1 2 Jump to
Offline
The Man wrote:
Goose wrote:
You still have to raise the same money from the same population.
You have to raise the same money, yes, but if it were raised entirely through income and/or sales tax, it wouldn't be the same population, it would be a much broader population, and the entire burden wouldn't be on property owners.
I see your point.
Why is success so unlikely on this?
Offline
Goose wrote:
The Man wrote:
Goose wrote:
You still have to raise the same money from the same population.
You have to raise the same money, yes, but if it were raised entirely through income and/or sales tax, it wouldn't be the same population, it would be a much broader population, and the entire burden wouldn't be on property owners.I see your point.
Why is success so unlikely on this?
My best guess would be the political clout of those excessive number of school districts.
Offline
Goose wrote:
The Man wrote:
Goose wrote:
You still have to raise the same money from the same population.
You have to raise the same money, yes, but if it were raised entirely through income and/or sales tax, it wouldn't be the same population, it would be a much broader population, and the entire burden wouldn't be on property owners.I see your point.
Why is success so unlikely on this?
I honestly don't know? I think whoever spearheaded getting this done would be extremely popular. The only reason I can think of is that property tax revenue is more predictable than income or sales taxes. But, if that's the reason, why do we have income and sales taxes at all? Why not just collect all taxes for everything from property owners?
Offline
The Man wrote:
The problem with Tom Wolf and the House's proposals is that if there actually is any reduction, it will be short-lived. There is no law to stop school districts from raising their property tax rates right back up to current levels. Then we would be stuck with higher income and sales tax, and property taxes like we have now. No thanks.
+++
The key to Wolf's plan=SHORT-LIVED!
Offline
Common Sense wrote:
The Man wrote:
The problem with Tom Wolf and the House's proposals is that if there actually is any reduction, it will be short-lived. There is no law to stop school districts from raising their property tax rates right back up to current levels. Then we would be stuck with higher income and sales tax, and property taxes like we have now. No thanks.
+++
The key to Wolf's plan=SHORT-LIVED!
Yep. The sad part is, the House's proposal is almost identical, and also would be short-lived. Apparently there are a lot of PA politicians who want to be voted out of office when their re-election bid comes up.
Offline
The plans would be short-lived only if the voters were short-memoried.
Problem is, the upward creep of the temporarily reduced property taxes would be so gradual that most voters would be oblivious, much like the proverbial like the frogs in water slowly heated to boiling.
The lawmakers are literally banking their ability to vest their pensions on it.
Last edited by Tarnation (5/25/2015 9:13 am)
1 2 Jump to