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.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (4762)	9/22/1998 6:39:00 PM
From: mrknowitall	Respond to of 67261

<OT> Michelle. re: "Most that are arguing for repealing it are arguing for the greater good of business in the area." Hmm. Let me see if that works. The law gets changed. Property taxes go up on some number of homeowners. Then the folks that are hoarding their wealth in their homes decide to put their homes on the market and move to a more economically attractive (taxed less) area. Are you sure they are dumb enough to abandon a rapidly appreciating property, one that they can reverse-mortgage and retire on or bequeath to their children in a trust, for one somewhere else, away from their friends and family that may or may not go up in value? Let's see, property taxes rise and equalize, Federal income tax deductions offset that somewhat, property value continues to go up (because of demand). Hmm. They weigh the stress and expense and basic emotional effects of uprooting. Hmm. Now we see that there just might just be a handful of houses come onto the market each year. That ought to do it, eh? I doubt it. Wrong treatment for the patient; you just put a bandaid on a heart patient. This reminds me of Maslow's "when one's only tool is a hammer, every problem appears to be a nail." Not attempting to mock, but I don't think I'm in need of a further clues. I apologize if you feel I was accusing you of jealousy or envy as a motive; having a business, I understand the problems of recruitment and retention. But I don't think that entitles anyone to some "greater good" position of authority when it comes to someone else's perfectly legally obtained personal property. Mr. K.