Eliminate Property Tax And Tax More On Consumer Products?

[Kane]

It never made much sense to me. Why do you have to pay tax for something you already own? I mean let's be serious here, when you buy something from the supermarket you pay taxes and yes this okay because you are buying something. Perhaps you should pay a good amount of tax for the properties and houses you buy but why should you pay anymore once you buy it? The government still owns your property in that case no matter what.

IMHO, I think it would be better to just tax more consumer products and what not rather than having any property tax and eliminate it.

Would you rather pay property tax at all or just a bit more tax on consumer products? What do you think?

 

[Gemini]

Considering you've already paid taxes on every penny you've earned to the fed, state (NY anyway) and sometimes local, I think any additional tax on anything is unjustified. It's double paying. Makes as much sense as paying for cable tv to watch mostly channels with commercials. Seems somewhere along the line, we forgot the whole reason for the commercials was to pay for the programming. So why do we pay taxes on everything we buy when we paid tax on everything we've earned already?

 

[Jonathan Randall]

Considering you've already paid taxes on every penny you've earned to the fed, state (NY anyway) and sometimes local, I think any additional tax on anything is unjustified. It's double paying. Makes as much sense as paying for cable tv to watch mostly channels with commercials. Seems somewhere along the line, we forgot the whole reason for the commercials was to pay for the programming. So why do we pay taxes on everything we buy when we paid tax on everything we've earned already?

Because BOTH political parties LUV to spend money and it has to come from somewhere. It would be nice if they were to CUT spending, but, hey, that's a pipe dream... %-}

 

[sgtmac_46]

Uncle Sugar gots to have more jack to spend on it's pet programs and projects. Some of them, quite legitimate (Roads, bridges) some of it much debated (welfare programs), some of it controversial (funding for the arts), some of it downright absurd (Think: Big Dig).

All that money got to come from somewhere. The answer politicians come up with, mostly, is to penny ante you to death. Take a little bit (income tax) take a little bit there (property tax), take some more from this (sales tax). That way you don't see it all bleeding out at once.

 

[michaeledward]

Cut the Fire Department.
Cut the Police Department.
Cut the Public Works Department
Cut the Public School System.

 

[stephen]

Property tax is bad, but not nearly as bad as some others. As at least it can be legitimized by the natural idea that property owners in an area should be the ones responsible for the fire dept and police etc.

Income tax is the baddie. A larger consumption tax or VAT would be better. The problem with a VAT in the US is simply that we would find ourselves with a VAT and an income tax like the UK and other countries.

A lower (or non-existant) income tax and addition of a VAT would encourage people to save, invest, and work more. Leading to a faster growing economy and more wealth to go around for all, in the long term.

Income tax is probably the most economically destructive way for the gov't to collect money. Not to mention the incredible amounts of wealth spent every year to support the huge infrastructure of gov't employees, tax accounts, and lobbyists who are necessary to collect, file, and understand the insane piles of rules and regulations that is the US tax code.

Much easier to just make the cashier collect an extra 10% at the counter.

Don't even get me started on the US gov't right to collect taxes on worldwide income of US citizens.......

 

[mrhnau]

Cut the Public School System.

Might agree with that one... alot of proponents of eliminating the department of education. At least a major upheaval of the system...

 

[lonecoyote]

I pay property taxes on my houses. Don't mind a bit, a lot of people own nothing and I'm fortunate to be able to collect rents, have a place to live, etc. I don't think we should have to pay taxes at the grocery store at all, especially for staples, like bread, milk, stuff for kids like diapers, formula. You shouldn't punish people who own nothing because you don't want to tax people who are fortunate enough to have some property.

 

[michaeledward]

Might agree with that one... alot of proponents of eliminating the department of education. At least a major upheaval of the system...

Absolutely ... what has Public Education for this country ever produced?

It will be much better to have 57 million young people wandering the streets, or their parents desperately searching for some way to ensure the children are safe.

4:20

 

[Rich Parsons]

Cut the Fire Department.

They did this already locally in a major city that is bankrupt.

Cut the Police Department.

They did this about state wide with the existing state and federal cuts to the local budgets.

Cut the Public Works Department

Hmm, did this too, but not as bad.

Cut the Public School System.

Well the Lotto system money goes here to the school system, And this is true, but the money from the general fund, was reduced to go elsewhere, including some roads and some bridges, not sure where the rest went.

So you could say that they did cut the Public School System.

Just a little data to prove your point.

 

[Ping898]

I just hate that I paid tax on my car when I bought it and now to register it in a new state I have to pay tax on the value of it today...I didn't buy a new car...just moved to a new state and need a new set of plates....grrrr.....that to me is double taxing. I mean I understand that you don't want someone going over the border to buy a new car and then register it here to avoid paying taxes, but I think if you bought it over a year ago you shouldn't have to pay taxes on it again.....grrrrrr.........

