Party of Small Government

Let’s contrast this. Here is a leftist:

Now let’s compare that post to this one from a prominent Republican who is opposed to the elimination of Florida’s property taxes. Click on this link to read the entire conversation: (this was removed due to confusion between two similar sounding names.)

There is no functional difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. Both parties want to take your money. The only difference between the two is which set of cronies are the recipients of your tax dollars that they they return to the party in question. It’s all a big lie.

I’ve said this tons of times: just because Democrats are your enemy doesn’t mean that Republicans are your friend. I’m sick of both parties, as all they do is take my money and my freedom while telling me it’s for my own good, because they know how to spend my money better than I, but it always seems to benefit them more than it does me.

Party of small government and fiscal conservatism, my white ass. I may just return to my previous philosophy of “voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil” and not vote for candidates of either party. I will, however, vote to cut taxes and strip the government of powers at every opportunity.

I won’t vote for a Democrat, but Republicans are going to have to earn my vote. Give me a reason to vote for you- don’t just talk about being small government, prove it.

The two most prolific opponents of cutting Florida property taxes I see on my feed are Jeff Brandes and Holly Bullard.

Holly Bullard is the chief strategy and development officer of the same institute. Her job is directing fundraising, policy advocacy, coalition building, outreach and communications strategies. She makes $110,000 per year.

Florida Policy Institute is a left of center NGO that specializes in collecting government grants, as far as I can tell. Their funding is part of a nearly impenetrable web of grants and untraceable funding. It appears to me as if it were another grift.

Taxation for Profit

Ever since DeSantis came out with his proposal to virtually eliminate property taxes, by social media feeds have been absolutely overrun with people screaming about how towns will go bankrupt and have to shut down police, fire, and roads. It is so pervasive and widespread, it’s like a chorus. They are also being misleading.

I want to use my town as an example. For a reminder on how Florida does property taxes, you can read this old post from a year ago. Where I live is a town with 3500 people living in about 900 households. Our only commercial property consists of a convenience store and a single diner. Of those households, nearly a quarter of them (18%) pay less than $200 a year in non-school taxes.

Town revenue breaks down like this:

  • 29% of revenue is from ad valorem taxes, with almost half of it (14% of the total revenue) being from ad valorem taxes on homestead property.
  • 29% of revenue comes from fees for services (fees for water, sewer, trash, and other city services)
  • 20% from state and federal funding
  • 10% from shared taxes with the county
  • 10% from utility taxes
  • 2% miscellaneous sources

Keep in mind that the town LOVES my neighborhood, because the people in it comprise only 1/10 of the town’s population, but pay about 25% of all ad valorem taxes. Another 18% pay nothing, or nearly so. The governor’s plan would increase homestead exemptions to $250,000 (from $50,000 currently) in the first year, then to $500,000 the second year, meaning no one would pay taxes on any home until its value was more than $500,000, except for school taxes, which would remain unaffected. A complete loss of ad valorem taxes on homestead property would mean the city would face a loss of 14% of their revenues. What would have to be cut? Let’s look at the town budget. This is where the town budget goes:

  • 33% to the Police department
  • 29% to Administration, Finance, Legal, Legislative, and Planning
  • 22% to Public Works and solid waste
  • 10% to the library
  • 2% to Code Enforcement
  • 3% to Historical Preservation, Cemetaries, and Special Events
  • 1% to parks and recreation

It seems to me that the town is pretty top heavy in administration, the library is an extravagance, and I would argue that a town of 3500 people doesn’t need 15 police officers. I would cut the library, and I would cut the police and admin budgets by 10% each. That takes care of most of the cuts you need right there.

  • Will a small town with almost zero crime miss a single cop being cut from the budget? Likely not.
  • Likewise, the library just isn’t as important as it used to be in the age of the Internet. Certainly not important enough to take money from residents, and taking the homes of those who won’t pay.
  • and seriously, a third of the city budget being administrative overhead?

The town has 50 employees, with 15 being law enforcement officers. Granted, 20 of the town’s employees are seasonal or part time, but that seems like a heavy dead load for a town of 3500, where a fifth of them aren’t paying any taxes at all.

Since 2020, the town’s total revenue has increased 250%, but the population has only increased by 6%.

