Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. So it looks like he's updated his proposal to focus on homes $1.5m+ and also 5m+. I'm a little better with this, although it seems that with inflation, this will need to be updated in 10 years when 1.5m is no longer a "mansion."

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/more-details-emerge-on-proposed-dc-mansion-tax/15396

In other words, OP, as long as it doesn't cost you, it's fine. You want stuff for free but don't want to have to pay into the system to get it.

This.

LOL. "I'M barely getting by with my 1 million dollar home, but HE is rich with his 1.5 million dollar home."

We stretched and stretched to buy our home 10 years ago at WAY less than 1 million. It happened to be a good investment and is appraised at just under a million now. But that doesn’t mean that we can afford some kind of luxury home tax. It means that we are a couple of poors who made a smart real estate investment.

OP here, yes, this is our situation too. We're in a somewhat hot area and so I think our home would appraise for close to $1m pretty soon, but it's far from a mansion, and we're quite far from rich.

Do you really not recognize your privilege? You bought a home for a relatively low amount and it's now worth $1 million dollars. You have major equity in this home. If you were truly "poor" you would sell the house if you couldn't afford the taxes and buy somewhere cheaper. But no, you just want to cry poor from your million dollar home.

You seem like you might be kind of dumb so I’ll try to explain this in simple terms. People who bought their homes for a modest price and then had the neighborhood around it rise sharply in value do not actually have any extra cash flow as a result of that. They’re still making the same modest income - they just happen to have an unexpected amount of equity in their house. But that doesn’t translate to actual dollars in the bank.

No, you're the dumb one, but let me try to explain it to you slowly so you could understand. If you sold that million dollar home, you'd have many many dollars in the bank representing your equity. You choose to live in an expensive area, and complain about sharing your fair share of taxes. If you don't like being taxed on your Richie Rich home, move.

+1 This is what happens with gentrification. People cash out on their homes when the taxes become too expensive and move somewhere they find more affordable. The fact that people aren't doing so means they aren't nearly as poor as they claim to be.

Gentrification is a bad thing. People shouldn’t be pushed out of their homes because they can’t afford the new tax assessment. Dumb.

Let me ask this: if we're going to tax property, why shouldn't it be progressive, like income taxes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. So it looks like he's updated his proposal to focus on homes $1.5m+ and also 5m+. I'm a little better with this, although it seems that with inflation, this will need to be updated in 10 years when 1.5m is no longer a "mansion."

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/more-details-emerge-on-proposed-dc-mansion-tax/15396

In other words, OP, as long as it doesn't cost you, it's fine. You want stuff for free but don't want to have to pay into the system to get it.

This.

LOL. "I'M barely getting by with my 1 million dollar home, but HE is rich with his 1.5 million dollar home."

We stretched and stretched to buy our home 10 years ago at WAY less than 1 million. It happened to be a good investment and is appraised at just under a million now. But that doesn’t mean that we can afford some kind of luxury home tax. It means that we are a couple of poors who made a smart real estate investment.

OP here, yes, this is our situation too. We're in a somewhat hot area and so I think our home would appraise for close to $1m pretty soon, but it's far from a mansion, and we're quite far from rich.

Do you really not recognize your privilege? You bought a home for a relatively low amount and it's now worth $1 million dollars. You have major equity in this home. If you were truly "poor" you would sell the house if you couldn't afford the taxes and buy somewhere cheaper. But no, you just want to cry poor from your million dollar home.

You seem like you might be kind of dumb so I’ll try to explain this in simple terms. People who bought their homes for a modest price and then had the neighborhood around it rise sharply in value do not actually have any extra cash flow as a result of that. They’re still making the same modest income - they just happen to have an unexpected amount of equity in their house. But that doesn’t translate to actual dollars in the bank.

No, you're the dumb one, but let me try to explain it to you slowly so you could understand. If you sold that million dollar home, you'd have many many dollars in the bank representing your equity. You choose to live in an expensive area, and complain about sharing your fair share of taxes. If you don't like being taxed on your Richie Rich home, move.

+1 This is what happens with gentrification. People cash out on their homes when the taxes become too expensive and move somewhere they find more affordable. The fact that people aren't doing so means they aren't nearly as poor as they claim to be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. So it looks like he's updated his proposal to focus on homes $1.5m+ and also 5m+. I'm a little better with this, although it seems that with inflation, this will need to be updated in 10 years when 1.5m is no longer a "mansion."

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/more-details-emerge-on-proposed-dc-mansion-tax/15396

In other words, OP, as long as it doesn't cost you, it's fine. You want stuff for free but don't want to have to pay into the system to get it.

This.

LOL. "I'M barely getting by with my 1 million dollar home, but HE is rich with his 1.5 million dollar home."

We stretched and stretched to buy our home 10 years ago at WAY less than 1 million. It happened to be a good investment and is appraised at just under a million now. But that doesn’t mean that we can afford some kind of luxury home tax. It means that we are a couple of poors who made a smart real estate investment.

