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: Tradelite who wrote (13053)	8/23/2003 2:41:01 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

They point out in their letter to the editor that Buffett appears to be paying 2.88 percent property tax on his Omaha home vs. 2 percent on the CA home. This is incorrect. Only NEW BUYERS in California pay 2% property tax, and Warren Buffett certainly doesn't. Buffett pays .05% taxes on his California home.

To: Tradelite who wrote (13053)	8/24/2003 12:34:59 AM
From: JF Quinnelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

Well said. Prop 13 was a response to real problem created by inflation of the '70s. Government was getting a windfall due to real estate inflation, and people whose incomes didn't track with inflation were being driven from their homes. Howard Jarvis had been trying for years to pass something like Prop 13. He got little interest until the problem starting biting a large segment of the California populace. Prop 13 wasn't designed with Warren Buffett in mind, nor real estate investors. But I don't know how you could have designed a bill that would have protected little people without the Buffetts and RE investors also benefitting. If the Envy Coalition can figure out how to tax the hell out of Buffett and Arianna Huffington, let them create a ballot proposition. I'm sure it will pass.