Tyrants in Maryland do it again

[awpitt]

No. I don't even smoke in a closed car with the windows rolled up when it's just me.

And when I see someone else doing it, I go :blech: but I still don't think the government should start making laws just because I go :blech:. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to restrict parents who smoke around their kids when there are parents who do so many worse things to screw up their kids.

I think letting your teens run wild and not supervising them should be against the law. That, IMO, is much worse than smoking around them. Are you prepared for the government to regulate how much supervision you give your child?

No. I don't even smoke in a closed car with the windows rolled up when it's just me.

Excellent. Thanks for answering.

I think letting your teens run wild and not supervising them should be against the law. That, IMO, is much worse than smoking around them.

I totally agree.

Are you prepared for the government to regulate how much supervision you give your child?

Actually, that’s already happening. As an example, I know Maryland sets limits on how old a kid must be in order to be left alone at home and another age requirement before a kid can be left alone with a younger sibling. I think it’s eight years old to be home alone and age thirteen to be home alone and care for a sibling younger than eight year old. If the youngest sibling is eight, the oldest sibling doesn’t have to thirteen. This is what I was told at one time so please correct me if this info is wrong. Ken??

 

[kwillia]

Ummm... no one ever truly "owns" their home. We only rent it from the government. Stop paying taxes on it and see what happens. Let the government chose to build a road through your property and see what happens.

Case in point...

84-Year-Old Woman Evicted From Bowie Home

For more than 40 years, a Bowie woman has called her house a home, but on Wednesday the 84-year-old was evicted.

The woman used to live at 12201 Maycheck Lane. "I think it's pure ugly, and they are trying to get me out of my house," said Mary Hoag.

Hoag said she and her husband bought the house in 1964 for $16,990. They financed the property for $13,500. For 25 years, the Hoags paid $83.03 each month for their mortgage until the house was paid off in 1989.

Hoag's husband died in 1999. Sometime after that, she said she got behind in paying her taxes on the property. The house was then sold at auction.

On May 15, a judge ordered Hoag's eviction.

On Wednesday, everything that Hoag owns was placed out on the street.

"This is a bummer. Nobody's got a right to take a widow's house from her, not when she's written every check herself," said Hoag.

The sheriff's department said it is working hard to find any of Hoag's relatives. In the meantime, officials said they are trying to find her a place to stay. County officials said they have also begun reviewing the case, and plan to provide Hoag with some legal aid.

 

[itsbob]

The sheriff's department said it is working hard to find any of Hoag's relatives. In the meantime, officials said they are trying to find her a place to stay. County officials said they have also begun reviewing the case, and plan to provide Hoag with some legal aid.

Now that they've taken her house, sold it for an incredible profit NOW they are trying to get her legal aid..

That's fair...

Work your whole life to buy a house, and the gov't takes it.. I'd like to know how much was owed, how much was made at auction, and where all the 'profit' went, and how many bidders there were. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a "secret auction" and someone's relative won it for EXACTLY what was owed in back taxes.

 

[awpitt]

Now that they've taken her house, sold it for an incredible profit NOW they are trying to get her legal aid..

That's fair...

Work your whole life to buy a house, and the gov't takes it.. I'd like to know how much was owed, how much was made at auction, and where all the 'profit' went, and how many bidders there were. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a "secret auction" and someone's relative won it for EXACTLY what was owed in back taxes.

I Saw this on the news yesterday. I don't if I was more sad or more angry. The house was paid off, fee and clear. The A__holes took it because of unpaid taxes. I can't believe someone couldn't have helped her out before it got to this point.

 

[itsbob]

I Saw this on the news yesterday. I don't if I was more sad or more angry. The house was paid off, fee and clear. The A__holes took it because of unpaid taxes. I can't believe someone couldn't have helped her out before it got to this point.

Yeah, I thought this was the whole purpose of "reverse mortgages"?

 

[vraiblonde]

Property taxes are bull#### anyway. You buy your house and land, you pay off your mortgage, you should own it free and clear, end of story. Not only do you have to KEEP paying for it, but the gov can set any tax rate they want, appraise it for whatever they want, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

THIS is why they want to ban guns. Because they don't want to get shot when they come to seize your property that you own.

Think it can't happen? Just read the news.

 

[vraiblonde]

Yeah, I thought this was the whole purpose of "reverse mortgages"?

Obviously the people trying to take your house from you aren't going to make you aware of your options to keep it.

