This is basically a tax on “unrealized gains”, which is what the Dems are pushing for on all forms of investments. Unless you’re already one of the elite who can hide your wealth, then it will become impossible to build wealth over time - which is exactly what they want. They want a population dependent on the government teat, which ensures an electorate that will keep voting for “free” stuff.
I would love to see a Constitutional Amendment recognizing the right of the individual to own property, and that the government is prohibited from taking that property from citizens under any circumstances.
Then challenge state property taxes at the Federal level, and nullify any Eminent Domain laws.
The problem with property tax isn't that it's thievery, but that people don't realize it is thievery.
An act of war is any direct violation of someone's inalienable rights. Thievery is an act of war.
The solution then, is to simply declare war on Bill Gates and take all his shit. That's how Sovereign entities have been doing it since the beginning of humanity.
There is nothing wrong with war. It is a perfectly natural thing. If one entity has horded all the resources there are consequences. Those consequences are that other's will declare war on them and take the resources back.
The problem is that people don't understand that they are Sovereign entities. ALL PEOPLE (including Bill Gates) are Sovereign entities. They have the inalienable Right to defend their property, no matter how they got that property. Bill Gates did not get his farmland without fuckery, but he still has the Right to defend it. We The People can decide that he shouldn't have that land because of the fuckery he employed to gain it. We can then declare war on him and take it.
As Sovereign entities, we have the right to declare war. Such a declaration, and the intended result, are direct violations of another's Rights, but that is not always a bad thing (or rather, it is sometimes a "necessary evil" for social cohesion). Indeed, societies violate individuals Rights all the time. Every time someone goes to jail, or pays a fine, or pays taxes, or a thousand other things we think are "totally normal", that is exactly what is happening: direct violations of someone's Rights AKA acts of war. We push the responsibility of those violations of Rights off to "the government," or "the law," but they are still acts of war from one Sovereign entity onto another.
The shifting of responsibility is the fraud. The responsibility is on us. We are the people who violate another's Rights when society puts someone in jail. Such an act is an act of war, from We The People onto the Sovereign entity that is put in jail. We say, "they deserved it" if we believe they do in fact deserve it, but whether they do or not is irrelevant for this discussion. It is a direct violation of their Rights, no matter what justification we use for that act of war. Such acts of war may be necessary for social cohesion (put a murderer in jail to prevent future murders e.g.). The point is that we must learn to understand that we are the ones responsible for those acts of war, and that the person who is the target of such acts is just as much a Sovereign as those doing the acts. All men are created equallySovereign.
The same rationalization that we use to put a murderer in jail can be used for any act of war, including taking the farm land from a globalist pedophile who lied, cheated, stole, and murdered his way to his land ownership.
The problem with our systems of law and government is not that they are "bad"... well, that is a problem, but it's not the real problem. The real problem is that our systems of law and government obfuscate who exactly is responsible for actions, specifically these acts of war.
People don't understand what Sovereignty means (Ultimate Authority). They don't understand that they are Sovereign (every single one of us). They don't understand what their Jurisdiction is. They don't understand what their inalienable Rights are (such as the Right to Defend their property). They don't understand that there are always consequences for actions, no matter what the law is. Most importantly, they don't understand that the system of "law" that we have is specifically designed to ensure that the greedy can avoid consequences by hiding behind the scam we call "law" and "government".
Make it a law that crimes against humanity is a capitol offense punishable by death and confiscation of all wealth and property. His role with Moderna and the death jab qualfies.
Although I agree with this, it needs to be used judiciously. I mean, the people in my parent's neighborhood decided they didn't like them. They are conservative, the rest of the 'hood seems to be Liberal. My Dad put up "Don't tread on me" flags, the neighbors didn't like it and tried to get them to take it down. After that, everything was a problem. The neighbors waged war on them because of their political views.
They antagonized them, they complained to authorities, they did everything they could until my parents sold their house. They were pushing 80, they didn't need this crap.
So I guess what I'm saying is, we can all agree to wage war on Bill Gates, however people use things like this to wage war for the dumbest reasons.
My parents ended up moving all the way across the country from their family and grandkids. Their choice, they could have moved somewhere else in this state, however they chose to move across the country where we see them now maybe once a year. At our expense, mind you. They moved that far away to be in the "free state of Florida" because they just wanted to get away from our red turned purple turned dark blue state.
Anyhow, waging war sounds good when it's people who really need it, but people use it as a weapon against people they just disagree with, don't like, or just feel like picking on.
And reduce the government / civil service by a corresponding 97-98%.
Taxes are not to fix roads or run schools, anyone with eyes can see this. Taxes are used to line the pockets of faceless bureaucrats and civil servants who give no bid contracts to corrupt corporations so they can eventually get a kick back.
Ever wonder why the perfectly good road got repaired again?
Technically speaking, unless you have an allodial title you own absolute equitable interest in land, but not the land itself. Regardless of whether you pay taxes or not, you don't own your land in a fee simple system like we currently have in the US.
