Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Left with Nothing

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 287 posts

Re: Left with Nothing

#51

Post by theorique »

brianmcconnell wrote: post #11

Queue up the Ayn Rand acolytes in 3...2...1 It's not a coincidence that this is happening to mostly elderly people who otherwise own their properties in the clear, people who are often burdened with serious health problems. There is a simple fix. Require the liens to be paid off when there is a change of ownership. The city knows what it is owed, and that it will get the money eventually. If the city needs the money…

Say what you like about Ayn Rand, but she was hardly a fan of out-of-control government/private collusion to seize individuals property in a manner completely out of proportion to the size of their debt.

Re: Left with Nothing

#52

Post by bolder88 »

rwmj wrote: post #38
rch wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has always seemed to me that property taxes are a completely incorrect idea; far more onerous than, for instance, the estate tax. Have there been any serious efforts to get rid of them?

Property taxes are very progressive and we should absolutely have more of them (fair ones, not like the one in this article where you lose your home if you fail to pay some trivial sum). The reasons are best described in the article below, but in summary, we all pay to defend and enhance your property (by supporting the police, roads, local services, etc). It's fairer for property owners to take a larger share of thi…

Why not just go the whole hog and tax all property.

eg you buy a laptop, you have to pay the government a tax each year to keep it.

Why just apply it to houses? May as well just prohibit people from owning property.

Personally, I think such taxes are a massive disincentive for people to do well. As soon as you have enough money to buy a house, you are penalised for it.

Luckily in the UK, we don't have property tax, although we do have other taxes just as disgusting and unfair - stamp duty, inheritance tax, council tax.

Re: Left with Nothing

#53

Post by radicalbyte »

I wouldn't be against this basically being a fraud committed by someone in the local government there. Who else would have the knowledge to have found the loophole? Who else could have abused it so well?

Re: Left with Nothing

#54

Post by will_brown »

Ironically, a lot of houses owned by banks as a result of foreclosures ("REOs") are in turn getting foreclosed for failure to pay taxes and HOA fees. Banks were/are not equipped to manage the number of properties they own as a result of foreclosures and they lack the basic infrastructure to maintain these properties not limited to paying taxes and HOA fees, but violations of certain civil statutes like failing to maintain lawns that result can result in fines upwards of hundreds of dollars per day for continued violation.

Re: Left with Nothing

#55

Post by rwmj »

bolder88 wrote: post #52
rwmj wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Property taxes are very progressive and we should absolutely have more of them (fair ones, not like the one in this article where you lose your home if you fail to pay some trivial sum). The reasons are best described in the article below, but in summary, we all pay to defend and enhance your property (by supporting the police, roads, local services, etc). It's fairer for property owners to take a larger share of thi…

Why not just go the whole hog and tax all property. eg you buy a laptop, you have to pay the government a tax each year to keep it. Why just apply it to houses? May as well just prohibit people from owning property. Personally, I think such taxes are a massive disincentive for people to do well. As soon as you have enough money to buy a house, you are penalised for it. Luckily in the UK, we don't have property tax, a…

In effect we do have a property tax on laptops, but for convenience you pay it up front (VAT @ 20% of the value). It pays for all the same things such as helping the police to defend your laptop from being stolen, and paying for the ports and roads along which your laptop was imported (as well as the national debt which was increased when you imported it).

Council tax is the UK property tax. It's a very low-rated and regressive tax, but it's a property tax.

Re: Left with Nothing

#56

Post by kaonashi »

drcode wrote: post #39
brianmcconnell wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was referring to the generally sociopathic attitude they tend to adopt toward The Poor. BTW, this is a privatized operation wherein predatory debt collectors buy the liens, foreclose the property, and then flip it at a huge profit. Just another example of government acting as stenographer for the financial industry.

> Just another example of government acting as stenographer for the financial industry. Did you actually just say a sentence with the phrase "government acting" in it as an example of something Ayn Rand would be in favor of? HAHAHAHA.... (I'm not in the Ayn Rand camp, but I think you're missing the basic concept of what she was about.)

It's privatization of tax collection; a Randian/Thatcherite dream.

Re: Left with Nothing

#57

Post by wwweston »

tvanantwerp wrote: post #27
brianmcconnell wrote: post #11

Queue up the Ayn Rand acolytes in 3...2...1 It's not a coincidence that this is happening to mostly elderly people who otherwise own their properties in the clear, people who are often burdened with serious health problems. There is a simple fix. Require the liens to be paid off when there is a change of ownership. The city knows what it is owed, and that it will get the money eventually. If the city needs the money…

I can't really see Ayn Rand supporting the seizure of property over unpaid taxes. I'm not an Ayn Rand fan, but it's pretty easy to figure out what she does or doesn't believe in from her writings. And taxes are definitely in the "I don't care for that" category.

I am a (limited) Rand fan -- I think she inadvertently explored some interesting ideas, particularly about the limits and problems of wealth/power in The Fountainhead, lost on most of her acolytes though they seem to be -- and my suspicion is that Rand would be pretty much fine with this outcome if we could just get government actors out of the equation and have private parties taking homes from people.

For an example, consider an HOA taking a home from someone over unpaid fees.

(Incidentally, if one were looking for a crystal ball into what private/libertarian governance would actually start out looking like in the first world, I'd guess that the problems of HOAs would probably give a pretty good idea.)

Re: Left with Nothing

#58

Post by venomsnake »

bsullivan01 wrote: post #34
harrytuttle wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an English atheist, possibly surprisingly, I think Islam is right regarding interest. Unfortunately wrapping it up in mumbo jumbo doesn't give it any credibility. Also it isn't really related to the article.

At least inflation has to be added, and that's without calculating any risk. Otherwise I'll borrow from you $100K and return it 30 years later

Depends. The money in the current system is created with debt. If you remove it than it may lead to some interesting stuff.

Re: Left with Nothing

#59

Post by to3m »

rwmj wrote: post #38
rch wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has always seemed to me that property taxes are a completely incorrect idea; far more onerous than, for instance, the estate tax. Have there been any serious efforts to get rid of them?

Property taxes are very progressive and we should absolutely have more of them (fair ones, not like the one in this article where you lose your home if you fail to pay some trivial sum). The reasons are best described in the article below, but in summary, we all pay to defend and enhance your property (by supporting the police, roads, local services, etc). It's fairer for property owners to take a larger share of thi…

Comprehensive (UK-focussed) site dealing with arguments against a property tax in the form of a tax on the imputed rental value of land: http://kaalvtn.blogspot.co.uk/

(Note that property owners would NOT take a larger share of the burden; as with council tax, responsibility for payment would fall to tenants, to the greatest extent that market forces will permit. For council tax, that is currently "tenant pays all of it". No reason to assume a land value tax would be different.)

Re: Left with Nothing

#60

Post by raverbashing »

aheilbut wrote: post #48
acchow wrote: post #10

Can someone point me to the laws and regulations that allow this? Someone who owns their home completely (with no mortgage) can lose the entirety of the home due to unpaid taxes? Even if the value of the home far exceeds the tax debt? This is mindboggling to me.

What is also crazy about it is that the government is apparently not setting a high enough price for the liens. If they correctly priced the 'option' that the lien wouldn't be paid and the buyer could foreclose, then it wouldn't be so attractive for the predatory buyers. So the government is allowing itself to get ripped off too.

Well, theoretically the price of the lien should never be bigger than the price of the debt. The price should be (debt x odds of getting payed). These are usually bought in bulk

But of course, with this "new method" it makes sense to be higher.

Post reply on HN