On Jun 29, 5:47*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jun 29, 10:57*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Jun 29, 7:07*am, MiNe 109 * wrote:
*"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:
On Jun 29, 12:09*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 28, 6:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Jun 28, 3:05*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its
government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the
deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states.
But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy
run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution
all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain. And at the root of
California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that
ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington,
the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative
legacy lives on.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190493800
"Direct democracy run amok".
2pid, is too much direct democracy a bad thing in a representative
republic?
And how does it feel to know your movement is "over"?
LoL.
Yes indeed, California is the last bastion of Conservatism!!!!
LoL. *If only it were true. *Meanwhile here's a few facts for the tax
and spend lunatics.
http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/web...es/034048.html
Under Prop 13 property tax revenues have not only far outpaced
inflation and population growth combined but also grew faster than
other sources of revenue.
One would hope you could find a valid cite for your positions but
apparently not. LoL.
Didn't he trot this one out a while back? Maybe he should explain why
the comparison to inflation, population growth and "other sources of
revenue" is valid to the discussion. The Jarvis website says taxpayers
have saved "over $528 billion."
Maybe most of that savings is for corporations who have shell
companies set up. Did you know that you could buy a shopping center in
California and not have the taxes increase?
If the mall is deeded to a corporation like "Mega Mall Assets LLC" all
you do is buy the corporation. Since it's not a real estate
transaction the property tax is not recalculated.
It depends on what taxes you are talking about.
Yes, the buyer would not pay one time transfer taxes
and recording fees if the transaction was for the
corporate ownership vs the real property.. As far as the property
taxes, I am not sure
of a few things. Not residing in California, I don't know
if Prop 13 covers all properties, or only residentialo properties.
wiki is saying "all".
At any rate, commercial real property owners would also be
looking at income taxes, as those properties are revenue
producers, and it might be beneficial on the Fed tax level
to sell the property vs sell the corportation, depending upon
where they are in the depreciation scale.
Homeowners face income tax too, just not income derived from their
property.
So, really, its a matter of individual circumstance, and can't
be painted all one color. But you are right in some cases, just
not in all cases. It gets pretty complicated.
It's probably too complicated for a "one size fits all" 'solution'
like Prop 13.
As an example, the Times has
reported that the property tax bill of the historic Capitol Records
building in Hollywood is approximately five cents per square foot,
while a small house assessed at $300,000 may pay up to 60 times that
on a per-square-foot basis.
I suspect that there may be a reason for that.
Do historic properties get a tax break in Calif?
I don't think it's a registered historic landmark. It's just an office
building.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol...cords_Building
Substitute "easily recognizable" or "well-known".
I don't know, but before putting faith in'that comparison,
I would want to know.
Critics of Proposition 13 have argued that
this situation unfairly benefits commercial property owners and should
be changed,[3] but recent attempted ballot initiatives have not
succeeded in altering assessment formulas. Tim Taylor at the
University of Minnesota has analyzed Prop 13 as part of a problem of
"Generational Justice" and a pattern of specifically providing tax
breaks and benefits to one generational cohort-and tax increases and
reduction in services to another generational cohort.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_13_(1978)
I'll bet 2pid loves scenarios like that. Otherwise it's possible that
the mall might move to Ireland.
I don't know, what are the, vacancy rates?
normal, higher than normal?
Irrelevant. That will change over time. I'm sure vacancy is lower than
"normal" now and in 2007 was probably higher than "normal".