How did they end up with "back" property taxes in the first place Stink?

Uhhh... maybe 'cause they didn't pay them?

I didn't petition the assessor in either state that I own property in and guess what? My property taxes went DOWN all by theyselves. How do you 'splain that?

Property taxes specifically weren't my point anyway. Krijack's analogy was talkin' about the 'rich' being taxed out of their homes in general... which just isn't the case.

So... since you're the economic Einstein... perhaps you could 'splain exactly how my logic is ass backwards?

Feel free to include any facts you deem pertinent as well... if you would be so kind.

This oughtta be good!

And just for you:

Gotcha,...........so individuals who worked for years to pay off the property in which they reside lose the home they worked so long and hard for due to increases in property tax assessments "failed to plan" and therefore should have their hard-earned property confiscated for pennies on the dollar. OK.

I guess then we should also say that individuals who are too fvckin' lazy to work and collecting a welfare check "failed to plan" for hard times and should therefore pay all the money back they collected or be imprisoned. Sound good?

The logic you use to justify federal spending as some magic boom to the economy is bass ackwards because you fail to have any forward vision when it comes to the money supply and you fail to acknowledge where the money originates from in the first place. If you can't wrap your midget brain around that than there's no need for me to go any further.

KD.....What stink said. The backed taxes came from hard time in one case and the other was just lack of responsibilty. Should they get it back......No. They should have planned better.

Salt
Lynnwood must be nicer than kitsap as we have had to petition on our taxes for our house in seabeck and to this point we have had no answer. Does not look good though. We will see but I won't hold my breath. Since we have had two appraisals and both were about 3/4 of what the county states you never know. No offer to drop it though has been given on this side of the H2O. Glad your county is making an effort not to screw you though.

Christ Stink... talk about midget brain!

I never said federal spending was a boon to the economy... I just said that dramatically cutting it off now would be bad.

The lame semantics game is pretty retarded too.

In Krijack's analogy... the 'rich' were being taxed to the point that they would just give up and sell their home... and I said that doesn't happen and that he couldn't name one example of where it did.

The federal government doesn't assess property taxes anyway... so you wingnuts can't blame Obama and the congressional Dems for that. Funny how nobody's mentionin' property taxes in states with a Republican governor and legislative majority. Are you sayin' that property taxes never increase in those states?

The bottom line is that we are NOT being overtaxed... no matter what you Teabaggers think.

Now... that should be simple enough for even you to understand.

Of course it would be bad. We've been artificially propping up the economy for years now.

What would be worse would be to continue what isn't working only to suffer the consequences down the road.

You can't fix over spending, public or private, by borrowing more money.

There is no fix to the economy that does not involve some kind of pain and sacrafice. To avoid that is only delaying the inevitable and compounding the original problem. Fixing the federal deficit should involve heavy cuts and temporary tax increases at the same time. Once balanced, a balanced budget proposal should be made and the federal income tax eliminated along with the dissolution of the IRS and the Fed Reserve Bank.

Here's something that'll suprise you about me. I think the Bush tax cuts should be allowed to expire. We couldn't afford them when they were implemented and we don't deserve them now.

The scary thing about giving the federal gov't more money is it's a cold day in hell when they decide to give some of it back to those who contributed when the problems are solved. If they're ever solved.

what happened to trickle down economics?

looks like bush was right when he called it "voodoo economics"

What I think is you're full of sh!t.

If that's the way it really went down, then every county would have their budget balanced, now wouldn't they?

Don't know goharley. To tell you the truth, it was the low cost of housing, location relative to grandchildren in Canada, the beauty of the area, that won the day. The taxes were a bonus. Couldn't believe how low. It's a pretty conservative state. The Repulican Governor was almost run out on a rail for even suggesting raising the gas tax and some Legislators lost their seats in the primary because they talked about supporting the tax.

Love this area, but it is pretty pricey on a retirement income and I couldn't convince my wife to move to the coast. Got to do what you got to do, but hey, I am happy.

Mike,
The important thing is that you're retiring where you'll be happy. Good on ya. I was surprised to find that fact of the tax ratio with Idaho. I know how conservative that state is, and would have thought they'd be on the lower side.

BWP,
By your logic, fishing and driving a car are also rights. Good luck with that in court.

BWP, the government didn't give you [censored]. Our rights were given by God, and protected by the constitution. Didn't anyone graduate high school? There have been so many idiotic statements in this discussion, it would take too long yo correct them all.