In other words, in a fee simple you own the right to do what you want with "your" land...except for rules, regulations, laws, taxes, liens, and eminent domain (when .gov decides they need it more than you do). So, our current ownership system is a joke, it's literally a carry over from the feudal era when a king let people "own" land. In this case the municipality your land is in generally owns it, the county owns the municipality, the states owns the county, and the federal government owns all of it (through the US corporation).
An allodial title, on the other hand, is absolute ownership beholden to no one except God himself. That is true ownership, everything else is partial as it's ultimately beholden to someone else.
You fix the title situation, everything else follows. Property taxes obviously need to go but they are simply the most egregious aspect of the fee simple system.
That's a good point. That would put individual property ownership at an equal level to the federal gov or any other entity. If implemented properly that would solve all those problems as any law that went against that right could be squashed on a constitute basis rather than case law or other law fare bs.
Renters don't pay property tax anyway. But income tax punishes EVERYBODY.
If income tax is necessary, how has the US survived and thrived for most of its history (and with no Great Depression) without an income tax? Because it isn't.
Just as shoplifting losses cost everyone because retailers pass it on as part of the prices on everything they sell, not only on those specific items stolen
Thank you! We did not have a Personal Income Tax until 1913, and this was also the year the Federal Reserve was set up. This was no coincidence. Furthermore, the personal income tax is a Federal tax, while property taxes are administered by the various states - the further the government is from you, and from being truly representative, the less just it tends to be. Originally, the personal income tax (Federal) only applied to federal employees, they have now conned all of us into accepting being Federally approved employees, and the shit goes on...
Penalties for non-payment can result in fines equaling 10% or more of the taxes due, potentially affecting an individual’s financial well-being and credit score (snippet from “10 things your tax team needs to know…”). The tax system can be complex, leading to errors, disputes, and potential violations of individuals’ rights to due process and fair treatment.
Absolutely. What can we do to push forward on this? I'm contractually obligated to keep taxes paid on my land but have secured the right to 'slow-walk' paying them as long as possible, and tried to convince others in my area with limited success to do the same.
First you have to get your title from the Department of the Interior and understand what "Real Estate" is. Next you have to understand the tax scam. Your taxes are constantly assessed against other home sales and adjusted annually. What happens here ? It is raised because mortgage lenders "roll" into the loan fees, percentage points , addendums, funds for repairs etc. . . ALL are considered the "Purchase Price" of the property in turn RAISING you tax assessment. This is in addition to INFLATION adjustments inside your tax assesment bill which includes utilities, schools etc. even if you don't have kids!!! SSSSSSSSScam Central.
Currently, the left wing leverage is to mandate you carry home owners insurance that meet their standards or they will close the loan and take the property. This is done by using the Insurance companies in Forida or Commiefornia for example to raise rates in lockstep with your assessment and inflation and then refusing to cover coastlines or rivershed areas that can flood or be subjected to disasters. Even if you previously had coverage, they just drop you. Hello Blackrock, they step in and confiscate the property and rent it out at inflated rates due to lack of available rentals, etc, etc. rinse and repeat. Bend Over Patriot, here comes the Blue Donkey again suggesting you eat the bugs and assuring you that you WILL BE HAPPY, when you own nothing !
I had this theory. I don't know if it would work. What if there was no rental property? And no buying and selling property like we currently do. Instead you basically mortgaged property from the owner (no bank). Maybe some incentive could be worked out between the seller and buyer (formerly landlord and tenant) such that they split these annually assessed prop tax costs. Of course it would be nice to get rid of that (since that was the whole point of this thread), and this arrangement would make banks unnecesarry (yay!). Perhaps houses are traded with "property shares" instead of the base currency, and the shares' values are based on market demand (location location location) and these shares can be bought and sold in some sort of property stock market. When you get to 51% of shares, you are the majority owner or something (or lawmakers/voters pick some threshold everyone agrees on) and can do what you want with the property (live in it, "rent" it, etc.) If a buyer (tenant) moves out, he/she can either sell their shares back to the seller (landlord) or sell them on the market for cash. The amount you pay in taxes is based on how many shares you own. Dividends are also paid out per share, perhaps trading those for physically living there once or once you pass the threshold. So if you lived there, your "rent" pays the dividends to the sharerolders. Or maybe you are contractually bound to pay some agreed number of shares to the 51% owner, and the "property taxes" or what that formerly was in the old syatem are what pays the dividends. The "renter" pays by buying shares and paying the "property tax" (there being no more tax to the government for this), and cannot recieve dividends from their shares until they pass 51% threshold. This way a "landlord" could generate income with their property by either selling shares in the market up to 49% to stay in their house and still recieve dividends from their shares(similar to a reverse mortgage), or "rent it out" and have a "tenant" (seller) live there if the owner is able to relocate somewhere else (i.e. had >51% stake in multiple dwelling properties)
I dunno just a thought. Need to hash the details out, but could that work? Downsides? Upsides? Worth it?
How does a Tariff trickle down to local municipalities?
You would essentially be taking money away from your local officials your town voted for and giving it to bureaucrats and politicians in washington that mega cities control.
