going to cash out, pay a huge amount in capital gains tax, and move somewhere cheap. I wonder sometimes why people that are retired, and that own a house in an area with inflated home values, don't move to somewhere cheaper and less crowded. Basically, it is the net cost of moving. And unless you know the area you want to move to, how can you be sure you want to stay there. Imaging finding a Tommy in the local bike club. This would have the additional benefit of freeing up single family homes for younger people that are working at the tech companies. Well, in that case you move and rent elsewhere and rent your old bigger house out There is also the question of cost of services. Older people tend to need more health services and some area cater well, but others gouge the old for all they can get. |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Depolicing the US
On 7/25/2020 9:38 PM, news18 wrote:
snip Well, in that case you move and rent elsewhere and rent your old bigger house out This is one of the unintended consequences of California's Prop 13. What should happen is that the house is sold and the new owner pays the appropriate property taxes, property taxes which support services like schools. Instead, the owner rents out the house for very high rent, the tenants send their kids to school, but the property taxes that are paid by the owner are far too low to pay for the necessary services. The owner would have to pay state and federal income tax on the income from the rental, but this mainly benefits the federal government. I'd gain about $16,500 per year by doing this, considering the cost of renting a property in a cheaper location and paying income tax on the rental income. Plus I'd have to manage a rental property. For some of my neighbors, who are paying only about $2000 in property taxes for the same tract home that I'm paying $9500 a year on, the schools are screwed even more if they rent out their house for $5000 a month to a family with two children. The elementary and middle schools spend about $8500 per child per year. If my neighbors or I sold our houses, the new owners would be paying $25,000-$28,000 per year in property tax. If I moved to a county where I could take my Prop 13 valuation with me, I'd be able to sell my existing house and buy a much nicer house and not be paying any extra income tax. However this tends to screw over the county I move to if I buy a house that would normally have much higher property tax than I am paying. This is why only 10 out of 58 California counties have opted in to the Prop 90 tax base transfer program. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Depolicing the US
On Saturday, July 25, 2020 at 8:53:54 PM UTC-7, news18 wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 07:35:19 -0700, cyclintom wrote: My net worth is over a million dollars, what is yours moron? I made more money off of my investments last month than half of my yearly income from Social Security. So exactly why do you need social security then? Oh, wait, that's right - you think that is a socialist program. If it is paid for by the community, then it is socialist. Over here, someone earning similar independent income, would not get 'social security' aka od age pension and they would be thought to be defauding the government if they were. Being taught socialism, you recognize anything and everything as socialism. What's it feel like to be a complete moron? Does it make your head hurt? |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Depolicing the US
On Sunday, July 26, 2020 at 8:02:44 AM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 7/25/2020 9:38 PM, news18 wrote: snip Well, in that case you move and rent elsewhere and rent your old bigger house out This is one of the unintended consequences of California's Prop 13. What should happen is that the house is sold and the new owner pays the appropriate property taxes, property taxes which support services like schools. Instead, the owner rents out the house for very high rent, the tenants send their kids to school, but the property taxes that are paid by the owner are far too low to pay for the necessary services. The owner would have to pay state and federal income tax on the income from the rental, but this mainly benefits the federal government. I'd gain about $16,500 per year by doing this, considering the cost of renting a property in a cheaper location and paying income tax on the rental income. Plus I'd have to manage a rental property. For some of my neighbors, who are paying only about $2000 in property taxes for the same tract home that I'm paying $9500 a year on, the schools are screwed even more if they rent out their house for $5000 a month to a family with two children. The elementary and middle schools spend about $8500 per child per year. If my neighbors or I sold our houses, the new owners would be paying $25,000-$28,000 per year in property tax. If I moved to a county where I could take my Prop 13 valuation with me, I'd be able to sell my existing house and buy a much nicer house and not be paying any extra income tax. However this tends to screw over the county I move to if I buy a house that would normally have much higher property tax than I am paying. This is why only 10 out of 58 California counties have opted in to the Prop 90 tax base transfer program. The teacher's union will not allow a teacher to be fired no matter how incompetent. In some areas not one single pupil can pass the age related tests for English or Math and the Teacher's union answer to this is pay the teachers more. Sounds like the sort of plan you have. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Depolicing the US | [email protected] | Techniques | 1 | July 7th 20 09:36 PM |
Depolicing the US | Frank Krygowski[_4_] | Techniques | 2 | July 7th 20 08:51 PM |
Depolicing the US | Frank Krygowski[_4_] | Techniques | 0 | July 7th 20 02:02 AM |