Re: [Phys-l] innumeracy - OT

[Bernard Cleyet <bernardcleyet@redshift.com>]

I think discussion of teaching (any physics) funding is OT (On topic).

I disagree w/ the assumption that the value of assets is not in some  
proportion to the ability to pay taxes on the assets.  This is, of  
course approximate, and, of course, there were horror stories of  
oldsters being priced out of their homes, but the numbers much  
exaggerated.  An important factor that I've read, and is not  
mentioned in the Wiki. page, is, at the time of high property taxes,  
the state had a huge surplus.  The legislature tried to reduce it,  
but prop 13 beat them to it.

Back about two decades ago, IIRC, Macy's sued or made some effort to  
change prop. 13, because they were new on the scene.  I understand  
other commercial property owners convinced them to desist.   
Concomitantly, I understand, if prop 13 were to be repealed, the  
increase in taxation of commercial property would be so great that  
recent home owners would find their tax bills reduced!

bc, angry, as he lost his teaching position at Ventura College  
because of prop. 13.

p.s. I would modify 13 to define change of ownership whenever, 50% of  
the stockholders changed or some other similar change, as discussed  
in the Wiki. page.  This is what Jarvis, a front for the  
corporations, fears.  I get annual scare letters from that &&&**  
soliciting money against legislative efforts to change it.  I post  
the post paid reply  letter, empty,  Note our ideology is not  
necessarily economically driven:  We (Gate Keeper and I) each own  
(TDs paid) an income property and share our residence.   BTW, there  
is a deferred taxation method, it's reverse mortgage.  This method  
would permit the oldsters to keep their home in a non prop. 13  
California, and contribute to the citizens present and future.   
Another social utility in deferred taxation, etc. is it helps prevent  
the accumulation of wealth.


[Not farfetched where people think property is theft.]


Prop. 13
On 2008, Mar 01, , at 19:42, John Mallinckrodt wrote:

> OT indeed, but you've scratched where I itch so ...
>
> California's increasingly serious financial woes over the last couple
> of decades clearly represent in very large part the continuing long
> term devastation wreaked by Prop 13 which put a tight lid on property
> taxes three decades ago.
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978)>
>
> Prop 13 was a response to the very serious problem pointed to by
> Bob.  Indeed, it was posed at the time and still is as if it were the
> only possible solution.  I've never understood, however, why the more
> obvious solution isn't simply to allow some system of tax deferral.
> After all, if a house appreciates by a half million dollars there
> will come a time when money will be available to pay deferred taxes
> and I don't see any reason whatsoever why the person to whom that
> windfall accrues shouldn't be responsible for sending a portion of it
> back to the state so that it can continue to fund the education
> system, transportation infrastructure, recreational facilities, etc.
> that helped to made the state a desirable place to live and that, as
> a result, played a central role in producing that windfall in the
> first place.
>
> It may be some measure of how vastly different the planet I live on
> is from this one, that I've rarely if ever heard anyone discuss this
> alternative in spite of its seeming obviousness to me--one who, by
> the way, would pay dearly if it were ever actually implemented.
>
> John Mallinckrodt
> Cal Poly Pomona
>
> On Mar 1, 2008, at 5:28 PM, LaMontagne, Bob wrote:
>
> > I realize that this is not the forum for this, but the value of a
> > home has little to do with the ability to pay taxes on the
> > property, especially if market value has outstripped wage
> > increases. You can't sell of a few bricks from a house to pay the
> > taxes, you have to dump the whole thing when you can't afford it Of
> > course, one could ban private ownership of homes and the government
> > could assign a few extra families to live with the homeowner.
> > Probably not too far fetched in Berkley :-)
> >
> > Bob at PC
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l