Quatloos!

I don't think this belongs in this thread, either, but perhaps fuzzy is a TP. I'm tempted to move it directly to archive, rather than to Potpouri, as it also contains demonstrably false statements.

If you're paying 10 times the amount of taxes in CA as in HI, it's probably because the property's assessed value is 20 times.

fuzzrabbit wrote: I can't MOVE! I get 45 days to id a place to 1031 into, and if that falls through (not uncommon) I HAVE to pay $159K on an $800K farm sale.

If I recall section 1031 correctly, you are allowed to identify multiple potential replacement properties within the 45 day period, and then complete the acquisition of one (or more) of those within the 180 day period (or the time your income tax return is due if that is earlier).

jcolvin2 wrote:If I recall section 1031 correctly, you are allowed to identify multiple potential replacement properties within the 45 day period, and then complete the acquisition of one (or more) of those within the 180 day period (or the time your income tax return is due if that is earlier).

Quite correct. What fuzz seems to have failed to notice is that you can't 1031 a personal residence, even if it's not your principle residence or it is on a farm.

fuzzrabbit wrote:(1) It has more to do with paying high civil servant wages so THEY can afford the ridiculous price of real estate there.

(2)The income tax is a scam.

(3) Don't SCOTUS appointees get there by way of them?

(1) Did you ever take the time to see what portion of tax revenues goes to paying civil service salaries versus the portion which is spent elsewhere? I'm positive you didn't because if you had, you wouldn't have made such a statement.

(2) Exaxtly how and why is it a scam?

(3) Could you please explain what you are getting at there.

Ranting doesn't stand on its own.

Facts -- or this thread may go to the TP Looney Bin

The facts don't support fuzzrabbit's claims. If you want to see where the money goes, you can find it here:

http://www.sccgov.org/sites/scc/countyg ... sions.aspx

Like many municipalities, Santa Clara County has a major problem on its hands to fund pensions, retiree healthcare, and healthcare costs of current employees. Furthermore it is an enormous metropolitan area with all of the usual costs of infrastructure and services. Its population is much greater than the state of Hawaii. Furthermore it is an affluent area (median household income more than $20k over that of Hawaii) with a lot of high-paying jobs, so if you don't have one of those high-paying jobs, it might not be a great choice since you will be competing with technology workers for housing. There are much more affordable places to live in California.

CaptainKickback wrote:As for the whole tariffs issue, remember this, today a tarrif would drive up the price of imported goods (and reduce the impetus for reducing the price of domestic goods), which in turn affects the poor the most.

In the short run that's true. On a level playing field, domestic and foreign manufacturing could go head-to-head to produce the best goods at the best price. But in the international market we're not dealing with a level playing field. In the long run tariffs provide protection of domestic manufacturing and domestic employment. And unless you plan on keeping the poor forever on the government teat, the thing which REALLY affects the poor the most is protecting domestic jobs.

On the one hand, the US government enforces domestic labor laws which drive up the cost of labor, and enforces domestic environmental restrictions which drive up the cost of materials. But China, for one, does not have or enforce the same standards. On the other hand, the same US government says it's perfectly OK for trading partner countries like Most Favored Nation China to flood US markets with goods priced so cheaply that US manufacturers can not possibly compete.

The inevitable result? Given two products of comparable quality, price sensitive customers buy the cheaper products produced overseas. Domestic manufacturing slows down from lack of buyers. Domestic jobs are eliminated in favor of jobs overseas.

The lack of jobs hurts the poor much worse than the prices of goods.

The only property I've owned was a lesson in insoluble problems. 21 plus acres on the end of a class IV road in Concord, VT, wrestled back from a TP who said it was a gift until a common friend privy to the land deal set him right. Down the hill from a violent felon who had sold the parcel of land to pay his lawyer so he would be able to plea the charges against him at the time.
What I found out was that out of state residents who own Vermont land would pay 80% of any net profit the first year to discourage speculation. Taxes were small on the land and I ended up having to clean up the land from the mess the TP and his family had left in order to just list the property. Owning property looks to me like a losing proposition unless it is totally affordable in all respects as I believe debt, even as a mortgage ("death"-"pledge"), is unwise for most who are sold on the benefits by real estate hucksters.