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: Jim McMannis who wrote (203658)	5/22/2009 1:01:59 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

guess who bought his home at $600k? i bet it wasn't his "friend." -lol- propr 13 is great - and no, i don't rant about getting more services, so he's wrong there. time to cut back on state services. cubicle worker sand janitors have to go. the billions spent on illegal aliens have to go. time to cut. we are broke. it was fun while it lasted, but it the freebie days are over. his very premise is wrong - that CA suffers from a tax revenue problem. it doesn't. its revenues outpaced both population growth and inflation. unfortunately, its spending outpaced its revenues. this was going on looooooooooooong before the collapse in the economy. the author is simply disingenuous. he wants to pain a picture of the CA tax payer as wanting more and more services but not wanting to pay for them. while this is generally true, the problem over the last decade has little to do with increased services. it has to do with unions lobbying to get a 50% increase in their pensions - from 2% per year of service to 3%. no tax payer lobbied for that and this isn't a "service" to the public. it was greed bag scheme by the unions to extract more from the tax payer. i don't know for sure, but one of those grandsons who inherited his home from his grandparents said that portion of the law no longer exists. iow, grandkids have to now pay taxes on the market rate of their inherited home. if they don't, i'd support that modest change to the law - but that's not what this moron is urging. he never discusses modest revisions, he wants the sociopaths in sacramento to raise taxes higher - and they will raise them until the state literally breaks. the government class deserves this in their view. he wants people like myself, who never would've paid $600k for a $200k home, to pay tax on his stupidity. uh, i mean his friend's stupidity. well, nobody made him buy the house. i mean his friend. he knew the rules when he bought the house. i mean his friend did. his logic is completely twisted, he claims that getting rid of prop 13 would mean they represent the people of the state, when the people of the state don't want prop 13? oh, he must mean "government class" when he refers to representing the people of the state. the rest of us don't even count as being worthy of representation in his view. i hope he enjoyed the boot on his behind as the people of this state kicked him in the *ss last tuesday.