 

[Sharon]

Property taxes are bull#### anyway. You buy your house and land, you pay off your mortgage, you should own it free and clear, end of story. Not only do you have to KEEP paying for it, but the gov can set any tax rate they want, appraise it for whatever they want, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

THIS is why they want to ban guns. Because they don't want to get shot when they come to seize your property that you own.

Let's not forget about Eminent Domain. :nausuperhighway:

 

[Woodyspda]

I Saw this on the news yesterday. I don't if I was more sad or more angry. The house was paid off, fee and clear. The A__holes took it because of unpaid taxes. I can't believe someone couldn't have helped her out before it got to this point.

Sometimes a Reverse Mortgage is a great thing......

 

[Woodyspda]

Property taxes are bull#### anyway. You buy your house and land, you pay off your mortgage, you should own it free and clear, end of story. Not only do you have to KEEP paying for it, but the gov can set any tax rate they want, appraise it for whatever they want, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

THIS is why they want to ban guns. Because they don't want to get shot when they come to seize your property that you own.

Think it can't happen? Just read the news.

Hmmmmm I guess you don't want paved roads, sewer, etc. basically infrastructure.

Taxation with representation is NOT against the Constitution....

 

[forestal]

None of us own property. We all lease it from the government. The lease is paid by our property taxes.

Only the American indians truly own their land.

Property taxes are bull#### anyway. You buy your house and land, you pay off your mortgage, you should own it free and clear, end of story. Not only do you have to KEEP paying for it, but the gov can set any tax rate they want, appraise it for whatever they want, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

THIS is why they want to ban guns. Because they don't want to get shot when they come to seize your property that you own.

Think it can't happen? Just read the news.

 

[jazz lady]

None of us own property. We all lease it from the government. The lease is paid by our property taxes.

That much is true. As for...

Only the American indians truly own their land.

You have it dead wrong. The American Indians prided themselves on being caretakers of the land and guardians of the Earth. Their tribal lands were communal properties and no one person owned any part of it. But that all changed when the white settlers appeared. Read up on The Dawes Act:

By breaking up reservation lands into privately-owned parcels, legislators hoped to complete the assimilation process by forcing the deterioration of the communal life-style of the Native societies and imposing Western-oriented values of strengthening the nuclear family and values of economic dependency strictly within this small household unit.

They forced them first into reservations and then forced the Western lifestyle and values on them. It was a disaster for their culture in every way, shape, and form.

 

[hvp05]

Only the American indians truly own their land.

Um, actually the concept of land ownership was completely foreign - for lack of a better term - to the Native Americans until Europeans arrived.

The Europeans were accustomed to own land and laid claim to it while they considered the Indians to be nomads with no interest to claim land ownership. (Source.)

 

[jazz lady]

Um, actually the concept of land ownership was completely foreign - for lack of a better term - to the Native Americans until Europeans arrived.

Wish I'd said that.

 

[awpitt]

vraiblonde[/color]]Property taxes are bull#### anyway. You buy your house and land, you pay off your mortgage, you should own it free and clear, end of story. Not only do you have to KEEP paying for it, but the gov can set any tax rate they want, appraise it for whatever they want, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

THIS is why they want to ban guns. Because they don't want to get shot when they come to seize your property that you own.

Think it can't happen? Just read the newsQUOTE]

Hmmmmm I guess you don't want paved roads, sewer, etc. basically infrastructure.

Taxation with representation is NOT against the Constitution....

VRAI wasn’t saying that taxes should go away. We all understand that things like paved roads, sewer, etc. cost money. The point VRAI made, and I agree, is that property taxes are a very regressive form of taxation. Unlike income taxes, property taxes tax you on something that hasn’t derived any monetary value during the taxing period. It’s different when you sell a house and derive an actual profit but when you’re living in the house that’s different.

 

[Larry Gude]

That's not so...

, is that property taxes are a very regressive form of taxation. Unlike income taxes, property taxes tax you on something that hasn’t derived any monetary value during the taxing period. It’s different when you sell a house and derive an actual profit but when you’re living in the house that’s different.

...your home is appreciating as you live in it, just like money in the bank is earning interest. You're not spending it but the value is growing.

If you live in an incorporated area that has official local government that does things; pave roads, push snow, pass ordinances to attract business or schools or new housing development, shopping so on and so forth, that stuff costs money and does benefit you even if your house is paid off, like money in the bank earning interest.

Property taxes are a reasonable solution to funding the growth. We can't all have our way. Just because one votes against a local government expenditure or growth plan doesn't exempt one from having to help pay for it. You can move.