 

[Phoenix44]

Yeah. It makes about as much sense as paying $9.50 to see a movie, and then having to watch 30 minutes of ads before the feature film.

 

[Kane]

Bottom line is that the government has no right to tax you on something they already taxed you on and you own. So I am okay with government taxing us on any type of products we have, but after the tax has been payed that should be it.

In the US there is an amendment in the Bill Of Rights that would probably very much frown against infinite property tax;

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Even if the government plans to give it back to the people through an auction or something, it still isn't right. Whether people can afford property tax is not the point. When you own something you own something. That's all there is too it. So after paying taxes to the government for buying a house or condo that should be the end of it.

I don't mind income tax as much, but it would be better if the government taxes more on consumer products than actually taking away more of the money you make.

 

[arnisador]

Bottom line is that the government has no right to tax you on something they already taxed you on and you own.

The U.K. effectively does this with TVs, right?

 

[Kane]

The U.K. effectively does this with TVs, right?

I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be suprised if they do. While Europe slips slowly into an almost communist-like socialism thank goodness that America still waves the torch of freedom in most ways. But it ain't perfect here either. I don't see why any government would want to tax someone for something as little as a TV :eek.

 

[michaeledward]

Bottom line is that the government has no right to tax you on something they already taxed you on and you own.

The government has whatever rights it takes for itself. We live in a representative republic. If you think the government doesn't have any rights, run for office and remove those rights you think have been unjustly awarded to the entity.

 

[mrhnau]

Absolutely ... what has Public Education for this country ever produced?

It will be much better to have 57 million young people wandering the streets, or their parents desperately searching for some way to ensure the children are safe.

4:20

did I say eliminate education? I'm a proponent of taking out of federal control and placing it in the hands of state and perhaps local (county? city?) level. Much of public education is already at that level, but the feds like sticking their noses in. Get it as local as possible.

MrH

 

[michaeledward]

did I say eliminate education? I'm a proponent of taking out of federal control and placing it in the hands of state and perhaps local (county? city?) level. Much of public education is already at that level, but the feds like sticking their noses in. Get it as local as possible.

MrH

The Federal Government is involved at approximately 7% of the budgetary consideration concerning education.

Property Taxes are assessed locally to pay for local education. You can't eliminate local property taxes without eliminating 93% of Education funding ... and now you want to take the other 7% away?

Wow.

 

[mrhnau]

The Federal Government is involved at approximately 7% of the budgetary consideration concerning education.

Property Taxes are assessed locally to pay for local education. You can't eliminate local property taxes without eliminating 93% of Education funding ... and now you want to take the other 7% away?

Wow.

Great way of looking at things... look at it the most negative way possible there are alternatives for local property tax. Take for instance, the option of consumption tax. There are alternatives. noone is saying take away every tax dollar from education. I'd like to see it come from another source, but thats just me. Go ahead and raise taxes, that would make it better. Throwing tons of money at situations always fixes them.

btw, I'm not sure about your local taxes, but mine don't just go to schools. Lots of other things. Alot of states get alternative forms of funding (lottery coming online in my state in a few years).

So, you don't seem to ask the "lay up" question. Why don't I want federal control? There are local issues that the individual boards of education deals with. Once the Feds start giving money, they want to also dictate policy. Policies like "no child left behind" sounds fantastic, but its totally unreasonable. I've not met a serious educator with a decent IQ that thinks its a splendid idea. Someone sitting in Washington is not going to seriously care about the individual child. Someone sitting on my local board of education is more likely to, since its likely their kid will be in the school system, or perhaps they were from the local school too. Local issues in schools will never get national prominance. Should we have a federal policy for everything? some schools in Texas or border states might want to have special programs for immigrants that congregate in the area. Would this come to attention at a national level? Its best addressed at the local level, where action can be taken by people actually having hands in the schools.

So, for 7%, are you willing to have unrealistic ideals spouted for political gain, like "no child left behind", that are going to wind up crippling our education systems? Historically its been states and local sectors that have dealt with education. Lets return to that way. I don't understand the fascination with bigger and bigger government.

 

[Kane]

The Federal Government is involved at approximately 7% of the budgetary consideration concerning education.

Property Taxes are assessed locally to pay for local education. You can't eliminate local property taxes without eliminating 93% of Education funding ... and now you want to take the other 7% away?

Wow.

Yes there are alternatives. Tax more on consumer products. Maybe raise income tax slightly. It is better to do this IMHO than it is to have property tax or any tax or something you own.