Democrats should be fighting a class war and NOT a cutural war

[RVonse]

Common, sense... RVonse, do you understand that it is possible to not be able to afford to live in a house you own? This is a thing where property taxes are high and pegged to housing value. If an area booms, the property taxes go up. In a state like New Jersey, it can be a mortgage unto itself, and if you own the home, you could technically not be able to afford to live in it as the taxes are too much to pay, especially if one is retired.

Seriously, it is as if you've never sought to understand these things, and you just want to vilify stuff you know nothing about. People who paid for their home shouldn't have to move from it, because it became too valuable. Such a concept is absurd!

Yes they should. What gives old people the divine right to live where it is expensive? Those older people (I happen to be one of them) who bought in an area that went up in value should cash out and retire to a much lower cost of living area that has no jobs (since they are retired moving to a low cost area with no jobs is fine for them). Younger popluation should move in those expensive areas to provide the skills and labor that the industry is willing to pay for.

That is what free market capitalism does. It prices everything (real estate included) to allow free movement of capital and people. And if you don't think that free market capitalism works for real estate, just look at Dubai. Some of the most beautiful buildings in the world. No homeless.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Is there homelessness in Texas or Florida?

Are their high-rises built to house the homeless in Dallas or Miami?

To be fair, every city probably has some homeless.

But LA, San Francisco, and Seattle take it to a level never before seen other than a 3rd world country. It should also be noted that these 3 cities are run by very liberal governments which IMO is not a coincidence.

You're absolutely correct. There are more homeless in Seattle and San Francisco because these cities are run by liberals who care more than conservatives. Seattle and San Franciso have built more homeless shelters that cities in the south. Far more. So, homeless flock to these areas to move into them. But the amount of homeless are outstripping the housing. I've heard that southern cities actually give money to homeless and bus tickets to encourage them to move to the west where there is more public housing.

 

[RVonse]

Is there homelessness in Texas or Florida?

Are their high-rises built to house the homeless in Dallas or Miami?

To be fair, every city probably has some homeless.

But LA, San Francisco, and Seattle take it to a level never before seen other than a 3rd world country. It should also be noted that these 3 cities are run by very liberal governments which IMO is not a coincidence.

You're absolutely correct. There are more homeless in Seattle and San Francisco because these cities are run by liberals who care more than conservatives. Seattle and San Franciso have built more homeless shelters that cities in the south. Far more. So, homeless flock to these areas to move into them. But the amount of homeless are outstripping the housing. I've heard that southern cities actually give money to homeless and bus tickets to encourage them to move to the west where there is more public housing.

Do you think those liberal policies are sustainable? Do you think those liberal policies are fair to the other (non-homeless) people living there who still want some quality of life?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Common, sense... RVonse, do you understand that it is possible to not be able to afford to live in a house you own? This is a thing where property taxes are high and pegged to housing value. If an area booms, the property taxes go up. In a state like New Jersey, it can be a mortgage unto itself, and if you own the home, you could technically not be able to afford to live in it as the taxes are too much to pay, especially if one is retired.

Seriously, it is as if you've never sought to understand these things, and you just want to vilify stuff you know nothing about. People who paid for their home shouldn't have to move from it, because it became too valuable. Such a concept is absurd!

Yes they should. What gives old people the divine right to live where it is expensive?

You mean other than having paid off their mortgage and owning the house and property?

Those older people (I happen to be one of them) who bought in an area that went up in value should cash out and retire to a much lower cost of living area that has no jobs (since they are retired moving to a low cost area with no jobs is fine for them).

Why do they need to move? Is this a new "fuck the elderly" platform? You worked hard, you paid off your debts, now fuck off and die in some poor place with no jobs! This is your vision for the country?!

It prices everything (real estate included) to allow free movement of capital and people. And if you don't think that free market capitalism works for real estate, just look at Dubai. Some of the most beautiful buildings in the world. No homeless.

I have a bridge that I think you are going to love.

 

[Gospel]

Let's please cut the crap on LA homelessness

As long as housing costs are high, you're going to be stuck with lots of homeless people.

Housing costs are high mostly because of liberal ideology greed.

Oh FFS!

Common sense would dictate property tax should be based on the property instead of the discrimination of how long the owner has lived their. But liberals have no common sense.