Sales tax. Which is the same as a tariff but with reverse mechanics.
Either way, consumption taxes are fine, as long as they're reasonable, they're typically non-discriminatory, and are progressive in that those who spend more pay more of them which are only those who have enough to spend in the first place.
Since they typically exclude food and other necessities they're about as fair as they can get and they require the government to ensure that a functioning marketplace with enforced laws exists if they want their cut. They get nothing "off the top" only "off the bottom."
This is all to say, every other tax is a robbery, and only enables the worst of government, particularly at the federal level, and should absolutely be abolished.
We dont do it by threatening to take away the property that I have spent 50 years building and paying for, shedding blood, sweat and tears to accomplish it. I built this house and every outbuilding with my own hands. I took 40 acres of woods, swamp and meadows and turned it into something productive. And every improvement I make they want more $$. Ive spent a couple million dollars paying for it. But they can take it on a whim? Fuck off.
Most fire departments are volunteer. Private toll roads have been a thing since the beginning of this country. Insurance covers emergencies. Most cities don't cover trash pickup. Water and sewer are also typically not covered.
You should pay for your own school. Look at what each state spends on education and what their outcomes are. If you don't participate as a purchaser in the market the results are horrific. If we gave you that money back in taxes you'd easily be able to afford what a functioning private school market would allow for.
Most hospitals are private. Health insurance can pay for more than just emergency room care. Look at Kaiser, which current sucks as a provider, but not because of their model.
Municipalities can charge directly for whatever services they think they need to provide. Which should be few and could ideally be covered by a simple sales tax. Sheriff's are really there to serve paperwork and handle warrants, which they can charge appropriately for, and the pressure will be on them to size their staff to the actual size of the problems they typically face.
Govt should have to ASK people to pay for common-good type stuff. Like in church, money is not EXTRACTED from you upon entering. You get to give money, a love offering, of any amount you wish.
Some give more, and some give less. Those who give more love tend to get more in return.
If govt would, instead of stealing the money before we ever see it, have to make a CASE for why we should give, and appeal to human nature to want to give of our resources, then people could give as much as they want. And there would be more than could ever be used. There would be extra to share with others.
The way life could have been, if the bad people weren't in charge.
Add up the amount collected in just your neighborhood... Just do the math real quick.
BILLIONS are collected via property tax alone... they do a shitty job with the trash pickup, kids come out of school stupid and brains ruined for life, popo harass the people over trivial shit, the fuel taxes keep going up, yet ALL OF OUR ROADS are worse than they've ever been. Fire them all and start over.
Notice how this is wrapped in public services, yet, property has nothing to do with their services.
They either are capable of producing a contract in which their duty to collect trash, maintain roads and stuff are iron clad enforcible, or there is only racketeering.
I have come for the comments. Stayed for the show. You are correct. Along with everything else my property TAXATION is too much. I have no voice or ability to deny the stealing of my wealth.
This would only work for our benefit if natural born citizens could own property. As it stands, foreigners through investment groups are buying up properties, strategically to cause displacement of native populations. Also to store illicit proceeds that would be flagged if they were put into banks, and depreciation of assets to offset income declarations.
Explain to me what prevents corporations or billionaires from acquiring all the land? Because that's what's happening. All this would do is accelerate that.
What you want is a progressive tax on land so you actually have a better opportunity to own some.
This is in important distinction that should be solved. Perhaps property taxes apply on houses after the first. The first doesn’t get taxed because the norm should be that a person or family should have one house. People should be discouraged from holding lots of property, and houses should be owned, not rented.
In late 2000 I bought 14 acre piece of property that I was going to build a 2400sqft home on. Bush got in and I held off. Thank God I waited. I'm still living in the 1300sqft on 3 acre home we raised three kids in.
Right now I have lived here 41 years. I still owe a little less than 1/2 of what I paid for it. The field is paid off.
Between the two pieces of property I pay an additional $350 a month in taxes. I rent out the field to a local farmer to help pay the taxes. Notice I said help. Every fall the farmer gives me a check for $1,000. It doesn't even cover the taxes on the field. Not to mention Joe taxes that $1,000 as income
Do the math. $350 a month x 12 = $4,200 a year.
If you extrapolate that to the population of the nearby village of 117 families (2000 census data) you get $491,400.
The math at the township level of 1,114 families (2000 census data) you get $4,678,800. That is a yearly income to the township.
Where does all that money go?
I challenge you to run the numbers on your community
and still we drive on horrible roads and pay schooling for those that don't bare the burden. We face additional millages for jails and schools. Many of our first responders are volunteer and we pay extra for an ambulance ride.
Home values are WAAAAY higher than reality right now. Our prices doubled and some even tripled during the scamdemic because people wanted out of crazy, Dem controlled defund the police areas.
Now that interest rates are so high they are not selling unless the price is low. Will they “re-evaluate”? Hahahahhaa!
This tax should be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. If not, it should still be done away with as when you own something it should not require a renters fee every year to keep it, or am I totally wrong??