I'm not unsympathetic to the plight of people who are retired and on a fixed income being hurt by exploding property taxes, but they are part of a community and I don't see a violation of their rights given local communities choices to fund local government.

Moving sucks at 25. It's a nightmare at 65-85. I wonder why someone who has a house long paid off that is now worth some, say, $500,000 when they bought it for $20,000 back in 1960, why don't they borrow against the house?

Say you're 65 and don't wanna move. Say your prop taxes are 1% or $5,000 a year and you figure to stay/be alive another 20. So, you borrow $100,000 against your home. The new mortgage is only $800 a month, 15 year, or so or $9,600 a year plus your property taxes of $5k so about $15,000 a year our of your $100,000. That gives you about 7 years if you assume no increase in taxes AND that the money is not earning anything as you use it up.

Taxes will go up but you will earn something on that money so, maybe that's close to a rub? Point is that after 7 years or so, you do it again. In the mean time, your $500,000 house might now be worth $600,000, so, in that way, you're not losing ground. Plus you were paying down the note anyway.

 

[vraiblonde]

Say you're 65 and don't wanna move. Say your prop taxes are 1% or $5,000 a year and you figure to stay/be alive another 20. So, you borrow $100,000 against your home. The new mortgage is only $800 a month, 15 year, or so or $9,600 a year plus your property taxes of $5k so about $15,000 a year our of your $100,000. That gives you about 7 years if you assume no increase in taxes AND that the money is not earning anything as you use it up.

I'm somewhat shocked at your attitude. A person shouldn't have to take out a mortgage on their house to pay their property taxes. The very thought of that is absurd.

We dole money to every deadbeat human and country that comes around with their hand out - why can't we say that old people on a fixed income don't have to pay taxes anymore?

 

[awpitt]

...your home is appreciating as you live in it, just like money in the bank is earning interest. You're not spending it but the value is growing.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>

<o> </o>

Okay then property should be taxed based only on the appreciation accumulated since the most recent ownership transfer. Just like taxing interest on money in the bank. The money isn’t taxed, the interest is. If I bought a house for $250K and it’s now worth $310K, then property taxes should be based on the $60K of appreciation that has occurred since I bought the place. <o></o>

<o> </o>

<o></o>

<o></o>

If you live in an incorporated area that has official local government that does things; pave roads, push snow, pass ordinances to attract business or schools or new housing development, shopping so on and so forth, that stuff costs money and does benefit you even if your house is paid off, like money in the bank earning interest.

I already knew this. I’m not saying people don’t have the responsibility to pay for the needs of the community. I’m just saying that property taxes are not the best way of doing it.<o></o>

<o> </o>

Just because one votes against a local government expenditure or growth plan doesn't exempt one from having to help pay for it.

I never said that.<o></o>

<o></o>

<o></o>

…why don't they borrow against the house?

Folks shouldn’t have to go into debt just to pay taxes.<o></o>

 

[Pandora]

I'm somewhat shocked at your attitude. A person shouldn't have to take out a mortgage on their house to pay their property taxes. The very thought of that is absurd.

We dole money to every deadbeat human and country that comes around with their hand out - why can't we say that old people on a fixed income don't have to pay taxes anymore?

They do have that ability. They can file a form to request credit. I've done it numerous times for people but the credit just isn't enough and they limit it at 200K. A dump around this area is worth at least 200K. I bet nobody could take 10-20 minutes out of their busy day to help this woman. Not even those trying to take her house.

My father is now a retired assessor (after retiring as a police officer) and he would help people with the form all the time. I don't know if that is or isn't allowed, but you would think since it is an option, it has to do with taxes, that there is nothing keeping him from doing that.


http://www.dat.state.md.us/sdatweb/htc.html

I have often said that if you make it to a certain age, you should be completely exempt from paying taxes. All taxes.

 

[Larry Gude]

Why would you be shocked...

I'm somewhat shocked at your attitude. A person shouldn't have to take out a mortgage on their house to pay their property taxes. The very thought of that is absurd.

We dole money to every deadbeat human and country that comes around with their hand out - why can't we say that old people on a fixed income don't have to pay taxes anymore?

...that I'm arguing people should pay their taxes?

Are you in favor of more welfare because we give in so many other areas or because it would be the right thing to do?

We certainly can say that old folks are exempt BUT people will take advantage of it just like they would any other tax break. What do we do when the majority of the people in a given area aren't paying taxes because they are old and collecting social security? We are an aging population.