>owe $147 >you have to pay $5000 >you lose $197,000 How is this acceptable?
Its quite mind blowing isn't it? Never heard anything like it.
Left with Nothing
81–90 of 287 posts
Re: Left with Nothing
#82Can 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, in Texas the liens are sold at auction. But yeah.
Re: Left with Nothing
#83The logical outcome of this kind of predatory practice should be that the "investor" (the purchaser of the liens) gets $5000 out of the $197,000 sale, and the debtor gets $192,000. And even that seem predatory, never mind getting all the equity and forcing the person out of their place of residence.
I have a hard time believing this story. If it actually is true, the local government in DC is beyond corrupt.
Re: Left with Nothing
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
Via private company operating for profit?
Issue is abuse of that system not the fact that it was by a private company operating for profit. Many prisons are run by for profit enterprises as well as hospitals. The way the program is run is the important thing not the type of enterprise handling the program. Example: Small town with "speed trap" (not a for profit business) gives out excess tickets to raise money.
I hardly think citing prisons and hospitals is a ringing endorsement of the profit motive.
Re: Left with Nothing
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would an Ayn Rand acolyte support the state taking the property of private individuals?
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.
Ayn Rand was poor.
Re: Left with Nothing
#86The logical outcome of this kind of predatory practice should be that the "investor" (the purchaser of the liens) gets $5000 out of the $197,000 sale, and the debtor gets $192,000. And even that seem predatory, never mind getting all the equity and forcing the person out of their place of residence.
when someone gets your $197,000 house for $134, they can sell it for $71,000 and take $6000 in legal fees, interest etc, as documented in the article.
The owner loses $130,000. Don't be surprised if the person buying the house for $71,000 is in on the game too.
Re: Left with Nothing
#87Earlier 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…
Property tax is primarily a disincentive to buy lots of land you can't do anything with and sit on it (metaphorically). That's a good thing- it means the incentives will push land into the hands of people who are actually going to do something with it (making it worth paying the property tax)
Re: Left with Nothing
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Do you think income tax has proven a big disincentive for people to go out and work? (To ancitipate an obvious rebuttal: yes, I will admit that inheritance tax has probably put people off the idea of dying.)
Higher rate income tax certainly does. Tax bands certainly provide a big disincentive for bothering to get a better job/raise.
Inheritance tax is very unfair. If you are rich enough, you'll plan around it and avoid it. But if you're not rich enough, your kids will not only lose their parents, they'll be sent a bill from the government. Which at best is a tad insensitive.
Add to that the fact that the thresholds for inheritance tax haven't been raised properly, so that someone with a 1 bedroom apartment in London will be subject to inheritance tax, it all seems pretty unfair, and perverse for the government to effectively profit from peoples death.
Re: Left with Nothing
#89Tell me again how government does such a wonderful job protecting the weakest & most vulnerable.
Tell me again what system actually does a wonderful job
Re: Left with Nothing
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's privatization of tax collection; a Randian/Thatcherite dream.
Collection of taxes being private, and the fairness of the rules are two entirely different things. "Randian/Thatcherite dream"...as if they want people to lose their houses. You are very misinformed on Objectivist principles.
The principles emphasize process over outcome. So it's not that they want people to lose their homes, but if things happen the 'right' way and that's the outcome, so be it.