What does property tax have to do with a third party loan on an object? Either there is, or there isn't, property tax. Otherwise you are saying the government can tax according to percentage owed. After all, why should I pay full tax in my last month's payment? At that point I own 99.9% of the property.
But the big-government-local(government) fascists will die without being able to suck at the teat of the taxpayer and become super morbidly obese. 🙄😡 In Missouri we have an April election and that is where the stick all of the tax increases we have to vote yeah or nay on. They've done this on purpose because they know so few people vote in those elections and chances are the increase will pass. Occasionally, they don't because they are so over the top. Our small-town council was asking for a tax increase, believe for parks, they used the selling point they'd be able to hire 2 additional government employees (sloths). Needless to say, it went down in flames. Imagine being so out of touch, you tout hiring new employees to do nothing.🙄 Stupid.
Not only do we need to end property tax and income tax, but we need to end Fed govt owning land. What biz do they have competing with the people for the land? We know, it's a slow absorption of everything into the belly of the beast.
having "property" tax is kind of a bad idea, but on the other hand taxes are taxes. Whether there is a "property" tax or not, people are still being taxed at the end of the day. I guess a point is, maybe a low "property" tax would probably be preferred over a higher tax that isn't called a "property" tax.
Also, regarding the idea that "taxation is theft": even if we didn't have a central government, we would probably have companies that provide "governing services". While taxes are compulsory, paying for such services wouldn't be compulsory, but since people often need such things, there is a sense of compulsion involved. Just like with food, yeah, no one has to force you to eat food, but since everyone must eat, there is a sense in which we are forced to eat. I think it's important to make all these distinctions about freedom, compulsion, and taxes.
So, taxes are some kind of 1) cost for a good that is compulsory 2) in need and 3) as decreed by government. Having no central government may result in removing #3, the compulsion of a decree by government, but it does not remove something of a #2 need for governing services (police, courts, legal help, etc.). To some extent, people can cut down these things to a more minimal level (a smaller police institution for example, or eating less expensive or less food), but at some level there is probably a "need" for such things. Having no central government also does not remove the #1 cost for the good: people still end up paying for food, or for police protection (or for their own defense tools if they want to "be their own police" in such a scenario without government).
Unfortunately, most people dont own allodial title, and hence dont really own the land. They are simply given the benefit of pretending to be owning the land. Hence the property taxes.
The taxation issue need to stop being about which individual tax type and should be about the whole tax system.
I am of the opinion that it needs to change to a tax-trickle-up system.
The local entity (probably a county) levies a single kind of tax (income, property, sales, w/e). This is then used to fund all activities in that county as appropriate. Then, all county citizens vote on how much of their revenue goes to the state (with each county getting a single vote for the state).
That revenue funds the state activities.
Then all state citizens vote how much of the state tax revenue goes to the federal government (again with each stage getting a single vote).
The federal votes can be every two years to match the election cycle. States and counties can set their own cycles.
This trickle-up means that people, counties, and cities will understand how much they have to give up to run the larger edifices of government. It will also shorten the leash on state and federal governments.
At the very least this should be the case for a person’s primary residence. It should be everything, but I think securing homes would be easier to actually get done as well as being one of the most important parts.
I have never totally trusted Greg Abbott, but, he does do a lot of good things for Texas, and he very much wants property tax to go away. This, of all taxes, makes me fume. Here Government, I bought you a house.
This is basically a tax on “unrealized gains”, which is what the Dems are pushing for on all forms of investments. Unless you’re already one of the elite who can hide your wealth, then it will become impossible to build wealth over time - which is exactly what they want. They want a population dependent on the government teat, which ensures an electorate that will keep voting for “free” stuff.
Much worse than tax on unrealized gains. Its tax on the capital. You gotta pay even if your property lost value.
The auditor does review property values and lowers house value and therefore taxes..happened to me after 2008 crash...but property taxes are assho
It's my understanding that according to the time traveler John Titor from 2036, there is no property taxes in the (near) future.
Donald Trump, a real estate man, understands the oppressive nature of property taxes. It would be illogical to think he would NOT abolish it.
"Make 'Property Taxes' unconstitutional (Again)"
WWG1WGA!
Like the carrot on a stick....
Preach it!!!!
You never own your own land. You merely rent it from the government. I would like to see an amendment that eliminates property taxes.
I really got on that train when my Great Aunt had to keep selling off pieces of her farm just to pay the property taxes every year.
I would love to see a Constitutional Amendment recognizing the right of the individual to own property, and that the government is prohibited from taking that property from citizens under any circumstances.
Then challenge state property taxes at the Federal level, and nullify any Eminent Domain laws.
Agree but how to solve for all the farmland that has been bought up by Bill Gates etc?
The problem with property tax isn't that it's thievery, but that people don't realize it is thievery.
An act of war is any direct violation of someone's inalienable rights. Thievery is an act of war.
The solution then, is to simply declare war on Bill Gates and take all his shit. That's how Sovereign entities have been doing it since the beginning of humanity.
There is nothing wrong with war. It is a perfectly natural thing. If one entity has horded all the resources there are consequences. Those consequences are that other's will declare war on them and take the resources back.
