Comments for Closing the Ag Loophole at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 34 out of 20 comments http://www.theind.com Wed, 19 Jun 2013 02:36:08 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-24955 No comment from Ko-Mo? I guess he was spending too much time trying to get Doise elected. - the original northsidian Tue, 22 Nov 2011 12:21:21 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-23548 What is Conrad Como's plan to correct this injustice? - the original northsidian Sun, 16 Oct 2011 13:33:50 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22295 Instead of allowing these landowners to "lose their ag status," I say we fine them on top of that for failing to comply with local tax laws. They should only get the ag status via farmland. No farm land, then no ag status. Failure to report should be a punishment. - UtahCajun Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:25:41 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22248 dear Tim: I'm thinking the value should go up at the time that the actual owner makes an improvement. (loathe using Calif for an example but it does work here) "Raw" land is very different from already developed commercial land and residential neighborhoods. There could also be a huge problem with variances that allow a new commercial endeavor in what was previously a residential. Remember when the coffee plant wanted to go commercial, was that on Moss Street? That investor would have sold 1/2 of the property to another interest, essentially getting his newly-acclaimed-commercial-but-only-paid-residential-value-land for free and maybe even a large cash profit due to the variance. Quite a portfolio coup! Would each of those neighborhoods surrounding been suddenly taxed exponentially? What's to prevent the proverbial "evil and greedy developer" from squeezing out the neighbors who refuse to sell to him and cannot afford a sudden increase? Remember, wages and raises don't come up exponentially, like the value of property next door might. And for people on "fixed incomes", it's not coming up at all. While the loophole could be addressed, property owners need protection from development that does not coincide with their own life plans and in particular the present threat of eminent domain abuse that we saw with HB 531 which is a present and real threat to Upper Lafayette. - realitycheck Tue, 20 Sep 2011 08:40:38 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22179 the original northsidian "James, do you have a lot of property? Or does your boss? We don't need a local income tax, we need a REVOLUTION!! ------------------------- No, sorry don't own much real estate, boss too. As an investment, I am luke warm on it. REVOLUTION? If you mean at the ballot box that's OK but guns and bombs, no thanks. - James Melancon Sun, 18 Sep 2011 20:14:05 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22174 James, do you have a lot of property? Or does your boss? We don't need a local income tax, we need a REVOLUTION!! - the original northsidian Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:26:35 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22169 by ragin_cajun "If a landowner can't afford to pay taxes on his property, he loses it". --------------------- Even now that can happen. Nevertheless, property tax is a poor method of taxation. Property tax is a wealth tax just like the Federal estate or so-called death tax. Perhaps we should call it a pre-need death tax; Pre-needed by our elected officials. - James Melancon Sun, 18 Sep 2011 16:36:55 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22168 by the original northsidian "I want everyone to be taxed accordingly". ------------------ Agreed. That's why an income tax is better than property tax. It taxes everyone according to their income; not net worth. Net worth in this case limited to real estate. Property tax is inherently regressive. It is a subjective measure of a changing value. Income tax, relative to the value of a dollar over a calender year, is an objective value. Besides, a local income tax can be easier to administer. You base it on a percentage. The percentage could be related to Federal or State taxable income or the Federal or State tax. by the original northsidian "I do not want a local tax, because the abuse will increase geometrically for the politically connected". ------------------------- The property tax is a local tax and all taxes are politically connected. - James Melancon Sun, 18 Sep 2011 16:29:28 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22165 "The only thing worst than more taxes is unequal distribution of the tax burden based on arbitrary political power of one class over another. " This is THE point! This whole "ability to pay" nonsense has been used and abused for so long now, that half the country now pays nothing and the other half pays everything. If a landowner can't afford to pay taxes on his property, he loses it. That's life. If I can't afford to pay tax on MY property, that is what will happen to me and no one here or at City Hall will shed a single tear over my misfortune. Why should ANYONE be treated any different? - ragin_cajun Sun, 18 Sep 2011 11:06:49 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22160 "COJRAD COMEAUX WAS BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY EVERY Administration, going back to his first term, the tax dodgers and the monopolist of the land flanking Ambassador which was purchased by the insiders, Andrus'S, Saloom's, Hebert's Young's, was pre Joey's time and he has never gotten over the fact he was not in on the ground floor, but that was going all the way back prior to Bowen, and Lastrapes, this was when JOEY was selling his birdseed to the cronys children, and now Joey has stepped into the same shoes, Walkin and Talkin A LA KENNY BOWEN, and he is trying his best to appease everyone of his hanger-on cronys, like the GreenAmbulanceMan and the Festermaker Surveyman with the uncalibrated scope. COMEAUX is just the Politically correct pimpmeister, show everyone how you bend over Conrat. - NORTHSIDIAN SHOTGUN Sun, 18 Sep 2011 08:44:09 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22157 dear realitycheck: see the problem is everyone is having to pay property taxes based on what is happening "next door". everyone that is except anyone with more than 3 acres who applies for agricultural exemption. If the value of land, what other criteria of land use do you think should be exempt from the same rate of property taxes as everyone else. Even property taxes on "residential" (home) is based on what is happening next door. Why should an "investor" in ag exempt lands have a different rate then the homeowners or other land use. Everyone is against more taxes. The only thing worst than more taxes is unequal distribution of the tax burden based on arbitrary political power of one class over another. - Tim Supple Sat, 17 Sep 2011 23:11:09 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22153 perhaps TheInd could take up the issue of "redlining" in north Lafayette? How many decades will this issue be ignored? We now the poverty pimps on both sides benefit, but maybe you TheInd could expose this problem as well? - realitycheck Sat, 17 Sep 2011 20:53:46 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22147 James Melancon: The subject is about landowners paying the agriculture tax rate when the land is not used for that purpose. Plain and simple. What don't you and the other @## K!