Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Woodsy
{snip} Taxation by its very nature is a sore subject. Nobody likes paying taxes. {another snip} I as a NH resident (Laconia) have no desire to pay any more in taxes than is required. I do however have a vested interest in the city and state in which I live. I require the city council and the mayor to spend the money wisely in a way that is in the best interest of the all of the residents of the city. I don’t have children, but I do think a new high school would be a good thing for Laconia, even though I know building the new school will increase my taxes.
Non-resident property owners generally do not particularly care what is best for the city or town. They are only concerned about themselves, keeping their taxes and other assorted costs of ownership as low as possible. I have absolutely no desire to give them any say in how the tax revenues get spent. If you don’t like how it’s done, move up here, become a resident, then vote accordingly, or sell out, pocket a big check and go somehwere else!
Woodsy
|
The question of taxation comes up every year on this forum and usually makes for an interesting, if ... ummm ... "spirited" debate. There are 2 questions I would ask of anyone. First, is the present system of taxation fair ? Betcha everyone says no
The next would be what would be a more fair scheme. Without going into the specifics, I would respond that such a system would assess taxes based upon the benefit accrued (or cost incurred). Only a few few would argue that such a thing is unfair. Whether such a system is workable, attainable or even desirable I won't address. Let me use school funding as an example of what I mean. I think most people would say public schooling is a good idea and that we all get some benefit from it. To that end everyone, even out of state property owners, should pay some of the costs. That said, the kid in school reaps most of the benefit and as such his/her parental units should (I say) pay the majority of the cost. We don't do this, although various fees and such are moving it in this direction. Whether such a system would work or not can be debated, but at least it would be (more) fair (IMHO). Simply telling people "go somewhere else" is somewhat akin (I'm exaggerating for effect) to saying Jim Crow laws were acceptable because the black man could have moved North. While NH's property taxation system doesn't rise to the same level of disenfranchisement of the various Jim Crow laws, taxation w/o represention is still one of those key conceptual building blocks that was an impetus for this country. Figuring out a more fair scheme would ease the complaints of non-residents while not ceding local control to them.
ps - And yes I do understand you were responding the to stupid Granite Head retort