The problem is that people don't understand that they are Sovereign entities. ALL PEOPLE (including Bill Gates) are Sovereign entities. They have the inalienable Right to defend their property, no matter how they got that property. Bill Gates did not get his farmland without fuckery, but he still has the Right to defend it. We The People can decide that he shouldn't have that land because of the fuckery he employed to gain it. We can then declare war on him and take it.
As Sovereign entities, we have the right to declare war. Such a declaration, and the intended result, are direct violations of another's Rights, but that is not always a bad thing (or rather, it is sometimes a "necessary evil" for social cohesion). Indeed, societies violate individuals Rights all the time. Every time someone goes to jail, or pays a fine, or pays taxes, or a thousand other things we think are "totally normal", that is exactly what is happening: direct violations of someone's Rights AKA acts of war. We push the responsibility of those violations of Rights off to "the government," or "the law," but they are still acts of war from one Sovereign entity onto another.
The shifting of responsibility is the fraud. The responsibility is on us. We are the people who violate another's Rights when society puts someone in jail. Such an act is an act of war, from We The People onto the Sovereign entity that is put in jail. We say, "they deserved it" if we believe they do in fact deserve it, but whether they do or not is irrelevant for this discussion. It is a direct violation of their Rights, no matter what justification we use for that act of war. Such acts of war may be necessary for social cohesion (put a murderer in jail to prevent future murders e.g.). The point is that we must learn to understand that we are the ones responsible for those acts of war, and that the person who is the target of such acts is just as much a Sovereign as those doing the acts. All men are created equally Sovereign.
The same rationalization that we use to put a murderer in jail can be used for any act of war, including taking the farm land from a globalist pedophile who lied, cheated, stole, and murdered his way to his land ownership.
The problem with our systems of law and government is not that they are "bad"... well, that is a problem, but it's not the real problem. The real problem is that our systems of law and government obfuscate who exactly is responsible for actions, specifically these acts of war.
People don't understand what Sovereignty means (Ultimate Authority). They don't understand that they are Sovereign (every single one of us). They don't understand what their Jurisdiction is. They don't understand what their inalienable Rights are (such as the Right to Defend their property). They don't understand that there are always consequences for actions, no matter what the law is. Most importantly, they don't understand that the system of "law" that we have is specifically designed to ensure that the greedy can avoid consequences by hiding behind the scam we call "law" and "government".
The problem with war. It drags in people who don’t have a problem to settle.
This is why the military industrial complex likes war.
They drag in the common citizen into war. That person loses arms or legs.
Once the war is over. The same people who told them to fight don’t care about the fallout.
What needs to happen isn’t a physical war: What needs to happen is no more classified secrets.
We have to declassify everything in my view. So the people can understand how the government really works.
Slyver you fricken' ROCK! Wish there were more folks thinking like you...
Yes!
And there are consequences for freedom. It is very uncomfortable to say no sometimes!
Make it a law that crimes against humanity is a capitol offense punishable by death and confiscation of all wealth and property. His role with Moderna and the death jab qualfies.
Although I agree with this, it needs to be used judiciously. I mean, the people in my parent's neighborhood decided they didn't like them. They are conservative, the rest of the 'hood seems to be Liberal. My Dad put up "Don't tread on me" flags, the neighbors didn't like it and tried to get them to take it down. After that, everything was a problem. The neighbors waged war on them because of their political views.
They antagonized them, they complained to authorities, they did everything they could until my parents sold their house. They were pushing 80, they didn't need this crap.
So I guess what I'm saying is, we can all agree to wage war on Bill Gates, however people use things like this to wage war for the dumbest reasons.
My parents ended up moving all the way across the country from their family and grandkids. Their choice, they could have moved somewhere else in this state, however they chose to move across the country where we see them now maybe once a year. At our expense, mind you. They moved that far away to be in the "free state of Florida" because they just wanted to get away from our red turned purple turned dark blue state.
Anyhow, waging war sounds good when it's people who really need it, but people use it as a weapon against people they just disagree with, don't like, or just feel like picking on.
EO 13818
Make imminent domain illegal too.
There should be one tax, if any and it should be capped at 2-3%. Everything else can fuck off.
And reduce the government / civil service by a corresponding 97-98%.
Taxes are not to fix roads or run schools, anyone with eyes can see this. Taxes are used to line the pockets of faceless bureaucrats and civil servants who give no bid contracts to corrupt corporations so they can eventually get a kick back.
Ever wonder why the perfectly good road got repaired again?
When you BUY stuff, so you have control over how much tax you pay.
Yeah, flat sales tax. That's it.
Technically speaking, unless you have an allodial title you own absolute equitable interest in land, but not the land itself. Regardless of whether you pay taxes or not, you don't own your land in a fee simple system like we currently have in the US.
In other words, in a fee simple you own the right to do what you want with "your" land...except for rules, regulations, laws, taxes, liens, and eminent domain (when .gov decides they need it more than you do). So, our current ownership system is a joke, it's literally a carry over from the feudal era when a king let people "own" land. In this case the municipality your land is in generally owns it, the county owns the municipality, the states owns the county, and the federal government owns all of it (through the US corporation).
