Reply #6: Prop. 13 just took care of one issue

[question everything]

of the increase in property taxes that would have forced people to move out of their homes (and then, what?)

The question should be: why should property taxes fund local governments? And, yes, many of us have been through layoffs when most of our expenses were reduced, including our income taxes, but not property taxes which would increase. The source for this route comes from Colonial times, when owning property was the only way to measure a person's ability to pay taxes.

Also, why should only property owners be taxed to fund local governments? Yes, I know, renters pay too, through their rental expenses but they have no say in, for example, special assessments.

It would make more sense to fund local government through supplements for income tax. Say a city needs, what $10 million to operate. It can then ask the Franchise Tax Board in Sacramento to tax more all the tax payers living in that city. At least, with income tax, the supplement would be progressive, and when one's income is reduced, so will be the supplemental one. And, at least, if most of the voters of that city think that it can run with only $7 million, they can vote on this.

The Wall Street Journal today had a page one story about the huge rises in property taxes in many places, including this paragraph:

For many homeowners, the increases have eaten into benefits they gained from President Bush's cuts in federal income taxes. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Economy.com Inc., a research firm in West Chester, Pa., estimates that nearly a fifth of the income-tax benefit Americans are receiving from federal tax cuts this year is going to pay for higher property taxes. Mr. Zandi says he expects property taxes to continue rising "very rapidly."