OP here, yes, this is our situation too. We're in a somewhat hot area and so I think our home would appraise for close to $1m pretty soon, but it's far from a mansion, and we're quite far from rich.

Do you really not recognize your privilege? You bought a home for a relatively low amount and it's now worth $1 million dollars. You have major equity in this home. If you were truly "poor" you would sell the house if you couldn't afford the taxes and buy somewhere cheaper. But no, you just want to cry poor from your million dollar home.

You seem like you might be kind of dumb so I’ll try to explain this in simple terms. People who bought their homes for a modest price and then had the neighborhood around it rise sharply in value do not actually have any extra cash flow as a result of that. They’re still making the same modest income - they just happen to have an unexpected amount of equity in their house. But that doesn’t translate to actual dollars in the bank.

No, you're the dumb one, but let me try to explain it to you slowly so you could understand. If you sold that million dollar home, you'd have many many dollars in the bank representing your equity. You choose to live in an expensive area, and complain about sharing your fair share of taxes. If you don't like being taxed on your Richie Rich home, move.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"It's about redistributing the wealth, and I think that we can get a lot more recurring dollars in our budget to invest in the priorities that we should be investing in in the District."

Like transit?!

Grasso is the same council member who recently led the effort to decriminalize fare evasion on Metro trains and buses in the District. Metro estimates that fare evasion is a $25 MILLION recurring problem, and that was before it was decriminalized in DC. So having created a disincentive for folks to pay the fare, now he wants a tax increase to pay for services and investments like transit!

Woke doofus.

Omg, this guy. Regretting I ever voted from him.

Welcome to socialism folks. Vote accordingly in November.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. So it looks like he's updated his proposal to focus on homes $1.5m+ and also 5m+. I'm a little better with this, although it seems that with inflation, this will need to be updated in 10 years when 1.5m is no longer a "mansion."

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/more-details-emerge-on-proposed-dc-mansion-tax/15396

In other words, OP, as long as it doesn't cost you, it's fine. You want stuff for free but don't want to have to pay into the system to get it.

This.

LOL. "I'M barely getting by with my 1 million dollar home, but HE is rich with his 1.5 million dollar home."

We stretched and stretched to buy our home 10 years ago at WAY less than 1 million. It happened to be a good investment and is appraised at just under a million now. But that doesn’t mean that we can afford some kind of luxury home tax. It means that we are a couple of poors who made a smart real estate investment.

OP here, yes, this is our situation too. We're in a somewhat hot area and so I think our home would appraise for close to $1m pretty soon, but it's far from a mansion, and we're quite far from rich.

Do you really not recognize your privilege? You bought a home for a relatively low amount and it's now worth $1 million dollars. You have major equity in this home. If you were truly "poor" you would sell the house if you couldn't afford the taxes and buy somewhere cheaper. But no, you just want to cry poor from your million dollar home.

You seem like you might be kind of dumb so I’ll try to explain this in simple terms. People who bought their homes for a modest price and then had the neighborhood around it rise sharply in value do not actually have any extra cash flow as a result of that. They’re still making the same modest income - they just happen to have an unexpected amount of equity in their house. But that doesn’t translate to actual dollars in the bank.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. So it looks like he's updated his proposal to focus on homes $1.5m+ and also 5m+. I'm a little better with this, although it seems that with inflation, this will need to be updated in 10 years when 1.5m is no longer a "mansion."

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/more-details-emerge-on-proposed-dc-mansion-tax/15396

In other words, OP, as long as it doesn't cost you, it's fine. You want stuff for free but don't want to have to pay into the system to get it.

This.

LOL. "I'M barely getting by with my 1 million dollar home, but HE is rich with his 1.5 million dollar home."

We stretched and stretched to buy our home 10 years ago at WAY less than 1 million. It happened to be a good investment and is appraised at just under a million now. But that doesn’t mean that we can afford some kind of luxury home tax. It means that we are a couple of poors who made a smart real estate investment.

OP here, yes, this is our situation too. We're in a somewhat hot area and so I think our home would appraise for close to $1m pretty soon, but it's far from a mansion, and we're quite far from rich.

Do you really not recognize your privilege? You bought a home for a relatively low amount and it's now worth $1 million dollars. You have major equity in this home. If you were truly "poor" you would sell the house if you couldn't afford the taxes and buy somewhere cheaper. But no, you just want to cry poor from your million dollar home.

Anonymous wrote:I'm actually in favor of this in theory, but it doesn't account for the completely insane inflation of the cost of homes in this area. I imagine that there are a lot of people living in million dollar properties here who are barely scraping by and this added tax might actually be a huge burden on them.

As Thatcher said, "eventually you run out of other people's money"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. So it looks like he's updated his proposal to focus on homes $1.5m+ and also 5m+. I'm a little better with this, although it seems that with inflation, this will need to be updated in 10 years when 1.5m is no longer a "mansion."

