Yet another Ebay sap..

[dustyyevsky]

compels someone to offer a bid for a used item that is higher than the price for the new item? The plane isn't exactly an antique collectible. Never ceases to amaze as well annoy.

[Tom Veatch]

1. ignorance of the true value of the item.
2. caught up in the "excitement" of the bidding.
3. mistaken idea that if you post the highest bid, then somehow you "win". Otherwise you "lose". Competitiveness run wild.
4. incremental bidding instead of posting your maximum bid as the first bid. (Oh, I guess I can up my bid a couple of dollars so I can "win".)
5. pure stupidity for indulging in any of the above.

Tom Veatch Wichita, KS USA

[Lee]

Simple....some dumb ass out there will buy it. On e-bay there is one born every 45 seconds

[Leon]

> What compels someone to offer a bid for a used item that is higher

I hate it when that happens. Housing does that. The government thinks my house is worth about twice what I think my house is worth.

[Doug Miller]

LOL - we've had some real problems with escalating property taxes here in Indiana. One proposed solution is a law requiring the tax assessor to buy any house at its assessed value if the homeowner wishes to sell it.

[Edward Hennessey]

>>> What compels someone to offer a bid for a used item that is higher

L:

At least where I am, the tax assessor can be talked out of a "decline in value form". If you make a convincing show, based on the condition of your house and the recent sale price of comparable residences whose location and, better yet, condition you document photographically, you can get a refund of that over-assessed part of the taxable value and reset your tax base. If you do a rational, thourough job here, dispute is unlikely and you still have recourse to an appeals hearing before a board if you feel the initial decision is wrong. Look for recent sales at the assessor's office or try

.

Regards,

Edward Hennessey

[Roemax]

> What compels someone to offer a bid for a used item that is higher

[Mark & Juanita]

>0177233443&_trksid=p3984.cWAT.m240.lVI>>>>>> What compels someone to offer a bid for a used item that is higher

Now *that* is a creative solution; I like it.

[Dan Coby]

One of the Sci Fi writers (I think that it was Clarke) wrote about a society where the assessment for a property was set by the owner. However anyone was allowed to buy the property at the currently assessed value.

[Kevin M. Vernon]

Heinlein. In "Number of the Beast." One set whatever value one wished upon one's property & paid property taxes based upon that valuation - BUT - anyone could, at any time, buy a property AT that listed valuation, against the owner's wishes, UNLESS said owner immediately raised his valuation to the point that the prospective buyer no longer wished to buy - PLUS immediately paid 5 years back-taxes on the new valuation. That part would tend to keep the valuations fairly honest.

Personally, My thoughts on the whole property tax mess are: Your tax rate is based upon your purchase price. When you sell the property the new owner then pays his taxes based upon the price HE paid for it.

-Kevin in Indy To reply, remove (+spamproof+) from address........

[George]

Kalifornia's prop 13, Michigan's Headlee both limited the rise to rate of inflation. Doesn't mean a lot, because they make up their public sector raises elsewhere. Of course it's always "the children" when it comes to "cuts" which aren't. Never ceases to amaze me how the papers report, without comment, such stupidity as "severe cutback in services" followed, in the next line, by "no jobs will be lost due to cutbacks." Sounds like one of the e-by bargain hunters, may be just be part of a bigger pool of suckers doesn't it?

[Charlie Self]

Not around here unless you're quick. Re-evaluation is done every four years. I've never known it to go down, overall, and recently, jumps of

67% to well over 150% have been fairly common.

[J. Clarke]

That's kind of how it works (or worked at one time) in California. For long-time residents it becomes a trap--relocate and you have to either downsize _way_ down or take a big tax increase.

[jo4hn]

But you know what your tax will be and can decide on the purchase accordingly. If you buy, you can budget your tax bill for as long as you own the house. Before Prop 13 (initiative that set the tax plan), my assessed valuation/tax bill had tripled and was about to double again. Now I had a question of whether I could pay the taxes and still buy milk and beer. Great solution for homeowners. The effect on commercial properties is not so good for the state. ... rant off, jo4hn

[Charlie Self]

Why annoy? It's their money; what they do with it is their business.

[B A R R Y]

Are you sure? Most areas do it on a regular schedule, and the assessor can usually tell you when you're due next.

It would seem that at-will reassessments would be a real political hot button at election time.

---------------------------------------------

** **

---------------------------------------------

[Andrew Barss]

Kevin M. Vernon wrote: :>

: Heinlein. In "Number of the Beast." One set whatever value one : wished upon one's property & paid property taxes based upon that : valuation - BUT - anyone could, at any time, buy a property AT that : listed valuation, against the owner's wishes, UNLESS said owner : immediately raised his valuation to the point that the prospective : buyer no longer wished to buy - PLUS immediately paid 5 years : back-taxes on the new valuation. That part would tend to keep the : valuations fairly honest.

And it would tend to have a lot of people get displaced from their homes by developers with deep pockets. No thanks.

: Personally, My thoughts on the whole property tax mess are: Your tax : rate is based upon your purchase price. When you sell the property : the new owner then pays his taxes based upon the price HE paid for it.

There's some good thoughts there. Would help out a lot of old folks who get taxed out of their homes when prices go up after 40 years.

-- Andy Barss

[Tom Veatch]

Same here except the appraised/assessed value increases every year, along with the mill levy. I'd love to have a 4 year cycle. I'm now paying taxes on an appraised value that is 63% greater than the original appraisal and the effective mill levy has increased enough to make the tax bill double what it was when we had the house built.

Tom Veatch Wichita, KS USA

[Kevin M. Vernon]

As opposed to the way it is now, when people get displaced from their home by developers with deep pockets - by simply shoveling that deepness at the politicians in return for some eminent domain legislation. Sure, that would happen in some cases. Any more than it does now? I doubt it. But then I wasn't advocating that particular scheme, simply fleshing out the details for the O.P. who brought it up.

This one I do quite like. After all, an "Assesment" is simply an estimate or guess of what your property might be worth, in someone's opinion. It's worth what somebody will pay for it. Pay taxes on the purchase price. Next guy that buys it - pays taxes on THAT purchase price. It's not worth diddly poo, until you actually sell it for something - and then whatever you sold it for is what it was worth.

-Kevin in Indy To reply, remove (+spamproof+) from address........

[Doug Miller]

That, or simply dump property tax altogether. Of all the different types of taxes we're hit for, property tax *alone* bears no relationship whatever to the taxpayer's ability to pay -- leading to retirees being forced to sell homes they've owned for decades, because they can't afford the taxes on a property that has appreciated substantially since they bought it.