In light of the recent high costs of home ownership, it is interesting to find that the property tax rates have not changed in California and Washington state since the 1980's. Yet the amount that homeowners have paid to the government has increased dramatically. In addition to the causes already mentioned, another cause is the federal government's refinance program, which was introduced circa 2011. This opened the door for a new, close cooperation between elected officials, and that of banks and large real estate entities. How does it work?
The Housing market crashed in 2008, as well as the auto industry and the economy at large. Afterwards, for the alleged purpose of alleviating financial strain and making home ownership "more affordable", the government introduced a program that would allow owners to "refinance" their home at a lower rate to get a lower payment. Yet doing this involves recertification from the state, and with it, a new appraisal of the property value. This means that the homeowner's expenses are now based on the newly assigned values, rather than on the value of the home when it was bought. This allows the state to collect far more money now than it ever did prior to refinancing, without ever raising the tax rate. This in turn allows real estate corporations to collect more on a sale.
Here is an example: You buy a home in 1998, at $70,000. You refinance the home in 2011, and now it is appraised at $200,000. Paying 1.2% at $70,000 = $840, whereas 1.2% at $200,000 = $2,400. This illustrates that depending on how the property is appraised at the time of refinancing, any money that may have been saved by refinancing at a lower rate is lost, and often lost many times over, to the state.
All of this is good reason enough on its own to believe that this is a scam, designed to take more of the wealth and assets of the middle class, doing so ironically under the guise of making home ownership "more affordable". The extent and scope of this confiscation scheme is multiplied exponentially when combined with the practice of gentrification.
www.donaldjtrump.com
Interact with other like-minded supporters of the RSBN Community and know the others in the chat are supporting Right Side Broadcasting just like you! Encourage others to join the chat and have fun!
Note: Chat is moderated to prevent NSFW content. Keep it civil, clean and respectful!
The failure of California leadership to reflect on their policies in the midst of the 1 trillion dollar drainage from their state can only mean one thing: They know what they are doing, and they are driving people away deliberately. Why would this be? It could only be because they are not concerned simply with the state of California or its welfare, but are instead part of a nationwide agenda that seeks to push the wealthy into all parts of the country. This is actually a veiled war against the middle class suburbs and rural America. This process involves county commissioners and the building/zoning departments who take land that was intended for agriculture/industrial use and "rezone" it for a "planned development project" (PDP). Rezoning land in this way is what permits far more population in a given area than what the area was meant for, which raises property values and costs of living in the given area far beyond true market conditions and prices out the homeowners already living ...
Although high interest rates can discourage loans and "free-wheeling" spending, they encourage thrift, savings and investment. This protects people's money against the erosion of the dollar and allows them to purchase the far fewer things of true value and enrichment. Although this may appear as "slower economic growth" or even a "shrinking economy", it represents a healthy simplification of the economy, and leaves more room for the existence of vital industry, which depends on this savings and investment to succeed. "Economic growth" has always been a high priority, yet when taking into consideration all of the possible things that could represent this "growth", this term is so vague as to be almost meaningless on its own. What do we really want the economy to look like?
It is far better to have one meaningful factory or shop, than to have what amounts to clutter, which takes up more land, raises property values and takes away from the possibility for such a shop to ever exist or ...
