- This topic has 115 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 7 months ago by
ucodegen.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 16, 2009 at 11:17 AM #417039June 16, 2009 at 11:26 AM #416320
DataAgent
ParticipantAny attempt to remove prop 13 would be political suicide. But since the Governator doesn’t care about reelection, he may give it a try.
June 16, 2009 at 11:26 AM #416558DataAgent
ParticipantAny attempt to remove prop 13 would be political suicide. But since the Governator doesn’t care about reelection, he may give it a try.
June 16, 2009 at 11:26 AM #416819DataAgent
ParticipantAny attempt to remove prop 13 would be political suicide. But since the Governator doesn’t care about reelection, he may give it a try.
June 16, 2009 at 11:26 AM #416885DataAgent
ParticipantAny attempt to remove prop 13 would be political suicide. But since the Governator doesn’t care about reelection, he may give it a try.
June 16, 2009 at 11:26 AM #417044DataAgent
ParticipantAny attempt to remove prop 13 would be political suicide. But since the Governator doesn’t care about reelection, he may give it a try.
June 16, 2009 at 11:30 AM #416330barnaby33
ParticipantWhoever said those properties built after prop 13 was enacted aren’t affected is full of it. Prop 13 limited tax growth, not the cost to maintain infrastructure. Furthermore commercial properties also were included. So grandma can keep her strip mall too!
Spending is part of the problem, but really its just part. Inflation is the real killer here. Prop 13 was just a symptomatic fix. It doesn’t stop the increases in cost to fix potholes or pay teachers, just the ability to collect taxes to pay for them.
June 16, 2009 at 11:30 AM #416568barnaby33
ParticipantWhoever said those properties built after prop 13 was enacted aren’t affected is full of it. Prop 13 limited tax growth, not the cost to maintain infrastructure. Furthermore commercial properties also were included. So grandma can keep her strip mall too!
Spending is part of the problem, but really its just part. Inflation is the real killer here. Prop 13 was just a symptomatic fix. It doesn’t stop the increases in cost to fix potholes or pay teachers, just the ability to collect taxes to pay for them.
June 16, 2009 at 11:30 AM #416829barnaby33
ParticipantWhoever said those properties built after prop 13 was enacted aren’t affected is full of it. Prop 13 limited tax growth, not the cost to maintain infrastructure. Furthermore commercial properties also were included. So grandma can keep her strip mall too!
Spending is part of the problem, but really its just part. Inflation is the real killer here. Prop 13 was just a symptomatic fix. It doesn’t stop the increases in cost to fix potholes or pay teachers, just the ability to collect taxes to pay for them.
June 16, 2009 at 11:30 AM #416895barnaby33
ParticipantWhoever said those properties built after prop 13 was enacted aren’t affected is full of it. Prop 13 limited tax growth, not the cost to maintain infrastructure. Furthermore commercial properties also were included. So grandma can keep her strip mall too!
Spending is part of the problem, but really its just part. Inflation is the real killer here. Prop 13 was just a symptomatic fix. It doesn’t stop the increases in cost to fix potholes or pay teachers, just the ability to collect taxes to pay for them.
June 16, 2009 at 11:30 AM #417054barnaby33
ParticipantWhoever said those properties built after prop 13 was enacted aren’t affected is full of it. Prop 13 limited tax growth, not the cost to maintain infrastructure. Furthermore commercial properties also were included. So grandma can keep her strip mall too!
Spending is part of the problem, but really its just part. Inflation is the real killer here. Prop 13 was just a symptomatic fix. It doesn’t stop the increases in cost to fix potholes or pay teachers, just the ability to collect taxes to pay for them.
June 16, 2009 at 12:01 PM #416335pencilneck
ParticipantI would argue that spending is the bulk of the problem. Property tax revenue has gone up faster than the rate of inflation most years of the past few decades.
Although it has softened in recent years, the real estate boom left us with a fortune from a tax revenue point of view. The fact that we were able to outspend the boom leaves me to believe that spending is the true culprit.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080606/news_1n6prop13.html
June 16, 2009 at 12:01 PM #416573pencilneck
ParticipantI would argue that spending is the bulk of the problem. Property tax revenue has gone up faster than the rate of inflation most years of the past few decades.
Although it has softened in recent years, the real estate boom left us with a fortune from a tax revenue point of view. The fact that we were able to outspend the boom leaves me to believe that spending is the true culprit.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080606/news_1n6prop13.html
June 16, 2009 at 12:01 PM #416834pencilneck
ParticipantI would argue that spending is the bulk of the problem. Property tax revenue has gone up faster than the rate of inflation most years of the past few decades.
Although it has softened in recent years, the real estate boom left us with a fortune from a tax revenue point of view. The fact that we were able to outspend the boom leaves me to believe that spending is the true culprit.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080606/news_1n6prop13.html
June 16, 2009 at 12:01 PM #416900pencilneck
ParticipantI would argue that spending is the bulk of the problem. Property tax revenue has gone up faster than the rate of inflation most years of the past few decades.
Although it has softened in recent years, the real estate boom left us with a fortune from a tax revenue point of view. The fact that we were able to outspend the boom leaves me to believe that spending is the true culprit.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080606/news_1n6prop13.html
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.