Small Property tax question

[Lloyd Danforth]

People moving here may be shocked as to the average age of homes on the market. Absolutely ancient compared to the rest of the nation. I am curious as to how much does this concern the typical buyer. Or do you have a lot of faith in the inspector to point out age issues?

Cathleen

If the roof is kept in good repair and the building is protected from water and insect damage the structure of a house doesn't wear out.  The things to worry about are the age and condition of the things we have brought into houses, relatively, recently:  Plumbing and Electricity.  A 200 year old house is at it's prime. 75 year old wiring isn't!
Most houses with the exception of some recently built, are either too tight or, too loose.  They often leak like a sieve or work has been done to make them so tight everybody's ears get sucked on when a door is opened.
Most houses don't have any rational system of air exchange and no effort has been made to bring outside air 'right to'  things that use air like furnaces, some hot water heaters and woodstoves and fireplaces. Those devices pull outside air in around cracks ( or, can't and don't work correctly ), warm it up and blow it out the chimney.
Many houses in New England were insulated in the 70's and 80's due to shortages and increases in the cost of fuel.  This was done by poping off pieces of siding and blowing in,mostly, fiberglass and cellulose insulation. Both of them settle to some extent.  Some installers didn't know enough about how the old houses were built (Hurricane bracketts) and did poor jobs.

[slim]

that is why the property tax has to be changed...

I disagree Frank the property tax does not need to be changed it needs to be eliminated. Personally I think all taxes need to be eliminated because they are all forms of slavery and I don't want to be a slave to anyone.

[RichW]

People are paying the owners of the property

but according to his analysis of landowners not being "permitted" (no right) to live without paying property taxes, neither would the landless in anarcho-capistan without paying a tribute to landowners - which means they are being compelled (read: forced) to work.

Poppycock!  There is every reason to believe that an AC world have private charities/church landowners, much as we do today.  Our local rescue mission offers a bed, meal, and a place to wash-up to anyone off the street.  Why would that change?  There is no reason to think people would be "forced" to work.

Further, without all the government rules/regulations/taxes, real estate would be very very very very cheap.  And, without the government ripping so much money out of your paycheck, that cheap real estate would be within financial reach for virtually everyone.

[FrankChodorov]

that is why the property tax has to be changed...

I disagree Frank the property tax does not need to be changed it needs to be eliminated. Personally I think all taxes need to be eliminated because they are all forms of slavery and I don't want to be a slave to anyone.

even in anarchy the economic rent will still attach to all locations beyond Locke's proviso (exclusive use is just so long as enough and as good is left in common for others) as two or more people naturally compete for access.

if the landowner collects this then the landless are compelled to work for what defines their right of self-ownership (to exist is to occupy land) - therefore it will be slavery too.

[FrankChodorov]

People are paying the owners of the property

but according to his analysis of landowners not being "permitted" (no right) to live without paying property taxes, neither would the landless in anarcho-capistan without paying a tribute to landowners - which means they are being compelled (read: forced) to work.

Poppycock!  There is every reason to believe that an AC world have private charities/church landowners, much as we do today.  Our local rescue mission offers a bed, meal, and a place to wash-up to anyone off the street.  Why would that change?  There is no reason to think people would be "forced" to work.

yes - then they will be gifted a place to locate for a hot meal but they have no right to be there.

I thought a right of self-ownership does not need to be gifted or purchased - does it?

[RichW]

People are paying the owners of the property

but according to his analysis of landowners not being "permitted" (no right) to live without paying property taxes, neither would the landless in anarcho-capistan without paying a tribute to landowners - which means they are being compelled (read: forced) to work.

Poppycock!  There is every reason to believe that an AC world have private charities/church landowners, much as we do today.  Our local rescue mission offers a bed, meal, and a place to wash-up to anyone off the street.  Why would that change?  There is no reason to think people would be "forced" to work.

yes - then they will be gifted a place to locate for a hot meal but they have no right to be there.

I thought a right of self-ownership does not need to be gifted or purchased - does it?

Your point that individuals would be forced to work in an AC system has been refuted.  Other than that, it would not be a good use of my time to spend 40+ pages trying to break your habit of circular-reasoning.

[FrankChodorov]

People are paying the owners of the property

but according to his analysis of landowners not being "permitted" (no right) to live without paying property taxes, neither would the landless in anarcho-capistan without paying a tribute to landowners - which means they are being compelled (read: forced) to work.

