On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 18:01:03 GMT, someone wrote:

... In Florida we're
fortunate enough to have a State Constitutional Amendment that caps the
rate of increase for assesed value of homesteaded property at 3% or the
consumer price index, whichever is less.

I wouldn't presume that is "fortunate", it just results in people
owning identical houses paying different tax on them. It cannot be
assumed that a person who has been there longer is actually poorer
than a person buying their first home.

The "seniors on a fixed income" argument is frequently used to justify
these schemes, but its really "welcome stranger" legalized. It also
subsidizes rich people with rising incomes not just the poor.seniors
on fixed incomes.

If its really to help poor seniors then it oughta be targeted that
way. Don't really poor seniors rent anyway.


Reply to NG only - this e.mail address goes to a kill file.