Quote:
Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac
What "market" necessitates an increase in spending and thus taxes ? Mebbe I don't "get it" but if the house market were tending towards increased house prices and thus increased evaluations then the tax rate should go down accordingly ... were spending to remain the same. The problem, if I may paraphase Glenn Frey, is the lure of easy money ... in this case OPM. The only disparity create is really btw lakefront and non-lakefront. Those out-of-state people of means don't get to vote on the spending.
|
While I may agree with you (and Mr. frey!) regarding valuations, tax rates, and " easy money", I dissagree with your presumption that spending would stay the same. Population growth neccesitates increases and/or creation of infrastructure (Police, Fire, Highway and other municipal departments, Nursing homes, Health Care facilities, etc..). I'm not even going to touch the additional $$ that the state demands. The reality is that the cost of such is not linear with the additional income generated by population growth alone.
Please explain the lakefront to non-lakefront disparity? The same home on an acre of non-lakefront land is worth much less than the same home/acre of land on the lake. Perhaps your issue is that the tax rates are not proportional? I would say that it is analogous to Local, state, and federal governments having different income tax rates based upon how much $$ is earned year, as they have had for decades. FWIW I don't wholly agree with this property or income tax redistribution of wealth either, but I will leave that for another discussion.
Like it or not, that is the way our constitutional republic form of government operates: The more money you make, the more expensive your property, the more (proportionally) you will be taxed.
The point I was attempting to make in my previous post was to convey the contiguousness of current Lakefront owners tax plight with previous lakefront property owners. Each in turn are the victim of no one but their own excesses. Back in the 70's and 80's when middleclass folk got priced off the lake the new owners were the very ones that shrugged their shoulders, said too bad for you as they bought the home/cottage that was in a family for generations. Now that the same is beginning to happen to them as an even wealthier section of society moves in, I see more than a little of "what comes around goes around".