$$34$ not understand about that? I want everyone to be taxed accordingly. I do not want a local tax, because the abuse will increase geometrically for the politically connected. Can't you people see the abuse now! That is why people hate politicians & the politically connected. Because the little man always gets the 2 1/2 crooked from the big boys!! Ya'll are pissed off because the Ind. is exposing all of the so say civic minded business men who are screwing the system. If everyone paid their fair share maybe, just maybe, they would not be wanting tax increases ever 3 frickin' years!! - the original northsidian Sat, 17 Sep 2011 17:36:03 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22144 by realitycheck "A property owner should not be taxed according to what is happening next door". ------------------------ Excellent comments. Nonetheless, someone, not me, will see Marxism in them :-( - James Melancon Sat, 17 Sep 2011 14:21:11 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22142 A property owner should not be taxed according to what is happening next door. This opens the door to being squeezed out of one's property by the next door neighbor, by commercial enterprises, etc. Talk about having to keep up with the Joneses just to survive! An investor should be able to sit on a property until such a time as he wishes to make improvements or sell; in his own time. Think of the people who buy a piece of property, and pay on it over time, dreaming of the day they will build their "dream retirement home" and/or divide it amongst their kids. After 10 years of making land payments with 5 left to go, a place like OLOL goes up 10 acres away and suddenly, they are facing an enormous bill for taxes? NO! In Calif, the property owner decides to raise his own taxes at the time he commits to making improvements. For instance, considerations of enlarging one's home includes the higher taxes that will accompany the improvement. One has to be able to afford both. Otherwise, taxes increase at the point of sale which is the only time that the owner is actually making any money from the increased values surrounding him. - realitycheck Sat, 17 Sep 2011 13:39:53 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22139 The subject under discussion was whether or not everyone should have the same property tax rate? Or is it that "some are more equal then others" - Tim Supple Sat, 17 Sep 2011 12:00:42 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22135 by ragin_cajun "Sorry, but you ARE a Marxist. Marx wanted a heavy, regressive income tax." ------------------------------- Sorry, but where did I say heavy and regressive, or progressive? Moreover, the idea of an income tax predates Marx. The British had one decades before Marx and the U.S. considered one in the early 19th century. During the Civil War, Lincoln had one but it was later declared unconstitutional after the war. The 16th amendment which changed the constitution to allow income taxes was proposed by President Taft in 1909 and passed by Congress that year. It is interesting to note that Lincoln, Taft, and the Congress of 1909 were all Republicans. As to my position, I would have a flat rate income tax (about 20% or less) with an low personal exemption and elimination of all credits and deductions. - James Melancon Sat, 17 Sep 2011 08:18:59 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22110 Yeah, I've heard the cliche. I just don't buy it. I have no sympathy at all for a man who Has so much land he can't pay his taxes. Sorry, but you ARE a Marxist. Go read the Communist Manifesto and see how many of his 10 demands you support. Marx wanted a heavy, regressive income tax. You do, too. Every Libertarian I'VE ever met hates taxes, progressive income taxes most of all. So you're NOT in line with Libertarian ideas. Given your unfamiliarity with Marxism and Libertarianism, I think it's reasonable to presume that you have not thought any of this out, and certainly not read any of this stuff. So your philosophy is a "feeling" you have? A set of beliefs you have and you know not why? You have a worldview and no idea how you've formed it. - ragin_cajun Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:44:00 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22105 by ragin_cajun "First of all, a person who owns property IS able to pay". -------------------- There is a cliche "land poor", often farmers and ranchers are in this category. It is not unusual for someone to have a high net worth made up mostly of land and little cash. The Federal Estate tax rules have special rules for this category when it comes to valuing and paying taxes due. Sorry, not a Marxist. I am mostly inline with Libertarian ideas. Besides I doubt Marx would have taxation in his perfect world since no one would own anything. - James Melancon Fri, 16 Sep 2011 13:37:56 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/9002-closing-the-ag-loophole#comment-22097 First of all, a person who owns property IS able to pay. Second of all, I don't accept that a tax based on ability to pay is superior. It is certainly more "progressive", and it is right in line with Karl Marx's demands in the Communist Manifesto, but it is not "superior". The idea that those with the "ability to pay" should pay more taxes than those deemed less able to pay is exactly consistent with another mantra introduced by Karl Marx -- "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" So tell us James, have you always been a Marxist? A Socialist? How long have you advocated Marxist ideology? Would you support other tenets of Marxism, like "abolition of all right of inheritance", or perhaps a "state monopoly on credit"? How did you become a Marxist? Did you read and think it through and choose collectivism over individualism conciously? Or did these Marxist ideas become your worldview by osmosis, without your concious and willful effort? Do you even REALIZE that you ARE a Socialist? I'm very serious, I'm very curious, and I really want to know just how a person come to hold such views while living a life of luxury and freedom in the only country that has ever been founded on the premise of individual liberty and limited government? In all seriousness, with all due respect, please explain that to me. I have always wondered how an American can arrive at Socialism as the answer to anything. - ragin_cajun Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:22:50 +0100