14 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Lisa Drewing FKA Cookie Lady's avatar

I kinda happen to think that property tax on people’s primary residence is a fairly bullshit way to raise revenue. (Hello progressive income taxation, it’s nice to see your equitable fine ass.)

And I also think the way to deal with funding to address climate change is to tax the shit out of the industries causing it while offering incentives to invest in green energy. Taking the revenue raised to pay for mitigation efforts (hello public transportation, I love you) and reducing the upfront cost to consumers to green up end user energy consumption by paying for part or all (income based sliding scale) of home solar and wind generation. No more of the bullshit tax breaks after the fact for individuals. Most cannot afford the initial outlay.

And yes. I am some kind of socialist.

Expand full comment
Aileen's avatar

Agree. My property taxes, homeowners insurance and utilities are more than my mortgage and my property taxes always go up by the maximum allowed 4% each year. When I retire, I won't be able to stay in my house (or county, realistically). I guess there's something to be said for freeing up my large house for a family, but it does kind of bum me out that no matter how much I plan and work to pay off the mortgage, there are costs outside of my control that will force me to leave the house I've invested so much into.

Expand full comment
BlueStateLibel's avatar

Totally agree with you.

Expand full comment
Peter MacMonagle's avatar

That makes too much sense. They won't do it.

Expand full comment
Adny Patridge's avatar

I agree. Let’s see, a tax on an illiquid asset whose value is out of your control. What a stupid idea.

Expand full comment
RRJKR's avatar

What you describe is not socialism. It is Fair, regulated capitalism with sensible taxation. What we had in the USA from the late 1940s until just recently

Expand full comment
Rosy red ASS's avatar

The "some kind of socialist" part is why I like you!

Expand full comment
Chemical's avatar

>>And I also think the way to deal with funding to address climate change is to tax the shit out of the industries causing it while offering incentives to invest in green energy.

You know what's funny? Late 80s, early 90s, we had this issue with the ozone layer depleting. And the proposed solution to that issue was exactly what you said here. The radical socialist that signed the bill into law was George Bush (he called it cap and trade, though).

Expand full comment
Doktor Zoom's avatar

Even more socialisty: We quickly negotiated an agreement with other countries to ban pollutants that were causing ozone depletion, and it went so seamlessly, without the feared destruction of the economy that wingnuts predicted, that today rightwingers point to the "ozone hole" as a liberal hoax that everyone forgot about because it didn't result in catastrophe. (rinse and repeat for Y2K, which we solved with a hell of a lot of effort)

Expand full comment
TakingAmes's avatar

I mean, if the predicted catastrophe doesn’t happen, they can’t blame Democrats for it.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Jan 16Edited
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Mark Lungo's avatar

Fuck off, spammer.

Expand full comment
InMyRoom's avatar

This makes too much sense to ever be done.

Expand full comment
Chemical's avatar

It had been done in the past, though.

Expand full comment