Warren Buffet (Arnold) Wants Higher Property Taxes in California

Billionaire financier Warren Buffett, an adviser to Arnold Schwarzenegger's campaign for California governor, suggested in an interview with The Wall Street Journal published Friday that the state's property taxes should be higher.

California's property taxes are reined in by Proposition 13, a set of restrictions imposed in 1978. Buffett, the chairman of holding company Berkshire Hathaway Inc., did not say in the interview that he would press for the rules to be repealed.

http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=3283368

What does Ahnald think he's gonna do with that big fat deficit?

It's possible this left-leaning side is just a ploy to win the election, but if it turns out to be sincere and Schwarzenegger wins big as a liberal Republican, his popularity may prove a real threat to the conservative, fundamentalist wing represented by Bush.

but that doens't mean he's not a threat. It just means he's a threat to us and also to the people on the far right. He's a "country club Republican."

He's doing this Chauncey Gardner routine. Say nothing and be all things to all people. So far he could be anything from a liberal populist to a nazi.

thanks.

Chauncey Gardner on steroids

Kozinski was so far ahead of his time

Damned liberal Republicans. They're like mutants, festering in the cracks of society and then, once every blue moon, coming out into the light and revealing themselves just for the shock value.
Liberal Republican LOL!
:toast:

Businesses pay very little in taxes, as their property does not turn over (taxes are re-assessed only upon sale).

While this helps long-term homeowners, it is a major windfall for long-term coporate owners of real estate.

Imagine being agri-business, or a company with large industrial properties. You are paying taxes based on your 1976 assessed valuation (plus 2% per year adjustment)

I'd support a split role, with business property being periodically re-assessed regardless of whether ir turns over or not.

I'd also have a business style property tax for income property, but keep primary residence property tax under the current scenario.

david

Kucinich 2004

Arianna YES
Recall No

We should bring that matter to a vote. Proposition 13 does discourage effective use of commericial properties. I don't think that we should reassess residential properties, and I think Davis should say this. Who knows, maybe in this election, the Democrats are the low-taxes crowd...

Otherwise, let's keep Prop. 13, which was passed because the property taxes in the state were becoming too high and too unevenly applied from county to county. I think it would be a tough task to overturn Prop. 13, even with its current inequities.

I can't get the 'pump you up' voice out of my head



"I was walking along the road with two friends.
The sun was setting.
I felt a breath of melancholy -
Suddenly the sky turned blood-red.
I stopped, and leaned against the railing, deathly tired -
looking out across the flaming clouds that hung like blood and a sword
over the blue-black fjord and town.
My friends walked on - I stood there, trembling with fear.
And I sensed a great, infinite scream pass through nature."
- Edvard Munch

Let's pass the tithing plate to enron et al

I was paying taxes on a 300K home although it was sold for 500K.

The Dems need to make this into a TV ad.

DAVIS wouldn't have a deficit problem! The minority of repubs in the legislature blocked ALL attempts to increase revenue.

They are laying off the current tax base to the middle class again!!!!
This is another transparent attempt to sieze the increased equity of older homeowners; many have their entire estates tied up in their homes. The more taxes they pay, the less of a burden on the "poor corporations."

I live in Florida... read about a property tax increase when we're already at3.4%! EVERYONE's property taxes are gonna go up.Bush is sucking us ALL dry!!

for picking up on the stink of unattended revenue source. Whether savings'n loans or school funding, Social Security or drinking water, boomers' retirements or nations' factory base, prison-labor scams or hypermilitarised cops, the gravy all very synchronistic'ly somehow finds its way into the cabal's insatiable maw.

Oh really, huh? Remember Jarvis-Gann!!!!

Take it from a native Californian, THAT will not go over well. My parents, both liberal Democrats, voted for Proposition 13 in 1978, even as they voted a straight Democratic ticket and to reelect Jerry Brown. Home values increased well beyond people's ability to pay ever increasing tax rates.

Arnold should fire Buffett right now, and send Pete Wilson packing while his at it too.

Low taxes on farmland to preserve agriculture. Used as a dodge by rich folks . Plant an acre of oranges or avocados, or do the Raygun thing and raise a few heifers! Lowers tax rates on property because your mega-million dollar showplace is now a "farm"! Also, many rich CA residents own condos in Vegas or Reno to claim Nevada residency and skip CA income tax! Don't ned to "raise" taxes, just need to enforce collections and identify the scofflaws!

