Increasing valuations are not the cause of increasing taxes. The mil rate is calculated by dividing the total spending by the total property valuation. There are three numbers. Change one of them and a second is available to change accordingly so the product is the spending, which equals the total taxes. This is basic arithmetic, not desires of deep and wide swamp creatures with magical powers in cahoots with evil bankers. What they spend is the amount of taxes they raise.

Collectivists and altruists will not change their premises in a collapse. People only become more frightened and cling to wider government powers to save them in yet another scheme. Knowledge does not miraculously appear in people's minds. It takes decades of thought and education.

In the artificially accelerated fictional plot, John Galt talked to the best and most moral key producers individually as they were suddenly and dramatically clobbered. The worst of the looters disappeared as no threat. Even Hank Rearden's tribunal cowered and surrendered to a speech. A small minority withdrew their minds and the whole country collapsed. It was romantic fiction with extremes in abstract form. The fictional plot is not the way this world works and not a basis for arguing for a strike.

The cities do not get more in taxes when property valuations increase; that only lowers the mil rate unless the total spending also increases more.

The mortgage interest deduction is supported by anyone who would otherwise pay higher taxes, just like any deduction or any lower rate. As long as rates are high that battle will continue for obvious reasons that are not inadvertent. Defending lower taxes is not a "swamp" with mysterious "implicit alignments of swamp interests" somehow acting like a conspiracy of evil bankers that otherwise can't be found.

But if was a city manager I would want to support any laws which resulted in valuations going up and people moving around to different houses. Hundred and also the total tax receipts. The swamp is deep and wideThat way I could spend more and wind up increasing the tax rate per

I agree that she intended for AS to change people’s minds by showing them where collectivism is heading. She also intended to show how the producers prolong the looters system by producing Withdrawing ones productive actions I agree does not provide the intellectual revolution needed. But I do think that the only thing that will get people to consider a new philosophy will be experiencing the collapse of the collectivist one. John Galt didn’t really spread his ideas until the collectivism system collapsed due to his stopping of the motor of the eorld

An increased valuation that is higher for one property owner compared to the rest will raise his taxes in comparison to the rest. The total tax receipts are the total spent regardless of the valuations, which only change the mil rate. In some parts of the country like California (proposition 13), Florida, and elsewhere, apparently including you, increases in property valuation for tax purposes are limited until the property is sold. Disparities in active valuations cause disparities in how taxes are distributed among different owners. It does not change the total tax receipts. If no one sold his property for decades, the major change would be for the mil rate to go up.

In some cases like California the property tax spending was limited through a maze of rules, so the state policies effectively circumvented it with massive increases in state subsidies to the cities and towns, resulting in higher state taxes and more state control over local affairs. This is the typical result everywhere when property taxes are limited by whatever means.

If only a particular tax is limited, or only property valuations or mil rates are limited, there will always be another tax to keep the total spending and taxes up.

That’s true but the cities gain when property valuations rise. Whether thru inflation, or changes in demand caused by mortgage interest deductions. I am just saying that the mortgage interest deduction is supported by all the special interest groups that benefit from it. It’s not a standard conspiracy but it’s an inadvertent alignment of swamp jntetests

Absolutely true. And they play games every year by assessing property values arbitrarily up about 20% and I have to remember to fight the new assessment within a two week “window” or the new vsluarion stsnds. Pretty crooked if u as. Me

Any kind of private property, including patents, is part of every 'business model'. No 'need' in any sector of the economy justifies taking private property either directly or through price controls.

They calculate the mil rate based on the projected expenses in the budget. If there is an "emergency" and they go over, or money is borrowed for a bond, that additional money to pay it back becomes part of the next expense calculation, which in turn is used to calculate the next mil rate. That they do whatever they can to exceed spending limitations with creative loopholes does not mean that property values determine the spending and taxes.

Plus, every year they “propose” s valuation adjustment of about 20% and you have to appeal within about two weeks, or the 20% vvaluatuon adjustment stands. Providing I don’t sell the property they can’t increase my actual tax bill by more than 3% per year regardless of this. “Valuation”. But selling of the property bumps the tax bill for the new owner up to the new valuation times the it assessed valuation tines the property tax rate per hundred. So I fight the increase every year

That is the unique aspect of drug companies and why a normal business model does not fit them.