An allodial title, on the other hand, is absolute ownership beholden to no one except God himself. That is true ownership, everything else is partial as it's ultimately beholden to someone else.
You fix the title situation, everything else follows. Property taxes obviously need to go but they are simply the most egregious aspect of the fee simple system.
I am in favor of a Constitutional Amendment recognizing the right of the individual to own property.
I think that resolves the Fee Simple system, property tax, Eminent Domain, and anything else.
That's a good point. That would put individual property ownership at an equal level to the federal gov or any other entity. If implemented properly that would solve all those problems as any law that went against that right could be squashed on a constitute basis rather than case law or other law fare bs.
We need a total tax revolt.
FIRST GET RID OF INCOME TAX.
Renters don't pay property tax anyway. But income tax punishes EVERYBODY.
If income tax is necessary, how has the US survived and thrived for most of its history (and with no Great Depression) without an income tax? Because it isn't.
Renters pay property tax. Landlords pass it on as part of the rent.
Just as shoplifting losses cost everyone because retailers pass it on as part of the prices on everything they sell, not only on those specific items stolen
Insurance too.
It's so obvious it almost goes without saying
Thank you! We did not have a Personal Income Tax until 1913, and this was also the year the Federal Reserve was set up. This was no coincidence. Furthermore, the personal income tax is a Federal tax, while property taxes are administered by the various states - the further the government is from you, and from being truly representative, the less just it tends to be. Originally, the personal income tax (Federal) only applied to federal employees, they have now conned all of us into accepting being Federally approved employees, and the shit goes on...
Penalties for non-payment can result in fines equaling 10% or more of the taxes due, potentially affecting an individual’s financial well-being and credit score (snippet from “10 things your tax team needs to know…”). The tax system can be complex, leading to errors, disputes, and potential violations of individuals’ rights to due process and fair treatment.
Property taxes are in the rent amount
Absolutely. What can we do to push forward on this? I'm contractually obligated to keep taxes paid on my land but have secured the right to 'slow-walk' paying them as long as possible, and tried to convince others in my area with limited success to do the same.
What a lovely timestamp.
First you have to get your title from the Department of the Interior and understand what "Real Estate" is. Next you have to understand the tax scam. Your taxes are constantly assessed against other home sales and adjusted annually. What happens here ? It is raised because mortgage lenders "roll" into the loan fees, percentage points , addendums, funds for repairs etc. . . ALL are considered the "Purchase Price" of the property in turn RAISING you tax assessment. This is in addition to INFLATION adjustments inside your tax assesment bill which includes utilities, schools etc. even if you don't have kids!!! SSSSSSSSScam Central.
Currently, the left wing leverage is to mandate you carry home owners insurance that meet their standards or they will close the loan and take the property. This is done by using the Insurance companies in Forida or Commiefornia for example to raise rates in lockstep with your assessment and inflation and then refusing to cover coastlines or rivershed areas that can flood or be subjected to disasters. Even if you previously had coverage, they just drop you. Hello Blackrock, they step in and confiscate the property and rent it out at inflated rates due to lack of available rentals, etc, etc. rinse and repeat. Bend Over Patriot, here comes the Blue Donkey again suggesting you eat the bugs and assuring you that you WILL BE HAPPY, when you own nothing !
carpet beggars by another name.
I had this theory. I don't know if it would work. What if there was no rental property? And no buying and selling property like we currently do. Instead you basically mortgaged property from the owner (no bank). Maybe some incentive could be worked out between the seller and buyer (formerly landlord and tenant) such that they split these annually assessed prop tax costs. Of course it would be nice to get rid of that (since that was the whole point of this thread), and this arrangement would make banks unnecesarry (yay!). Perhaps houses are traded with "property shares" instead of the base currency, and the shares' values are based on market demand (location location location) and these shares can be bought and sold in some sort of property stock market. When you get to 51% of shares, you are the majority owner or something (or lawmakers/voters pick some threshold everyone agrees on) and can do what you want with the property (live in it, "rent" it, etc.) If a buyer (tenant) moves out, he/she can either sell their shares back to the seller (landlord) or sell them on the market for cash. The amount you pay in taxes is based on how many shares you own. Dividends are also paid out per share, perhaps trading those for physically living there once or once you pass the threshold. So if you lived there, your "rent" pays the dividends to the sharerolders. Or maybe you are contractually bound to pay some agreed number of shares to the 51% owner, and the "property taxes" or what that formerly was in the old syatem are what pays the dividends. The "renter" pays by buying shares and paying the "property tax" (there being no more tax to the government for this), and cannot recieve dividends from their shares until they pass 51% threshold. This way a "landlord" could generate income with their property by either selling shares in the market up to 49% to stay in their house and still recieve dividends from their shares(similar to a reverse mortgage), or "rent it out" and have a "tenant" (seller) live there if the owner is able to relocate somewhere else (i.e. had >51% stake in multiple dwelling properties)
I dunno just a thought. Need to hash the details out, but could that work? Downsides? Upsides? Worth it?
