What's new
Forums
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Pics
Videos
Fishing Reports
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General
General Discussion
Property Tax Petition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Allen" data-source="post: 374708" data-attributes="member: 389"><p>IMHOl, the closest widespread radical change I can compare this to is Prohibition. I doubt many thought there would be such widespread and negative consequences to Prohibition, and I suspect many who were in favor of it would have changed their minds if they had had the foresight to the unintended consequences of it, but that was a painful time for America. </p><p></p><p>That doesn't mean I think the loss of property taxes would lead to a resurgence of Al Capone type of gangs, but even legal side effects of this are likely to be very unpopular in the long run. </p><p></p><p>Another example of well intended laws was the Federal Flood Insurance Program. The federal government saw the need to do something with respect to large scale disasters like hurricanes, spring floods, etc. There were just so many people that were devastated by these kinds of natural disasters that they "had to do something". So, along comes federally subsidized flood insurance. Well, fast forward a fair number of years and the federal cost of subsidizing flood insurance became quite onerous and people like myself who refuse to live on a flood plain won out in Congress and a number of years ago they decided to let people who live on the flood plain start paying for the actuarial cost of living there. People who bought their homes (most glaring example I am thinking of is the Outer Banks of NC) were SHOCKED to discover they were going to see their insurance go up a few hundred percent. They fought over this in Congress for years to reach a complicated scaling up of insurance to avoid devastating the investment millions of Americans have in flood prone areas. Needless to say, flood prone areas are no longer as attractive an investment as they once were.</p><p></p><p>These may seem like far-fetched analogies to the topic at hand, but I suspect the level of change this would involve will lead to a similar level of unintended consequences.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Allen, post: 374708, member: 389"] IMHOl, the closest widespread radical change I can compare this to is Prohibition. I doubt many thought there would be such widespread and negative consequences to Prohibition, and I suspect many who were in favor of it would have changed their minds if they had had the foresight to the unintended consequences of it, but that was a painful time for America. That doesn't mean I think the loss of property taxes would lead to a resurgence of Al Capone type of gangs, but even legal side effects of this are likely to be very unpopular in the long run. Another example of well intended laws was the Federal Flood Insurance Program. The federal government saw the need to do something with respect to large scale disasters like hurricanes, spring floods, etc. There were just so many people that were devastated by these kinds of natural disasters that they "had to do something". So, along comes federally subsidized flood insurance. Well, fast forward a fair number of years and the federal cost of subsidizing flood insurance became quite onerous and people like myself who refuse to live on a flood plain won out in Congress and a number of years ago they decided to let people who live on the flood plain start paying for the actuarial cost of living there. People who bought their homes (most glaring example I am thinking of is the Outer Banks of NC) were SHOCKED to discover they were going to see their insurance go up a few hundred percent. They fought over this in Congress for years to reach a complicated scaling up of insurance to avoid devastating the investment millions of Americans have in flood prone areas. Needless to say, flood prone areas are no longer as attractive an investment as they once were. These may seem like far-fetched analogies to the topic at hand, but I suspect the level of change this would involve will lead to a similar level of unintended consequences. [/QUOTE]
Verification
What is the most common fish caught on this site?
Post reply
Recent Posts
Wood Stoves
Latest: Hamm's
26 minutes ago
The Decline of Devils Lake
Latest: Rowdie
46 minutes ago
T
ICE Fishing videos
Latest: thriller1
54 minutes ago
NFL News (Vikings)
Latest: Kurtr
Today at 8:49 AM
Buying gold and silver.
Latest: Maddog
Today at 8:41 AM
B
Model 12 Winchester
Latest: Bauer
Today at 7:53 AM
ND concealed Weapons Permit
Latest: Maddog
Yesterday at 6:45 PM
Heated jackets
Latest: wslayer
Yesterday at 4:36 PM
T
Cheaper Lithium for FFS shuttl
Latest: Traxion
Yesterday at 12:52 PM
Newbie here.
Latest: svnmag
Tuesday at 9:00 PM
What are these things?
Latest: svnmag
Tuesday at 8:27 PM
S
F 150 Owners
Latest: snow2
Tuesday at 6:50 PM
S
Backyard chickens?
Latest: snow2
Tuesday at 4:11 PM
sharpening auger blades
Latest: risingsun
Tuesday at 3:58 PM
L
CCI Uppercut JHP ammo?
Latest: LBrandt
Tuesday at 1:26 PM
S
500,000 acre habitat program
Latest: savage270
Tuesday at 12:43 PM
D
Catfish anyone?
Latest: Downrigger
Tuesday at 8:08 AM
Seekins rifles
Latest: Jiffy
Monday at 3:23 PM
Tire inflator
Latest: 5575
Monday at 1:09 PM
A.I. Are you Excited?
Latest: Lycanthrope
Monday at 9:33 AM
Polaris Ranger Windshield?
Latest: Allen
Monday at 8:34 AM
L
I HATE coyotes!!!!
Latest: LBrandt
Monday at 2:37 AM
Wood Planer?
Latest: risingsun
Sunday at 1:51 PM
Friends of NDA
Forums
General
General Discussion
Property Tax Petition
Top
Bottom