Swingman wrote:

Why? ... they don't get any more services.

Suppose your "bigger home", of the same size and quality, is in Waco
where the appraised values for an equal sized home are half that in
Houston, but the government services those tax dollars provide are
equal, if not better?

I would argue that your assumption falls apart in that, very common,
scenario.

Property taxes are based on many things. Some may be the number of
plumbing fixtures, the amount of living space, etc.

Property taxes on primary residences are almost universally based on
"appraised value" in this country. Around here these appraisals are
done by a government instituted "appraisal district".

Among other things, creating an appraisal distrcit conveniently allows
elected officials to effectively circumvent "taxation without
representation" ... IOW, no longer can you hold an elected official
accountable for raising tax rates and vote him out of office. The
appraisal district, under the thumb of the government, sets the
appraised values, which almost always has the effect of increasing tax
revenue, without the inconvenience to an elected official of
increasing tax rates ... and, even during these tough times,
"appraised property values" have not fallen at the same rate as
actual real estate prices ... not even close.

My point is that I think it would be more equitable, and allow much
more power to the taxpayer (where it arguably belongs under our
Constitution), to base single family primary residences (very
important distinction here, your one and only "homestead" so to
speak) on a state wide "square foot" basis, instead of an easily
manipulated "appraised value" basis.

still based on "size", as in your first above ...

After all, most rural land has always been taxed on the former
principal, on an acreage basis, for decades ... a universally more
equitable practice, and allowing the citizen to actually hold his
elected representatives feet to the fire a la "taxation with
representation".

Another consequence (unintended or not) is that the system generated
built-in increases in revenue without elected officials having to do
anything, has certainly served to make it more convenient to increase
the rampant government spending we see at all levels.

I'm of the opinion that property taxes on primary residences are
becoming a crushing burden, to the point that, for all practical
purposes, you simply do not own your "home" any longer ... you are
renting it from the government. Stop paying those taxes and see how
long your "ownership" stands up ... and not the usurious "penalties
and interest" that make it almost impossible to recover from a
temporary setback in fortune.

Tilting at windmills, I know ... but it irks me how these things are
structured to take rights away from citizens, and without a whimper
from same, as most folks never "realize" their property tax payments
because it is handled like "withholding" from their paycheck.

I've been around too long, methinks ...

Add to that the notion that the rich should pay LESS in taxes than the poor.

Oh, sure, the rich should pay SOMETHING: they are driven on tax-supported
roads and fly through government controlled airspace. But they don't send
their kids to public schools, get treated at the county hospital, receive
food stamps or rent supplements, and seldom end up in government owned
housing (i.e., prison).

Still, a case could be made that the lower your income, the more government
services you require, and the more you should pay.