• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

What cha' got for ballot props and initiatives?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
ivwshane said:
You aren’t providing any information that would cause housing prices to go down nor are you providing any information as to why property taxes would go down.

As of right now, there isn’t any constitutional amendment about property taxes on the ballot, so nothing will change with regards to the rate.
Click to expand...
So to be clear you’re saying that when municipalities were suddenly confronted with an avalanche of new money they would keep everything the same?
 
fskimospy said:
It would be perfectly easy to adjust the assessed value calculation and the percent tax at the same time. This isn’t exactly rocket science.
Click to expand...

No shit. What I’m asking is; is this something that’s done typically? How likely is that to happen?
 
ivwshane said:
No shit. What I’m asking is; is this something that’s done typically? How likely is that to happen?
Click to expand...

I would venture to say most places do it based on assessed market value.

This has also historically fucked over minorities - especially when they have homes in deep urban places that get gentrified around them.

Places (such as my state) attempt to put protocols in place to limit things. Here in TX if your home is registered as a homestead, they can only raise your assessed value as much as 20% per year..... Yet, 20% addition per year can EASILY be make or break for majority of folks. If you live somewhere for 5 years, they can more than double your assessed property value. Majority of folks can't sustain that level of tax increase.
 
ivwshane said:
I did. I asked how likely is it for cities to lower their property taxes. I’ve personally witnessed it once and that was because we had the Great Recession that was specifically caused by housing loans.
Click to expand...
You said the constitution mandated a certain percentage which is why they couldn’t be lowered. The constitution similarly mandates the assessment increases. You can change them both.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
I would venture to say most places do it based on assessed market value.

This has also historically fucked over minorities - especially when they have homes in deep urban places that get gentrified around them.

Places (such as my state) attempt to put protocols in place to limit things. Here in TX if your home is registered as a homestead, they can only raise your assessed value as much as 20% per year..... Yet, 20% addition per year can EASILY be make or break for majority of folks. If you live somewhere for 5 years, they can more than double your assessed property value. Majority of folks can't sustain that level of tax increase.
Click to expand...

Yes, in California property taxes are based on assessed values. The difference is that they are assessed on values at the time of purchase and not the current value. So I’m order for that value to go down we would either need property values to magically drop our cities willingly lowering their rates.

The question is; what is the likelihood of cities lowering their rates?
 
ivwshane said:
I did. I asked how likely is it for cities to lower their property taxes. I’ve personally witnessed it once and that was because we had the Great Recession that was specifically caused by housing loans.
Click to expand...

Property taxes are two-fold - at least here in TX they are.

1. Your assessed value
2. The tax rate per sqft per assessed value

Just about every year our tax rate declines. They often attempt to increase the assessed values of properties - which you should protest every year.
 
fskimospy said:
You said the constitution mandated a certain percentage which is why they couldn’t be lowered. The constitution similarly mandates the assessment increases. You can change them both.
Click to expand...

Anything is possible but it’s not on the ballot right now nor is there any guarantee that it would be passed. That’s a lot of ifs for something that could hurt a lot of families in the meantime.
 
ivwshane said:
Anything is possible but it’s not on the ballot right now nor is there any guarantee that it would be passed. That’s a lot of ifs for something that could hurt a lot of families in the meantime.
Click to expand...
There’s no ifs at all; it’s just smart policy. Prop 13 is incredibly destructive. It’s probably one of the worst laws passed in the US in the last 50 years. Just junk it entirely and restore flexibility to localities.
 
Vic said:
My fav measure on the ballot this year is Measure 110: https://ballotpedia.org/Oregon_Meas...ion_and_Addiction_Treatment_Initiative_(2020)



We are ending the failed War on Drugs.
Click to expand...
This measure is now passing by a wide margin. To all the right-wing 'libertarians' who have forever claimed to be against the failed war on drugs, and yet done nothing because of their love of the taste of boot leather, I'd like to point out that it was us supposedly authoritarian 'radical left coasters' that actually did end it. For ourselves, at least.
 
Vic said:
This measure is now passing by a wide margin. To all the right-wing 'libertarians' who have forever claimed to be against the failed war on drugs, and yet done nothing because of their love of the taste of boot leather, I'd like to point out that it was us supposedly authoritarian 'radical left coasters' that actually did end it. For ourselves, at least.
Click to expand...

Why do you choose to associate this with "right wing" or "libertarians"?

It's been shown that it is quite bi-partisan to decriminalize drug-use.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
Why do you choose to associate this with "right wing" or "libertarians"?

It's been shown that it is quite bi-partisan to decriminalize drug-use.
Click to expand...

Which is why the vast majority of the no votes are coming from the Trump-voting counties, right?

The fight to end the failed war on drugs isn't even remotely bipartisan.
 
Vic said:
Which is why the vast majority of the no votes are coming from the Trump-voting counties, right?

The fight to end the failed war on drugs isn't even remotely bipartisan.
Click to expand...

Right - I would argue that it tends to come more from... say... religious nut-wings. Which they may lean republican generally - but shitting on "right wing" and "libertarians" on something that the vast majority support seems to be the equivalency of shooting yourself in the foot.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
Right - I would argue that it tends to come more from... say... religious nut-wings. Which they may lean republican generally - but shitting on "right wing" and "libertarians" on something that the vast majority support seems to be the equivalency of shooting yourself in the foot.
Click to expand...

The NJ weed legalization results are close enough to the presidential election results. While not 100% correlation, it's mostly Trump voting dipshits that voted against it, guaranteed.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
Right - I would argue that it tends to come more from... say... religious nut-wings. Which they may lean republican generally - but shitting on "right wing" and "libertarians" on something that the vast majority support seems to be the equivalency of shooting yourself in the foot.
Click to expand...

The vote tally on this measure is lining up almost exactly with the state Presidential vote tally, so it's hardly going out on a limb here to say that the right-wing, whether evangelical or self-labeled 'libertarian,' do not support ending the failed war on drugs. Either that, or there were a lot of right-wing 'libertarians' voting for Biden, which I strongly doubt.
 
Vic said:
The vote tally on this measure is lining up almost exactly with the state Presidential vote tally, so it's hardly going out on a limb here to say that the right-wing, whether evangelical or self-labeled 'libertarian,' do not support ending the failed war on drugs. Either that, or there were a lot of right-wing 'libertarians' voting for Biden, which I strongly doubt.
Click to expand...

Same in NJ.

Small gov't republicans hate big government, except when it comes to a bloated military and excessive wars. Or when it comes to telling someone they can or can't smoke weed. Or telling a woman what she can do with her body. Or deciding how some land can be zoned or not zoned, as long as it benefits them personally. Or having big government help bring infrastructure to their more rural shithole areas like utilities, roads and internet, Etc. etc..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vic
mect said:
I don't even think it makes sense for primary residences. Why should long time inhabitants pay lower taxes than a family that just moved in? It promotes a NIMBY mentality and stifles housing growth since the people that already own their homes don't want property values to fall and also don't care if property taxes are high on others, so long as it isn't them. If you allow property taxes to track with property values, it motivates voters to support policies that keep property values under control.
Click to expand...
That is a good point about controlling property values, that I'll have to consider further. But, I think primary residences, especially for the non-rich deserve the most protection.
 
Eski should love this! California prop 19 passed.

I voted no on this. This was another give away to rich old white people (because that’s who will take advantage of this the most).

Oh and prop 15 didn’t pass, I voted for it.
 
Pot's legal in Arizona.
The initiative to raise state income taxes on high income individuals passed.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top