Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: techanalyst1 who wrote (12438)	8/16/2003 11:18:07 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

RE:"I'll bet that Laguna home is assessed for about 250K which means he has owned it for a very long time. Most people who have owned their homes in that neighborhood for that length of time surely are elderly now and don't have the income that Mr. Buffet has. I would bet that most of those people couldn't afford to pay $116,000 per year in property taxes all because they bought their house years ago and it went up in value." The rub is that if property taxes were allowed to float Buffetts house in Laguna would NOT be worth 4 million. Nor would the assessment millage need to be anywhere as high. It's going to take a real jockey-er to figure this one out. Some peoples taxes could actually go down but the majority will go up and some will really go up big. OTOH, if something is not done California will become a wasteland. Jim