How do we fund Fire, Roads, emergency and waste management? Schools, hospitals and municipalities?
Tariffs.
And if our govt officials were honest, actually spent money properly…it shouldn’t be a problem
How does a Tariff trickle down to local municipalities?
You would essentially be taking money away from your local officials your town voted for and giving it to bureaucrats and politicians in washington that mega cities control.
Sales tax. Which is the same as a tariff but with reverse mechanics.
Either way, consumption taxes are fine, as long as they're reasonable, they're typically non-discriminatory, and are progressive in that those who spend more pay more of them which are only those who have enough to spend in the first place.
Since they typically exclude food and other necessities they're about as fair as they can get and they require the government to ensure that a functioning marketplace with enforced laws exists if they want their cut. They get nothing "off the top" only "off the bottom."
This is all to say, every other tax is a robbery, and only enables the worst of government, particularly at the federal level, and should absolutely be abolished.
In Alabama, we pay tax on everything, including food.
We dont do it by threatening to take away the property that I have spent 50 years building and paying for, shedding blood, sweat and tears to accomplish it. I built this house and every outbuilding with my own hands. I took 40 acres of woods, swamp and meadows and turned it into something productive. And every improvement I make they want more $$. Ive spent a couple million dollars paying for it. But they can take it on a whim? Fuck off.
Found the democrat
Brilliantly managed logic
Can’t think is a response? Hurl insults. Nice job
It’s a very basic question
Nailed it
Most fire departments are volunteer. Private toll roads have been a thing since the beginning of this country. Insurance covers emergencies. Most cities don't cover trash pickup. Water and sewer are also typically not covered.
You should pay for your own school. Look at what each state spends on education and what their outcomes are. If you don't participate as a purchaser in the market the results are horrific. If we gave you that money back in taxes you'd easily be able to afford what a functioning private school market would allow for.
Most hospitals are private. Health insurance can pay for more than just emergency room care. Look at Kaiser, which current sucks as a provider, but not because of their model.
Municipalities can charge directly for whatever services they think they need to provide. Which should be few and could ideally be covered by a simple sales tax. Sheriff's are really there to serve paperwork and handle warrants, which they can charge appropriately for, and the pressure will be on them to size their staff to the actual size of the problems they typically face.
Columbus Ohio...trash water sewer electric fire Dept all city agencies
Govt should have to ASK people to pay for common-good type stuff. Like in church, money is not EXTRACTED from you upon entering. You get to give money, a love offering, of any amount you wish.
Some give more, and some give less. Those who give more love tend to get more in return.
If govt would, instead of stealing the money before we ever see it, have to make a CASE for why we should give, and appeal to human nature to want to give of our resources, then people could give as much as they want. And there would be more than could ever be used. There would be extra to share with others.
The way life could have been, if the bad people weren't in charge.
Add up the amount collected in just your neighborhood... Just do the math real quick.
BILLIONS are collected via property tax alone... they do a shitty job with the trash pickup, kids come out of school stupid and brains ruined for life, popo harass the people over trivial shit, the fuel taxes keep going up, yet ALL OF OUR ROADS are worse than they've ever been. Fire them all and start over.
Towns are corporations... that's a fact.
Notice how this is wrapped in public services, yet, property has nothing to do with their services.
They either are capable of producing a contract in which their duty to collect trash, maintain roads and stuff are iron clad enforcible, or there is only racketeering.
Yes ..."or" indeed my fine feathered fren...
Here's a question: Does the gubmint pay taxes on the property it owes? No? Then why should We The People?
I have come for the comments. Stayed for the show. You are correct. Along with everything else my property TAXATION is too much. I have no voice or ability to deny the stealing of my wealth.
make HOAs voluntary again too. another way that your home isn't really yours, and it turns neighbors against each other to boot.
This would only work for our benefit if natural born citizens could own property. As it stands, foreigners through investment groups are buying up properties, strategically to cause displacement of native populations. Also to store illicit proceeds that would be flagged if they were put into banks, and depreciation of assets to offset income declarations.
What smooth brain thought this up?
Explain to me what prevents corporations or billionaires from acquiring all the land? Because that's what's happening. All this would do is accelerate that.
What you want is a progressive tax on land so you actually have a better opportunity to own some.
This is in important distinction that should be solved. Perhaps property taxes apply on houses after the first. The first doesn’t get taxed because the norm should be that a person or family should have one house. People should be discouraged from holding lots of property, and houses should be owned, not rented.
In late 2000 I bought 14 acre piece of property that I was going to build a 2400sqft home on. Bush got in and I held off. Thank God I waited. I'm still living in the 1300sqft on 3 acre home we raised three kids in. Right now I have lived here 41 years. I still owe a little less than 1/2 of what I paid for it. The field is paid off. Between the two pieces of property I pay an additional $350 a month in taxes. I rent out the field to a local farmer to help pay the taxes. Notice I said help. Every fall the farmer gives me a check for $1,000. It doesn't even cover the taxes on the field. Not to mention Joe taxes that $1,000 as income Do the math. $350 a month x 12 = $4,200 a year. If you extrapolate that to the population of the nearby village of 117 families (2000 census data) you get $491,400. The math at the township level of 1,114 families (2000 census data) you get $4,678,800. That is a yearly income to the township.
