May 3, 2016 at 5:32 pm #842618
The Mayor and the City Council which us to believe that they can solve any problem in the City by raising property taxes with levys that are 2 to 3 times higher than the previous levy that is expiring and which failed to cure the problem over the last 7 years. Why is housing unaffordable? Demand is greater than supply AND Property taxes and levies keep skyrocketing.
So now we have another new levy to make housing more affordable which is 2X larger than the old levy which the Times says was $145MM. Now they are asking for $290MM. Even accounting for the lowest inflation in decades, the old levy would only be $173MM. So lets keep raising property taxes and soon we will all be able to stay in our unaffordable homes. And schedule the vote for August 4 when the City Council knows darn well there will be limited voters and attention paid to it. Have some guts and schedule for a real election, like November 2016. We must vote these types of levies down or the Mayor and the City Council will keep robbing us every chance they get.
May 4, 2016 at 10:20 pm #842805
- This topic was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by JayDee.
In Seattle? Really? Passive Aggressive Government? This city knows what is best for you and your money!!! I just might have to move. Hey, most of you keep electing Demo/Socialists. This is what we get.May 5, 2016 at 7:27 am #842860
The irony is overwhelming. We’re going to make housing more affordable by raising taxes on housing. HahahahaMay 5, 2016 at 10:09 am #842889
Tan, you summed it up perfectly. There seems to be an assumption that incomes rise proportionately with property values. Not so, especially if you’re older or retired.
The real elephant in the room is overpopulation. A more fair tax system would include elimination of tax breaks for breeders, and an income tax.May 7, 2016 at 12:20 am #843089May 7, 2016 at 1:33 am #843092
anonyme…by “breeders” do you mean families having children? Seriously? I find that term quite disgusting.May 7, 2016 at 6:41 am #843102
Overpopulation is global, and experienced locally. Humans are mammals, and human ‘reproduction’ is not in any way more noble than that of any other animal. The term “breeding” is perfectly appropriate, especially in reference to an animal that is breeding it’s way to extinction.May 7, 2016 at 9:19 am #843122
Off topic: Many of our problems that we argue about (Global warming, destruction of rain forest, acidification of the ocean…) are tied to the fact there are too many of us humans for the planet/or local unstable political situation to support. As Edward Abbey observed endless growth is the ideology of a cancerous cell. I am not certain the housing levy is a symptom, but it is reflective of the depth of our political discourse. Like us, the City is expected to grow asymptotically with no end in sight. Ballard and West Seattle, as urban villages, have absorbed many times the growth originally projected in the Urban Village plans yet there is no changes suggested. Flame off.
May 7, 2016 at 3:28 pm #843172
- This reply was modified 3 years, 9 months ago by JayDee. Reason: clarity
Thank you, Jay Dee. It was not my intention to re-route your topic, but it appears that we agree on the points of the diversion. However, I do think that housing shortages are a very real and obvious symptom of the cancer that is overpopulation.May 7, 2016 at 5:39 pm #843205
“Breeder” IS a derogatory, offensive term. Please do not use it here.
Also, previous post flagged for an even more derogatory attack and has been deleted.
-TracyMay 8, 2016 at 9:30 am #843281
WSB, so why exactly did you delete my post but leave anonyme’s post where you yourself said that a “derogatory, offensive term” was used? Do you not recognize the bias you show to your longtime forum posters? They are allowed to post all manner of hateful speech, but you for whatever reason seem to tolerate their venom. I like your blog, but I would hardly call it independent, or use the term journalist. Why don’t you try to show some impartiality and recognize that these forums are used as a playground for some pretty hateful regulars that frequent here. At the very least you could show equal treatment and delete the post that caused the response you found so much more derogatory? You used the term “attack”, but who exactly do you feel started it? Way to celebrate Mother’s Day by allowing all manner of bashing of a human’s decision to have children.May 8, 2016 at 2:33 pm #843308
it’s still offensive. So…do you have a solution? Maybe be like China, and outlaw having more than one child? Outlaw sex? just give every 12 year old a vasectomy, or tubal ligation, and no more children? When we’re gone we/re gone? No more population? You choice, I’m assuming is that you had no children…and that was YOUR choice. No one forced you to not have them. Would you like to see that for everyone else, though? You complain…do you have solutions?May 8, 2016 at 5:49 pm #843327
My original point stands: Why are we the citizens of the city required to be taxed to make the city affordable? Seems like a double negative where those who are taxed out of their homes in hopes they can qualify for rent in a tax-subsidized apartment? I plan on living in my home when I retire but when I am no longer earning $ that money will be dear especially at 2-3% interest/dividend rates. But we are expected to pony up tax levy monies at the rate of 17% interest a year over 7 years for another levy? (I neglected marginal inflation, BTW)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.