We need to hang people by their thumbs if they abuse the Williamson Act, but I hope you're not suggesting we get rid of it. Like prop 13, the Willamson Act is a 'Third Rail' that nobody wants to touch because it benefits a lot of people in a lot of ways and is a valuable tool to fight suburban sprawl. Fix it, but as they say, Don't throw the bath water out with the baby! In the not to distant past, we spent millions billions to make the desert bloom while we built houses on the best farmland in the world; now we have the Williamson Act to protect the land. Yes, I like your words 'Don't need to "raise" taxes, just need to enforce collections and identify the scoff laws!' How come republicans tend to be the scoff laws in life?


http://ceres.ca.gov/topic/env_law/williamson/stat.html

Williamson Act

<snip>

The Williamson Act is a procedure authorized under state law to preserve agricultural lands as well as open space. Property owners entering into a Williamson Act contract receive a reduction in property taxes in return for agreeing to protect the land's open space or agricultural values.(preserves land)


During the term of the contract, the property cannot be used for any purpose other than the production of agricultural commodities for commercial purposes, open space, and/or uses determined by the Board of Supervirors to be compatible with agricultural and open space uses. This restriction applies to you, any of your tenants, and any person(s) to whom you may transfer property during the term of the contract.(kills land speculation because huge fees are applied when land is removed from Act)


Your property will be reassessed in accordance with the applicable legal requirements. Generally, your house and any compatible uses will be assessed at standard tax rates, with the balance of the property subject to reduced taxes.(build a castle and pay the big bucks)

<more>

I mean, I know that's a general question, but I mean on an average 6 to 8 room home, within commuting distance of a large city, what kind of range would that be?

is out here, but a 6-8 bedroom home is definitely NOT the average or norm out here. I have been living out here in northern Cal for almost seven years now. I bought my 3 bedroom 2 bath home in 1998 for 179k. (gasp) My mortgage+tax bill is approx. 40% of my salary.

This was 3 times the price of my old home in Georgia, with 1/4 the lot size and a slightly bigger floorplan. We considered it a great price at the time.

We pay approximately 3000 a year in property taxes. If the taxes were raised with the property value, we would owe about 10,000 a year right now. Needless to say, if that happened, we could no longer afford to live here. Rents have doubled in my area since I arrived here.

Edit: I still have to commute 75 miles a day round trip. about 40 minutes in at 6am, 1 to 1.5 hours out at 4pm. (I work a flexible, yet long day). I earn a very good salary by "average american" standards, but here in CA it is a very middle class existence. No sports cars, boats or luxury yachts in my neighborhood.

A three or four bedroom house with or without a den or family room was the range I had in mind. Here on Long Island I'd say our taxes for a house like that would range from 6,000 on up to 10,000 easy, depending on the community. 6 to 7k for a working class community an hour or more from the city and higher for a better neighborhood and/or closer in toward NYC. I have no idea how much the McMansions that are sprouting up all over are costing in taxes. Plenty, I'd bet.

I went back to look at my statements from last year. They are closer to 5000. I refinanced early in 2002, so I got a split tax billing from the state. (escrow amounts).

the average CA'ian with same income as average NY'er lives in a house which cost two or three times more. So, even though a NY'er and CA'ian would pay same property taxes on 500,000 house, in many CA communities, that's an entry level house, whereas in NY that a mid to high range house. So, bottom line, you're still paying way more in taxes, collectively and individually, in CA.

...because the wealthiest citizens in America -- large corps -- don't pay them. Corporations love property taxes because the big corps all have cut deals with local governments freeing them from this form of taxation. When you hear that a municipality has raised property tax rates, you should read that as 'corporations are bearing even less of a tax burden as middle and working class bears bigger and bigger burden.'

know much detail about him. But I know Dobbs is the biggest Repuke 'Financial' Whore in America.

How can you budget for a home if the property tax is a wildcard? :shrug:

ERRRR! Wrong answer!
LOL This is so STUPID of them.
Not that I don't like the idea. I just know how people react to a platform including raising taxes. In particular, property taxes.

Uhhhh.....
This is pretty damned far left.
What if Arnold is deliberately trying to suck up a good portion of the middle that would have gone to the Dems, while moving away from the right and leaving that to Bill Simon?
If he moves much farther left he's going to have most of the Republicans against him. Which might give Simon the plurality of votes, as long as Arnold takes votes from Bustamante.
Of course, both Simon and Arnold have to share with McClintock and that other Uberman guy.
Huh...just something to think about.

nasty debates in Repug circles and start to divide the stupid repug vote. (stupid is not very civil, but i'm so tired of getting lied to by the Bushites and the damage they are inflicting on innocents, the economy, the environment, and American freedoms)