So to you idiots who feel we are under taxed, how much extra do you mail in so you feel you are paying your fair share?

You know somethings do not compute. $100 a month in taxes. Let me see two ways that can happen. One your income is not that hot. Two you have a biz to write things off with.

Now not being a rocket scientist 52k / single will put you in the 25% tax bracket. ( over 39k single / 49k married ) I have substantial deductions and I am able to drive my tax rate down to 15% or around 4k a year and my property taxes are $3800 a year. As anyone that has over 25k income and retired is regarded as rich by congress my Soc. Sec. is taxed back in on a % formula. Then we have sales tax, licenses, fees & taxes built in ph, water, electric. Don't know what your lifestyle is but I hope your Dat B210 is still running!

$100 a month taxes you need a muchhhhhhhhhhh better income guy OR your father in law is a bloody genius.

BaitDunker....I remember the "Pledge of Allegiance", but that was the only example that I remember talking about "god" in school (thankfully).

Snit

I can remember when God wasn't mentioned in the pledge. Somehow we struggled along anyway. If someone tried to remove God from the pledge today some of the fundies would go berserk.

Nope your not and idiot. Just the opposite as you think it through put out a thought and reasons for them and DO NOT sound like a sound bite or parrot.

Taxes are strange things. When I bought this place I almost picked up to different ones and they were both for sale by retired people who were selling as the property taxes had gotten so high they could not afford their own home. Now that is just plain wrong. We need to modify the property tax system similiar to what was done in CA or cap it someway.

Being your hopping out on a limb so to speak, mind if I join you? My ideas?

Soc Sec take the cap off and pay all the way up. Now you pay so much and stop but most folks never get there. Retirement age has to go up some and over 250K gross income no Soc Sec.

State and Fed flat tax ( no deductions ) and same rate for all. If the rate needed is 10% then if you make 10000 you pay 1k You make 100k you pay 10k no loop holes.

Sales tax state and a VAT national.

Flat rate ( whatever % of income is needed ) and a single payer health care that is managed by each state for it's citizens that allows choices and a public option.

Then the big thing, the Federal Government be required to balance its budget except in time of a legal declared war.

They do this type of thing I will join in saying I can afford it as the government will have to deal with services and efficiency. I have been around government agencies most of my life. Right now you give them more money and they will just continue down the same screwed up road.

That is the fundamental difference in European Governments say Germany & France and US. There governments make things work or crap flies and you have a Greece. We aren't there yet but getting close.

Painting break ( any excuse hate painting ) Well now the transfer to corporations on anything, yes / no. Here is the kicker.........ah let me try this.

Medical. What if,
If provided by employer it becomes wages and you do not loose them. Right now those who buy there own get screwed over as my union ins was not wages a bit unfair those who pay from the packet.

All pay in whatever it damn well cost. Breathing is a right and you can stop breathing if you can not get a doctor.

BUT you have the option of a private company or public. The kicker is simple the Ins would have to be standardized nation wide, you could only change providers once year, basic rules to keep ins companies from cherry picking, and some sort of arbitration process so a patient could get after a provider. If the policies and rates are standardized then the only way to maximize profits is by attracting more paying customers. You provide a poor product ( ins policy & service ) then nobody will stick with them.

Despite all the BS from R & D's this screwed up system is of both of their making. Return control of your choice to you and all the government has to do is set the standards, collect taxes for it, and disperse the funds to the states. Frankly steps to insure it is not admin-ed to death would be needed.

Almost forgot. Everyone loves to cut military spending. We have done that over and over again in the history of the nation. The fundamental flaw is that well over 50% of the time it left us vulnerable and actually increased the likelihood of war. FDR violated more laws and absolutely lied to the nation in the years prior to WWII as we built up a military that was in bad shape. You can argue these points forever and both be right.

Here is what is also true. Many millions could be saved by closing bases, getting rid of some weapon systems ( Trident boomers for sure ) getting our troops out of Europe, Asia, wherever and simply maintain Rapid D bases, hell the list is huge. The problem here is THE DAMN CONGRESS which immediately screams jobs / politics and makes a mess out of things. The military is necessary but costly and Ike was blunt in his warning when he was prez.

Wow, many points to agree with from both those whom I usually agree with and disagree with. What's this forum coming to? Where's KK to restore the polarization?

Sg

out to pasture