Poppycock!  There is every reason to believe that an AC world have private charities/church landowners, much as we do today.  Our local rescue mission offers a bed, meal, and a place to wash-up to anyone off the street.  Why would that change?  There is no reason to think people would be "forced" to work.

yes - then they will be gifted a place to locate for a hot meal but they have no right to be there.

I thought a right of self-ownership does not need to be gifted or purchased - does it?

Your point that individuals would be forced to work in an AC system has been refuted.  Other than that, it would not be a good use of my time to spend 40+ pages trying to break your habit of circular-reasoning.

in other words..."I concede the point".

charity is a gift and rights do not have to be gifted or purchased - we are born with them as social constructs to help avoid conflict.

[RichW]

People are paying the owners of the property

but according to his analysis of landowners not being "permitted" (no right) to live without paying property taxes, neither would the landless in anarcho-capistan without paying a tribute to landowners - which means they are being compelled (read: forced) to work.

Poppycock!  There is every reason to believe that an AC world have private charities/church landowners, much as we do today.  Our local rescue mission offers a bed, meal, and a place to wash-up to anyone off the street.  Why would that change?  There is no reason to think people would be "forced" to work.

yes - then they will be gifted a place to locate for a hot meal but they have no right to be there.

I thought a right of self-ownership does not need to be gifted or purchased - does it?

Your point that individuals would be forced to work in an AC system has been refuted.  Other than that, it would not be a good use of my time to spend 40+ pages trying to break your habit of circular-reasoning.

in other words..."I concede the point".

charity is a gift and rights do not have to be gifted or purchased - we are born with them as social constructs to help avoid conflict.

no, in other words..."you are wrong".

Asking a question of another poster is a way of controlling a conversation.  I choose not to be controlled.  If it makes you feel better in your own mind to declare "victory" when a game has not even been played go ahead.  You remind of a little kid from the neighborhood who would show up at my door each day and ask if I wanted to play baseball.  After saying no, he'd run away from the door, hands raised in victory yelling "I win, I win".

Your view about rights is but one of many.  I must have lost my copy of the Universal Handbook on Rights. As I recall, you were not the author.

[error]

Let me suggest doing what dozens of others have done and hit the nice Ignore button.

[FrankChodorov]

Your view about rights is but one of many.

maybe - but no view of rights say they have to be purchased or gifted.

QED

[RichW]

Your view about rights is but one of many.

maybe - but no view of rights say they have to be purchased or gifted.

QED

This has absolutely nothing to do with the price of eggs in Hong Kong.

Your statement that the landless would be forced to pay a tribute to landowners in an anarcho-capitalist system is factually incorrect.

QED

[FrankChodorov]

Your statement that the landless would be forced to pay a tribute to landowners in an anarcho-capitalist system is factually incorrect.

if all land is legally occupied then one will either have to pay a tribute to landowners or be gifted the right to occupy land via charity.

neither of which fulfill the fundamental tenet of libertarianism - the absolute right of self-ownership.

a right does not have to be purchased or gifted.

[RichW]

Your statement that the landless would be forced to pay a tribute to landowners in an anarcho-capitalist system is factually incorrect.

if all land is legally occupied then one will either have to pay a tribute to landowners or be gifted the right to occupy land via charity.

neither of which fulfill the fundamental tenet of libertarianism - the absolute right of self-ownership.

a right does not have to be purchased or gifted.

Your original statement is incorrect, no matter how much you try to muddy the matter.

[FrankChodorov]

Your statement that the landless would be forced to pay a tribute to landowners in an anarcho-capitalist system is factually incorrect.

if all land is legally occupied then one will either have to pay a tribute to landowners or be gifted the right to occupy land via charity.

neither of which fulfill the fundamental tenet of libertarianism - the absolute right of self-ownership.

a right does not have to be purchased or gifted.

Your original statement is incorrect, no matter how much you try to muddy the matter.

I have always stated that a right does not have to be purchased or gifted...do you believe that to be true?

[Pat McCotter]

DOH!, how evil... All taxes are a price for living but at least some taxes are measured depending on what you do with your money.

Just one quick note to think about:

An income tax makes you pay more the more productive you are.
A property tax makes you pay the same, independent of how productive you are.

In essence, an income tax punishes work while a property tax gives you incentive (or at least no disincentives) to make your property more productive.

But, in many places, zoning disallows making the property productive.