Common, sense... RVonse, do you understand that it is possible to not be able to afford to live in a house you own? This is a thing where property taxes are high and pegged to housing value. If an area booms, the property taxes go up. In a state like New Jersey, it can be a mortgage unto itself, and if you own the home, you could technically not be able to afford to live in it as the taxes are too much to pay, especially if one is retired.

Seriously, it is as if you've never sought to understand these things, and you just want to vilify stuff you know nothing about. People who paid for their home shouldn't have to move from it, because it became too valuable. Such a concept is absurd!

It's as if foreclosing homes due to "unpaid property taxes" isn't a lucrative business in some states. Both New York & Michigan to name two don't have a clean record of fairly evaluating properties. In some cases they've been caught inflating the value, foreclosing & then deflating the value for new owners. Sorry to pull the race card but I'm near certain most of their victims were uninformed black people lacking sufficient legal representation. Surely only liberals were behind that property tax scheme.

Unfair and Unpaid: A Property Tax Money Machine Crushes Families​

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Jebus! That is awful.

 

[RVonse]

You mean other than having paid off their mortgage and owning the house and property?

Whats that got to do with anything? In the first place, no one really owns anything if you have to pay taxes to keep it. In the second place there are many kinds of assets you can easily purchase which are not practical to own. One example, there are airplanes in airworthy condition that can be bought cheap but prohibitively expensive to fly. And in the third place, why should a property owner have some kind of seniority rights over the neighborhood just because he got there first? Taxes should be based on what you are consuming and the normal rate is based on the quality of your property. Getting there first has nothing to do with how much fire protection (etc) you are consuming.

Taxing people according to proposition 13 is no better than giving the Warren Buffets and hedge fund billionaires a capital gains break. Neither class of people deserve it.

 

[ZiprHead]

Housing costs are high mostly because of liberal ideology greed. We usually think of Republicans as being the greedy robber barrons, but in this case its the liberals who did the damage. For example, propostion 13 of California

WTF are you talking about? Prop 13 was a conservative proposal whose main proponents were Howard Jarvis and Paul Gann, both conservative activists. It ushered in the era of conservative tax revolts all over the country and placed Ronald Reagan at the forefront of California politics.

I have no idea who is feeding you this bullcrap but it makes this quote come to mind: “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”

 

[RVonse]

Housing costs are high mostly because of liberal ideology greed. We usually think of Republicans as being the greedy robber barrons, but in this case its the liberals who did the damage. For example, propostion 13 of California

WTF are you talking about? Prop 13 was a conservative proposal whose main proponents were Howard Jarvis and Paul Gann, both conservative activists. It ushered in the era of conservative tax revolts all over the country and placed Ronald Reagan at the forefront of California politics.

I have no idea who is feeding you this bullcrap but it makes this quote come to mind: “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”

If prop 13 was really a conservative law (it isn't) it would have been taken down long ago. California is a liberal state.

 

[Gospel]

In the first place, no one really owns anything if you have to pay taxes to keep it.

I doubt this is likely to effect the filthy rich. Now if we're talking about those who aren't filthy rich? Right on brotha!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You mean other than having paid off their mortgage and owning the house and property?

Whats that got to do with anything?

You mean other than the American dream thing?

In the first place, no one really owns anything if you have to pay taxes to keep it. In the second place there are many kinds of assets you can easily purchase which are not practical to own. One example, there are airplanes in airworthy condition that can be bought cheap but prohibitively expensive to fly.

Trying to, but not seeing the practicality issue of owning a house verses owning an airplane.

And in the third place, why should a property owner have some kind of seniority rights over the neighborhood just because he got there first?

Because people that busted their asses to buy and pay for the place shouldn't be punished.

Taxes should be based on what you are consuming and the normal rate is based on the quality of your property. Getting there first has nothing to do with how much fire protection (etc) you are consuming.

Taxing people according to proposition 13 is no better than giving the Warren Buffets and hedge fund billionaires a capital gains break. Neither class of people deserve it.

You should start a party and run with it, "Fuck the Elderly!" You can campaign to the young people and tell them they have the rights to all this stuff, until they are too old and then they can "Fuck off and die" somewhere else.

 

[ZiprHead]

Housing costs are high mostly because of liberal ideology greed. We usually think of Republicans as being the greedy robber barrons, but in this case its the liberals who did the damage. For example, propostion 13 of California

WTF are you talking about? Prop 13 was a conservative proposal whose main proponents were Howard Jarvis and Paul Gann, both conservative activists. It ushered in the era of conservative tax revolts all over the country and placed Ronald Reagan at the forefront of California politics.

