North Dakota to vote on ending property tax

shane77m

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
3,711
This needs to spread across the country like a wildfire. There is something horribly wrong with a system that can steal an elderly widow's home and send her out on the street.
 
This needs to spread across the country like a wildfire. There is something horribly wrong with a system that can steal an elderly widow's home and send her out on the street.
yep! so much for their "social safety net"
 
Good on ND. I'd move there if it wasn't such a shitty place to live. Hopefully they pass it and more states have a look once it's proven a success.
 
This needs to spread across the country like a wildfire.
It would be about as destructive.
There is something horribly wrong with a system that can steal an elderly widow's home and send her out on the street.
Stupid, evil, anti-property tax liars always have to tell stupid, evil lies. Always.

When did property taxes ever steal an elderly widow's home and send her out on the street?? When? Anti-property tax liars have been challenged many times to name and document a single case where that has happened, and they have never been able to do so. Ever.

CA passed Proposition 13 in 1978 allegedly to save a handful of those mythical elderly widows from a fate worse than death: selling at a huge, unearned and untaxed profit -- pocketing an outright GIFT from the community -- and buying in a neighborhood better suited to their needs and means.

But what has been the ACTUAL RESULT?? Because of CA's low-property-tax-fueled land boom and now bust, in the last five years, MILLIONS of Californians have literally had their homes taken from them, have lost their life savings and everything else, while a handful of huge corporations have saved billions on their property taxes.

That kind of atrocity does not happen innocently. It requires stupid, evil liars who are willing to chant stupid, evil lies.
 
Good on ND. I'd move there if it wasn't such a shitty place to live. Hopefully they pass it and more states have a look once it's proven a success.
Yeah, look what a huge, proven success California has had with Proposition 13.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.
 
But what has been the ACTUAL RESULT?? Because of CA's low-property-tax-fueled land boom and now bust, in the last five years, MILLIONS of Californians have literally had their homes taken from them, have lost their life savings and everything else, while a handful of huge corporations have saved billions on their property taxes.

wait what ??!?!?!

It took 30 years for the Prop 13 bubble to pump up enough to burst? really??!?!! reaching much? are you sure it was prop 13?
 
wait what ??!?!?!

It took 30 years for the Prop 13 bubble to pump up enough to burst? really??!?!! reaching much? are you sure it was prop 13?

Sounds like a troll is grasping at straws here. (Roy, not you.)
 
It took 30 years for the Prop 13 bubble to pump up enough to burst? really??!?!!
Yes. It was kicked down the road by Silicon Valley and the dot.cons in the 90s, then by the credit bubble after 2001 and bank deregulation.
reaching much?
No.
are you sure it was prop 13?
Yes. States with high property tax rates - NH, NJ, TX, WI, OR, etc. -- did not experience the bubble on the scale that low property tax states like CA, NV, FL and AZ did.
 
wait is someone a fan of Ron Paul and an advocate of property taxes?
Compared to most other taxes on the books, anyway. The statistical relationship is very clear: low property tax states are mostly basket cases, high property tax states are better in almost every way. There are good economic reasons for that. You just don't know enough economics to be aware of them.
I'm very confused these days
That is not an accident.
 
Many people do. Especially those who get paid with them.
<sigh> I don't get paid with taxes, and I want almost all of them abolished. The one good tax we have is the land value portion of the property tax. Abolishing it is insanity.
 
I think getting rid of property taxes could be good. But I am not 100% sure what implications it would have as far as other taxes going up to make up for it. Would non property owners pay the money that the property owners are now paying (after a shift increase of other taxes to make up for the loss of property taxes)? My guess is yes that would be the case. Anyways, there is always a give an take. I do like the fact that once you buy something you should not have to pay taxes every year to keep it. There should be a one time tax on it like purchasing anything else. A sales tax and that is it. Just a thought. But the reality of the situation would need to be looked at. What would be the benefits versus the costs to the tax payers. Would it unfairly burden people that do not own property by shifting the taxes on to them?

I don't believe Roy L statement on why the housing bubble happened I don't think property taxes had much to do with it. It was more about over priced houses do to easy credit and people willing to pay too much for houses. It was about the greed of banks and the subprime loans.

Would there be a capitol gains tax on the sale of the property once it was sold? Just thinking here.
 
Last edited:
Yes. States with high property tax rates - NH, NJ, TX, WI, OR, etc. -- did not experience the bubble on the scale that low property tax states like CA, NV, FL and AZ did.

The people of CA actually has near the highest property taxes in the US, especially in the coastal areas from the Bay to the Mexican border where millions and millions of people live. Orange County and LA, despite having near the highest property taxes in the US, experienced a massive bubble. As did the area just inland of OC and LA. FL is also a high property tax state.
 
Proposition 13 did not abolish property taxes, it only placed a cap on them based on the value of the property at the time of sale. Prop 13 didn't go far enough, in my opinion. The land speculation that lead to the bubble implosion in 08 was the result of monetary policy, and had nothing to do with property taxes, high or low. In fact, property taxes tended to be highest in the areas where land values due to speculation increased the most.

Because property taxes can increase without any regard whatsoever to one's circumstances or ability to pay, there are many (like those living on fixed incomes) who are forced to sell their property when they can no longer afford to pay the taxes and live in their home. Thus, property tax becomes a mechanism for sweeping aside the "unproductive" (unproductive to the state), and has definite appeal to those who rely on government revenue streams, and want them maximized, not threatened in any way.

Incidentally, the group opposing Measure 2 in North Dakota (all beneficiaries of property tax laws, including special exemptions) has outspent the proponents to the tune of hundreds of thousands versus thousands. Well over $1 Billion in mostly private property is exempt from paying any property taxes in just four counties in North Dakota. Those are economic advantages that were lobbied for through the ND Chamber of Commerce and other lobbyists, which special interests don't want to lose. The Tax Commissioner of North Dakota, Cory Fong, a staunch opponent of the Measure, has already projected that property taxes will increase by 7%+ every year - meaning that if M2 does not pass (and it may not) the property taxes paid, the rate of increase of which more than outstrips inflation, will more than double over the next decade.

This is actually deja vu for North Dakota, which has been through this before. They sought to abolish PERSONAL property taxes (on possessions, like jewelry and appliances) back in the early 60's. North Dakota University, teachers unions and others on the public doll did studies, and circulated propaganda saying that the sky would fall in North Dakota if that tax was not in place. Local governments would lose control, schools wouldn't be funded, essential government services would be cut to nothing, etc., and proposition for the repeal of the personal property tax was soundly defeated in '65. Emboldened by this defeat, local governments, with the help of the North Dakota Legislature, apparently felt that personal property taxes were somehow immune, or "safe", as personal property tax valuations increased and were abused even further. That made the tax ripe for abolishment and was finally repealed in 1969.

This may be the way it plays out in North Dakota, as polling shows that the majority of North Dakotans, while angry and screaming for property tax reform, may not be ready to eliminate the tax just yet. Sometimes you have to wait until sheep are sheered down past the skin with blood drawn before any change happens. And that will happen, even if Measure 2 is defeated today. Taxes on residential property just went up 7%, while property tax on agricultural land are increasing this year by a whopping 27% (commercial property by only 3%, go figure). Those are just the state-wide averages, which far outstrip the rate of inflation. Some farmers and ranchers are hopping mad, who received notices in the past two weeks that the property tax on their particular land is increasing anywhere from 70% to 200% in some cases.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top