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: GraceZ who wrote (12784)	8/20/2003 10:19:11 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Grace I think most would totally agree that the elderly should never be taxed out of their homes, and taxes are too high. The problem is that if you have a system that for whatever uncalculated reason ends up creating "house poor" elderly folks who wind up living in million dollar plus homes while they struggle to get by, the young folks who likely will have no chance to achieve the same level of abject poverty get a little fed up. Its not that people think that seniors who buy homes for 50K should be taxed out when those homes appreciate 3-fold.... but when they appreciate FIFTY FOLD you have a massive windfall on your hands and its hard to see these people as charity cases. jmo.

To: GraceZ who wrote (12784)	8/20/2003 10:47:57 PM
From: GraceZ	Respond to of 306849

Oops....the people from MA aren't the only ones who can't add. I made a big goof on the taxes on the younger couple. 14,000 RE 22,000 FED 10,000 State 1,200 Sales ====== 47,200 Total Leaving them with $72,800 for an effective rate of 39%.

To: GraceZ who wrote (12784)	8/21/2003 12:36:12 PM
From: fatty	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 306849

A cape house is considered a luxury by many. You can easily add two more bedrooms in the attic. Some turn that into a two family house. Some knock it down to build apartments. Time changes. What was once considered a poor man's hut is probably no longer true. The house that I live in was built as single family house for cattle slaughters. It is now considered a luxury two family victorian. From what I read, the local tax as share of GNP was 5.8% in the 1940. That's not too far off from the the 7.3% in 1992. The federal's share, however, increased from 7.0% to 20.8%! Guess who is the biggest beneficiary of the federal tax?! I'm all for downsizing governement services and lowering taxes. But the point of this discussion is why should a 80 year old couple pay less property tax than a 30 year old for the same house?