Losing ad valorem taxes on homestead property isn’t just doable, it’s the only way to curb the bloat. Towns are treating these massive windfalls from taxation like a teenager who just found his dad’s credit cards.

Mom, he’s looking at me

The Chicago Cubs are suing a bar located near their stadium, because the bar isn’t paying the Cubs for allowing their customers to look at the team while they play baseball. The team is claiming the rooftop bar is misappropriating the team’s property rights because the bar is selling admission to the bar and allowing patrons to watch Cubs games from that vantagepoint. It looks like the courts are going to side with the team. In the meantime, the city is investigating the structural integrity of the roofs, issuing citations to those in danger of collapse. I’m sure those investigations are totally legit and were in no way sponsored or encouraged by the billionaire team owner.

Money talks, I guess.

The Ricketts family, billionaire owners of the Cubs, began purchasing the nearby rooftop properties in order to control the marketable sight lines into the stadium and by the end of the 2016 season, owned (or controlled via agreement) 11 of the 13 rooftop locations that had a view into the nearby baseball field. Wrigley Rooftop is one of the two that has thus far refused to sell.

I don’t care what the court says, if I can see it from my property, then you have no claim to force people to pay for looking at it. This will open all sorts of legal maneuvering. If my neighbor can see into my yard, can I sue him for watching me swim in my pool?

If the Cubs don’t want people in nearby tall buildings watching them play, perhaps they should build a dome. I’m sure they can get taxpayers to foot the bill. After all, teams build sports ball complexes at taxpayer expense all the time. For example, the Tampa Bay Rays are getting a Billion dollars of taxpayer money to build their new stadium, even while the local governments of the state are assuring the taxpayers that property taxes are totally needed to fund things everyone agrees are needed- things like firefighters, police, schools, and roads: “The money we take in from property taxes totally is being used for needed services and is in no way being used to fund billion dollar sports complexes. The money going to build places of business for billionaires to pay millionaires to play children’s games is totally coming from a different line item that was totally taken from taxpayers in a different way, so it doesn’t count.”

If that doesn’t work, perhaps the team could try the Scooby Do method and pay someone to dress a ghost in order to force the owners to sell.

Meanwhile, the shortstop for the Rays is being paid $182 million to play baseball. Jason Heyward is being paid $184 million to play the game by the Cubs. Meanwhile, the bar in question (Wrigley Field Rooftop Bar) is estimated to be making $1 million a year.

This is one of those times where a billionaire is doing something immoral to make more money, and the government shouldn’t be getting involved. Government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers. Remember, when the legislature decides what can be bought or sold, the first thing to be bought and sold are the legislators themselves.

Circus

We keep being told how eliminating property taxes will mean roads, the fire department, and schools will be unfunded. They tell you so because everyone wants those services, but here is a great example of where property taxes go.

That’s right- Hillsboro county is going to use a billion dollars of taxpayer funds to build a new stadium for the Tamp Bay Rays. That works out to nearly $2,000 per household. They powers that be claim no one will notice, because the billion will come from county reserves. See, you won’t notice how we stole a bunch of money from you so we could pay a bunch of grown men a hundred million apiece to play a child’s game.

Incidentally, the team is worth $1.7 billion, but the taxpayers are expected to build half of the $2.8 billion stadium they will play in. How about instead, we let the taxpayers keep their money, and the team can charge what the traffic will bear for tickets instead of forcing taxpayers to fund your business?

EDITED TO ADD:

If the new field lasts as long as the old one, the stadium will cost $80 million for each year it’s used, or about $1 million per game. There are 25,000 seats in the stadium, meaning the team would have to add $40 to the price of each and every ticket to pay for the stadium themselves. That seems reasonable to me, and if people won’t pay it, then does Tampa really need baseball?

Property Taxes

The standard argument about getting rid of property taxes is always “Who will pay for Fire Dept, Police, Schools, Roads?”

Even so, the proposed law would cut non-school ad valorem taxes for homestead property. Schools won’t be touched, as they are exempt. How about the other services?