Exactly, this is just a different form of manipulation.They cover it up with such a huge amount of advertising, double talk and misleading statements, people end up loving them more when they are done.

The mil rate is calculated by dividing what they spend by the total property evaluation. Annual automatic mil rate increases in evaluation are only to smooth out the changes between the direct estimates of market value. The mil rate is a consequence of what they spend and the total assessed property valuation. The total tax receipts are the total they spend. Changes in property evaluation have no effect on that. Changes in property evaluation affect the mil rate they set so that the receipts come out to be what they spend, and how the taxes are distributed. If one property value goes up and another goes down, the taxes are applied accordingly, with the total collected equal to the total spent. The Federal mortgage interest deduction was not a plot to raise property taxes.

Ewv, while they spend as much as they can, that is why they borrow like madmen. In Oregon, they are limited to a 3% a year increase (restricted by a law passed by a popular submitted law they tried to kill 8 different ways). They do spend as much as they get, they budget to "projected revenue" then borroe when it doesn't meet expectations, and emergencies come up that they do not budget for either. That is the aggravating, irresponsible thing called "government". The Feds are no different, but spend as much as they can to get everyone what they need to keep supporting them. One reason I think most people who can see this are fed up.

There are so many overlapping and contradictory regulations that they can get anyone for anything. Aside from ordinary arithmetic and numbers in tables, whatever you don't pay or think you don't have to pay based on interpretations is only by convention. If they had more auditors they could go crazy collecting more taxes, interest and penalties.

Thats the Oregon model, pretty much.

In Nevada they get an automatic 3% minimum increase in valuation every year. On top if that they charge an amount per 1000 valuation that seems to done behind closed doors. So they take their assessed valuation which they decide and multiply it by their tax per thousand of valuation. They tax as much as they an get away with

The whole thing is inherently evil

I would say that the tax system has getten so complicated courtesy of the swamp that people are making too many decisions to avoid taxation and it’s cutting into the total tax receipts. Every change they make has too many unintentional consequences to ready figure out

Ayn Rand was disappointed that the ideas in Atlas Shrugged did not change how people think and act. That was not because people kept producing; they did not understand and accept the truth of the ideas.

The answer to that is not to try to wreck the economy and that is not what Ayn Rand advocated. If the current system collapses it will bring an "end" all right, after which it will be worse. The tension in the plot between Dagny and the strikers was put there by Ayn Rand for the purpose of the book; it has nothing to do with the fact collapse is not a solution and does not in logic support trying to do it. The strike and the return of the strikers unopposed were fiction.

I don't support the taxes. Cities don't raise taxes because of increases in nominal home values. The taxes collected are the amount they spend; that is how the property tax rate is calculated. They spend as much as they can get away with regardless of home values.

They don't periodically cut taxes back to some baseline, they partially back off in the name of addressing the complaints as they manipulate the system with more shift and shaft. The general trend is progressively more and more taxes and controls.

An unfortunate side effect of tax reductions is that as people earn more, government collects more in total revenue than before the tax reduction. Republicans like that and claim it is the justification of the tax reductions; never mentioning that it is our money and the goal of tax cuts is so we keep it, not give more to them. Then they squeeze the taxes up again over time until there is another backlash as they strive to maximize the take and the controls.

High income taxes prevent people from saving and becoming wealthy, making it even harder for high expenses like buying a home. Those who provide mortgages don't want their business harmed either. If taxes were not so high there would be no need for the exemption. It is another statist distortion claimed to solve a problem caused by statism.

One major reason that there are so many complicated rules for deductions, depreciations, etc. is that different kinds of personal and business situations are hit differently and to different degrees by the high taxes. Of course people clamor for deductions. What else can they do when there is no hope of lowering taxes and government spending? It is the other side of the pressure group warfare of the welfare state: pressure group self defense. It is not an excuse to denounce mortgages as "slavery" and banking as a sinister force. Simply repeating over and over that the deductions people want are really a banking conspiracy is unconvincing.

Trump is oblivious to all of this and thinks people want "simplification" by eliminating their deductions. He's too stupid to realize that if we were willing to pay even higher taxes for "simplification" we could already do that by ignoring all the paper work and "simply" paying more taxes than we have to. Or perhaps he thinks we are too stupid to realize it.

Living under tribalism is not being at "peace". It means living without your rights. Surrender is not "peace".