Home values are WAAAAY higher than reality right now. Our prices doubled and some even tripled during the scamdemic because people wanted out of crazy, Dem controlled defund the police areas.
Now that interest rates are so high they are not selling unless the price is low. Will they “re-evaluate”? Hahahahhaa!
My wife still thinks we have a valuable asset.
This tax should be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. If not, it should still be done away with as when you own something it should not require a renters fee every year to keep it, or am I totally wrong??
What does property tax have to do with a third party loan on an object? Either there is, or there isn't, property tax. Otherwise you are saying the government can tax according to percentage owed. After all, why should I pay full tax in my last month's payment? At that point I own 99.9% of the property.
They will lol
Get rid of the unconstitutional Personal Income Tax first -Then let's talk.
The history of the Personal Income Tax is far more suspect, and the PIT is far more destructive to the economy.
Ummmm how about none of those taxes??? Why do people do this? All these taxes are illegitimate and tyrannical.
I support this
I agree with her 100%.
We don't own our property outright even though we have the banks paid off.
But the big-government-local(government) fascists will die without being able to suck at the teat of the taxpayer and become super morbidly obese. 🙄😡 In Missouri we have an April election and that is where the stick all of the tax increases we have to vote yeah or nay on. They've done this on purpose because they know so few people vote in those elections and chances are the increase will pass. Occasionally, they don't because they are so over the top. Our small-town council was asking for a tax increase, believe for parks, they used the selling point they'd be able to hire 2 additional government employees (sloths). Needless to say, it went down in flames. Imagine being so out of touch, you tout hiring new employees to do nothing.🙄 Stupid.
Yup, just finished paying my, "Please don't shoot me and take everything I already own" property tax. 1200 smackaroos every year.
In some states..like mine..if you are 65 and own and live in your home you can get a "homestead" exemption....you only get raped half as much
Not only do we need to end property tax and income tax, but we need to end Fed govt owning land. What biz do they have competing with the people for the land? We know, it's a slow absorption of everything into the belly of the beast.
Remember the old movie " The Blob"? Look it up.
Keep banging that truth drum
Property taxes are often associated with public works but for areas that already collect income taxes property taxes is theft of the highest order.
Some thoughts on a philosophy of taxation:
having "property" tax is kind of a bad idea, but on the other hand taxes are taxes. Whether there is a "property" tax or not, people are still being taxed at the end of the day. I guess a point is, maybe a low "property" tax would probably be preferred over a higher tax that isn't called a "property" tax.
Also, regarding the idea that "taxation is theft": even if we didn't have a central government, we would probably have companies that provide "governing services". While taxes are compulsory, paying for such services wouldn't be compulsory, but since people often need such things, there is a sense of compulsion involved. Just like with food, yeah, no one has to force you to eat food, but since everyone must eat, there is a sense in which we are forced to eat. I think it's important to make all these distinctions about freedom, compulsion, and taxes.
So, taxes are some kind of 1) cost for a good that is compulsory 2) in need and 3) as decreed by government. Having no central government may result in removing #3, the compulsion of a decree by government, but it does not remove something of a #2 need for governing services (police, courts, legal help, etc.). To some extent, people can cut down these things to a more minimal level (a smaller police institution for example, or eating less expensive or less food), but at some level there is probably a "need" for such things. Having no central government also does not remove the #1 cost for the good: people still end up paying for food, or for police protection (or for their own defense tools if they want to "be their own police" in such a scenario without government).
Unfortunately, most people dont own allodial title, and hence dont really own the land. They are simply given the benefit of pretending to be owning the land. Hence the property taxes.
I'd ask why you posted a screenshot with Show More clearly visible, meaning there's more to the tweet than is being shown...
...except I just found the original. There is no more to the tweet. Weird.
The taxation issue need to stop being about which individual tax type and should be about the whole tax system.
I am of the opinion that it needs to change to a tax-trickle-up system.
The local entity (probably a county) levies a single kind of tax (income, property, sales, w/e). This is then used to fund all activities in that county as appropriate. Then, all county citizens vote on how much of their revenue goes to the state (with each county getting a single vote for the state).
That revenue funds the state activities.
Then all state citizens vote how much of the state tax revenue goes to the federal government (again with each stage getting a single vote).
The federal votes can be every two years to match the election cycle. States and counties can set their own cycles.
This trickle-up means that people, counties, and cities will understand how much they have to give up to run the larger edifices of government. It will also shorten the leash on state and federal governments.
At the very least this should be the case for a person’s primary residence. It should be everything, but I think securing homes would be easier to actually get done as well as being one of the most important parts.
I have never totally trusted Greg Abbott, but, he does do a lot of good things for Texas, and he very much wants property tax to go away. This, of all taxes, makes me fume. Here Government, I bought you a house.
Hot wheels