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/more-details-emerge-on-proposed-dc-mansion-tax/15396

In other words, OP, as long as it doesn't cost you, it's fine. You want stuff for free but don't want to have to pay into the system to get it.

This.

LOL. "I'M barely getting by with my 1 million dollar home, but HE is rich with his 1.5 million dollar home."

We stretched and stretched to buy our home 10 years ago at WAY less than 1 million. It happened to be a good investment and is appraised at just under a million now. But that doesn’t mean that we can afford some kind of luxury home tax. It means that we are a couple of poors who made a smart real estate investment.

Yup. Out here in Fairfax County, they are doing a lot of 'socioeconomic redistributing' under the One Fairfax plan. Letters went out here in Great Falls to at least one of the elementary schools about 'redistricting the high school'. This means that they will be taking part of Great Falls and moving them out of Langley to Herndon, which is gang-ridden. This means our property values will plummet and probably make our area hard to sell. Now had the powers that be not destroyed Herndon High by massive immigration and sanctuary policies, the school would not be gang-ridden. But they did and the brilliant idea is to use some of Great Falls to fix the problem.

I feel for you and encourage you to read more about socialistic policies and how they promise the moon, but really is theft.

I'm actually in favor of this in theory, but it doesn't account for the completely insane inflation of the cost of homes in this area. I imagine that there are a lot of people living in million dollar properties here who are barely scraping by and this added tax might actually be a huge burden on them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. So it looks like he's updated his proposal to focus on homes $1.5m+ and also 5m+. I'm a little better with this, although it seems that with inflation, this will need to be updated in 10 years when 1.5m is no longer a "mansion."

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/more-details-emerge-on-proposed-dc-mansion-tax/15396

In other words, OP, as long as it doesn't cost you, it's fine. You want stuff for free but don't want to have to pay into the system to get it.

This.

LOL. "I'M barely getting by with my 1 million dollar home, but HE is rich with his 1.5 million dollar home."

We stretched and stretched to buy our home 10 years ago at WAY less than 1 million. It happened to be a good investment and is appraised at just under a million now. But that doesn’t mean that we can afford some kind of luxury home tax. It means that we are a couple of poors who made a smart real estate investment.

OP here, yes, this is our situation too. We're in a somewhat hot area and so I think our home would appraise for close to $1m pretty soon, but it's far from a mansion, and we're quite far from rich.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. So it looks like he's updated his proposal to focus on homes $1.5m+ and also 5m+. I'm a little better with this, although it seems that with inflation, this will need to be updated in 10 years when 1.5m is no longer a "mansion."

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/more-details-emerge-on-proposed-dc-mansion-tax/15396

In other words, OP, as long as it doesn't cost you, it's fine. You want stuff for free but don't want to have to pay into the system to get it.

This.

LOL. "I'M barely getting by with my 1 million dollar home, but HE is rich with his 1.5 million dollar home."

We stretched and stretched to buy our home 10 years ago at WAY less than 1 million. It happened to be a good investment and is appraised at just under a million now. But that doesn’t mean that we can afford some kind of luxury home tax. It means that we are a couple of poors who made a smart real estate investment.

Anonymous wrote:"It's about redistributing the wealth, and I think that we can get a lot more recurring dollars in our budget to invest in the priorities that we should be investing in in the District."

Like transit?!

Grasso is the same council member who recently led the effort to decriminalize fare evasion on Metro trains and buses in the District. Metro estimates that fare evasion is a $25 MILLION recurring problem, and that was before it was decriminalized in DC. So having created a disincentive for folks to pay the fare, now he wants a tax increase to pay for services and investments like transit!

Woke doofus.

If woke doofus were a t shirt, I'd buy it! With his face under the slogan. Perfect.

Anonymous wrote:"It's about redistributing the wealth, and I think that we can get a lot more recurring dollars in our budget to invest in the priorities that we should be investing in in the District."

Like transit?!

Grasso is the same council member who recently led the effort to decriminalize fare evasion on Metro trains and buses in the District. Metro estimates that fare evasion is a $25 MILLION recurring problem, and that was before it was decriminalized in DC. So having created a disincentive for folks to pay the fare, now he wants a tax increase to pay for services and investments like transit!

Woke doofus.

Omg, this guy. Regretting I ever voted from him.

"It's about redistributing the wealth, and I think that we can get a lot more recurring dollars in our budget to invest in the priorities that we should be investing in in the District."

Like transit?!

Grasso is the same council member who recently led the effort to decriminalize fare evasion on Metro trains and buses in the District. Metro estimates that fare evasion is a $25 MILLION recurring problem, and that was before it was decriminalized in DC. So having created a disincentive for folks to pay the fare, now he wants a tax increase to pay for services and investments like transit!

Woke doofus.