From: ahk@chinet.com
conklin wrote:
>
>"Adam H. Kerman" wrote in message
>news:lqjqm8$rli$1@news.albasani.net...
>> conklin wrote:
>>>"Adam H. Kerman" wrote:
>>>>conklin wrote:
>>>>>hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>>>>On Sunday, July 20, 2014 11:58:03 PM UTC-4, Glen Labah wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>It's rather hard to take anything on an Americans for Prosperity web
>>>>>>>site seriously. It's a mouthpiece basically for the Koch Brothers.
>>
>>>>>>Just a quick glimpse at their website shows all sorts of distortions
>>>>>>about the investment costs in transit, Amtrak, highways and airways.
>>
>>>>>>They jumped onto the "free wine" bandwagon of complaints about Amtrak
>>>>>>food service.
>>
>>>>>>Bottom line: my property taxes go up to pay for more highways.
>>
>>>>>The gas tax needs to go up, not your property taxes.
>>
>>>>Perhaps you could explain how there's no relationship between
>>>>transportation and land value, George, so that hancock's property taxes
>>>>shouldn't go up if his highways are improved. If his highways suck,
>>>>his property taxes should go down.
>>
>>>I did not address the issue of transportation and land values. Land right
>>>on a railroad? Noise. Too close to an airport? Noise. Too close to a
>>>highway? Noise. It all depends on where and what.
>>
>> In many of those cases, proximity is an advantage for certain land uses.
>> No one builds hotels for air travellers that aren't close to an airport.
>> No one builds big-box stores and large office buildings on minor roads.
>>
>> If hancock's road takes him to an employment center with good jobs,
>> his land value rises. Why exactly shouldn't the highway be paid for
>> with property taxes?
>
>The fuel tax should pay for roads.
Nonresponsive
--- SoupGate/W32 v1.03
* Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)
|