I have no idea who is feeding you this bullcrap but it makes this quote come to mind: “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”

If prop 13 was really a conservative law (it isn't) it would have been taken down long ago. California is a liberal state.

Yes, I'm sure a new proposal that would end up throwing old folks out of their homes would be really popular.

 

[RVonse]

You should start a party and run with it, "Fuck the Elderly!"

I'm just saying it isn't fair and government should be fair with the taxes. Everyone should pay their fair and equal share to support the commons including the billionaires and also including the elderly. And like I already said, I'm in the elderly crowd myself I would not expect a younger person to support my lifestyle just because he has a great paying job.

And all of this does not even include the blowback of the aforementioned unfairness causes on homeless front. Getting more available cheap housing in the market.

 

[laughing dog]

Is there homelessness in Texas or Florida?

Are their high-rises built to house the homeless in Dallas or Miami?

To be fair, every city probably has some homeless.

But LA, San Francisco, and Seattle take it to a level never before seen other than a 3rd world country. It should also be noted that these 3 cities are run by very liberal governments which IMO is not a coincidence.

I think you have a very limited historical perspective. Many very big cities in Europe had sustained problems with the homeless in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries ( see History of homeless in the US, US Homelessness - History, Causes, Effects, etc.... and Homelessness in Great Britain are some examples). In the UK, the homeless are referred to as "rough sleepers". Historically, the homeless were referred to as "vagrants". Basically the official social response was to let them die.

The idea that homelessness is on the rise due to "liberal" or "Democratic" policies is naive ideologically-driven propaganda. LA and Seattle have growing homelessness in part due to migration - other areas either directly or indirectly induce the homeless to move there. Moreover, they have more temperate climates and have more services available to the homeless.

 

[Gospel]

Is there homelessness in Texas or Florida?

Are their high-rises built to house the homeless in Dallas or Miami?

If there was a race over the finish line of which state has the biggest homelessness problem, Florida & Texas would fight for third place. I have no idea why anyone would warm the bleachers for that race instead of finding a better sport for us to play though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You should start a party and run with it, "Fuck the Elderly!"

I'm just saying it isn't fair and government should be fair with the taxes.

We are talking about livelihood here. I'm sorry if you think shit has to be fair across the board. That level of equity doesn't exist. I'd rather people get to live in their homes than young people get to kick them out.

Everyone should pay their fair and equal share to support the commons including the billionaires and also including the elderly.

The elderly already did! They paid into FICA and all that stuff. They paid the taxes. They did their share. They are done now. And they should be allowed to live in peace... not kicked out of their homes to go live somewhere poorer.

And all of this does not even include the blowback of the aforementioned unfairness causes on homeless front. Getting more available cheap housing in the market.

You are advocating throwing the elderly out of their homes!

 

[laughing dog]

You should start a party and run with it, "Fuck the Elderly!"

I'm just saying it isn't fair and government should be fair with the taxes. Everyone should pay their fair and equal share to support the commons including the billionaires and also including the elderly. And like I already said, I'm in the elderly crowd myself I would not expect a younger person to support my lifestyle just because he has a great paying job.

"Fairness" is in the eye of the beholder. What you may feel is fair may not seem fair to someone else. That is why the notion of "tax fairness" is always in discussion.

And all of this does not even include the blowback of the aforementioned unfairness causes on homeless front. Getting more available cheap housing in the market.

Why isn't more cheap available housing available in the market? Do you think it might have something to do with a combination of building codes and profitability?

 

[bilby]

That is what free market capitalism does. It prices everything (real estate included) to allow free movement of capital and people.

There's a difference between "allows free movement" and "forces people to move from places they have lived all their lives, and which they have paid for and own outright.

And if you don't think that free market capitalism works for real estate, just look at Dubai. Some of the most beautiful buildings in the world. No homeless

Ah, yes. That bastion of freedom, Dubai.

Have you ever visited the UAE? They've got lots of stuff there, but freedom ain't any part of it.

 

[bilby]

Whats that got to do with anything? In the first place, no one really owns anything if you have to pay taxes to keep it

So do you think that nobody should be permitted to own anything, if the government decides that they want it; Or do you suddenly support the Proposition 13 style protections for people's private property that you were arguing against upthread?

 

[bilby]

I'm just saying it isn't fair

Life isn't fair. Your half-baked policy positions will not help this situation at all.