Paying taxes is different than paying to own. It is one way that money is collected to pay for common needs like roads, parks, and schools and is more consistent than income or other taxation because we know how much land exists.
I guess a dollar amount could just be expected from every single person regardless of circumstance. Would that be better?
Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days ago
Yes, that would make far more sense to me than tying it to something arbitrary like land. Failure to pay should not result in homelessness. Especially after a lifetime to paying for said home.
notabot@lemm.ee 2 days ago
I’m not sure where you are, but typically even if you rent rather than owning you pay the normal taxes, either directy or via your landlord, so they have little to do with owning a property, and more to do with occupying one, as a proxy for the demands you put on communal services. In most places you would also not lose your home for not paying them, you’d get dragged through the courts, possibly jailed for some period, and the tax authority in question would just end up with a lien on the property, entutling them to recompense when you sold or refinanced it.
I’m not discounting the possibility you live sonewhere with different property tax laws, but you’ve been making extremely broad and general statements that don’t match reality in many places.
LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz 2 days ago
If you’re behind $1000 in taxes for a $250000 house doesn’t mean the government takes your whole house and you get nothing.
They typically sell it at auction and you get the leftovers.
www.michigan.gov/taxes/…/forfeiture-foreclosure
If you’ve lived in the house after a lifetime, you’d either have to be extremely behind in taxes, have not maintained the house, or both, for it to be a complete loss.
Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
And that seems fair to you?