|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Instead of raising taxes, why don't they cut government expenses and
programs back to 1997 levels, or levels that would have been if we
never had a financial bubble?
Why should they pay higher taxes for more Bureaucrats, their
fat salaries, and all of their pork legislation, which all got as fat
as the big fat juicy flying pig that led the stock bubble?
I'm sure Californians are practicing their signatures and waiting by
their front doors, ready to sign another Proposition 13 style mandate.
The issue here is not the discrepancy between new and old CA home
owners. The issue is more taxes, adding to California's rampant
inflation on essentials, like insurance, food, and gas.
Wednesday, August 20, 2003, 3:37:29 PM, you wrote:
DM> Buffet is right about property taxes being too low à la Prop. 13. Prop. 13 also
DM> favors longer term property owners vs. newer home buyers. Buffet pays 7x more
DM> in prop taxes for his home in Nebraska than in Calif even though the CA home is
DM> worth 8x more:
DM> http://www.tax-news.com/asp/story/story.asp?storyname=13018
DM> Prop 13 was never fair because newer home buyers paying $600,000 for a single
DM> story home in Los Angeles, yes that's $600K, will be taxes for the full value of
DM> the home. In Newport Beach, homes worth $2 Million are assessed for far less
DM> because the owners have been there for years.
DM> Daniel Martinez.
DM> BobR wrote:
>> Must be that Warren owns some California bonds or is going to buy some and
>> like with private companies he is going to make sure the investment pays off
>> by taking an active roll in the management.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "John Armstrong" <mrktwiz1@xxxxxxxxx>
>> To: <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 12:09 PM
>> Subject: Off Topic item regarding Calif recall and Arnold S.
>>
>> > Warren Buffet has just agreed to be Arnold
>> > Schwarzenegger's Economic Advisor...developing....WOW!
>> >
>> > John Armstrong
|