Let’s use Daytona Beach as an example. You will see why I chose Daytona shortly. Daytona Beach has adopted a $379.8 million budget for the 2025-26 fiscal year (beginning Oct. 1, 2025), a 4.1% increase in property tax revenue driven by rising property values. The budget holds the millage rate at 5.9300 ($5.93 per $1,000 of taxable value). About a third of the city budget is from ad valorem (property) taxes. However, only a third of ad valorem taxes are from homestead property. The vast majority of property taxes are paid on commercial property like hotels, stores, and rental property. Overall, the loss of homestead ad valorem taxes would only cut city revenues by about 12%.

In Daytona, police and fire take up 55%, roads are about 15%, and schools take up 0% of the city budget. That means expenses that aren’t fire dept, police, schools, or roads comprise 30% of the city budget. In other words, the 70% of the budget for the police, fire, schools, and roads wouldn’t be touched if property taxes on owner occupied homes.

Especially if you consider that those departments are filled with waste, fraud, and corruption. One firefighter in Daytona blew the whistle on the department cooking the books and wasting damned near a million bucks a year. What did he get for his efforts? He was terminated. What’s going to happen there is he will sue the county and will likely get a huge paycheck because it is illegal to take action against a whistleblower. Somehow, my tax dollars will pay for the corruption, and will also pay for the lawsuits resulting from that corruption.

SovCits Enter the Discussion

There are the people (mostly women, and disproportionally black) who think arguing with the cops while demanding to speak with a supervisor will get them out of legal trouble.

Then there are the dumbasses who have taken the “don’t fight on the road, fight in court” advice to heart, and do some studying on the Internet. They don’t understand legal terminology, so they attempt to fake it by spouting a bunch of big words arranged into nonsensical phrases, using them as if they were the magic words in a spell that will make the bad consequences of their actions go away. Some of them even comment on this blog.

It’s tiresome and I can’t imagine how much restraint some of those in the courthouse have to put up with. Heck, I have problems dealing with it on this very blog. Let me illustrate:

Look, I make no bones about being more than disappointed with how our government does business. However, the things some of these outright morons come up with are simply incorrect and won’t work. They haven’t worked. No, you can’t get out of paying income taxes by casting a magic spell using vague Latin sounding phrases in court. Wesley Snipes tried using the 861 argument, and he went to prison for four years. He tried making the argument that he isn’t obligated to pay taxes. He has an outstanding $23 million tax bill. They have been fighting this in court since 2006. The IRS offered to settle it for $9.5 million, but Snipes refused.

This argument has been ruled frivolous in DOZENS of appellate cases. It just isn’t a thing. Proving that everything that comes up on this blog has been discussed already, I posted on this back in 2008. As I said then:

I agree that progressive income taxes are [morally and ethically] wrong. I agree that taking my money to give to someone else in a socialistic redistribution of wealth is the equivalent of armed robbery. I disagree that the tax code has such ludicrous loopholes.

I will not entertain any argument to the contrary in the comments to this post, unless that comment comes with a valid citation to an appellate case verifying your position. I am not going to turn this blog into a Sovereign citizen sounding board.

However, in the interest of fairness, anyone who wishes to set up their own blog to espouse those theories is perfectly welcome to do so. Just contact me, and I can set you up on this very server for the low, low price of $15 per month. The only rule I have for server space here is no porn. It takes up too much bandwidth and invites accusations of child porn and all of the scrutiny that comes with it.

Last Time This Year, I Promise

Last rant for income taxes for the 2025 tax year. I finally filed my taxes this year. My wife and I made $17,000 more in 2025 than we did in 2024. Thanks to changes in our tax situation, we lost $28,000 in tax deductions and another $12,000 in credits thanks to changes in the tax law, with the result of us paying $20,900 more in taxes for 2025 than we did in 2024.

That’s right- we got a $17,000 raise, but wound up taking home $3,900 less. Thanks a lot to the government.

Meanwhile, there are millions here in the US who don’t work, don’t pay taxes, and still hate me for paying their bills…

The Butcher’s Bill

My second post of the day has been delayed, on account of myself and Turbo Tax trying to get my taxes done. This is a project I thought was (nearly) complete two months ago, but there was more left to be done than I realized. This post will have to do, I guess.

Alas, the BBB passed by Trump has skinned away many of my deductions of past years, thus forcing me to pay more in taxes. I am trying earnestly to keep that number to a minimum, but many deductions begin to phase out or become eliminated at an income of $146,000 for a couple, and that really isn’t a very high number.

The final bill is that I still owe slightly less than $3,000. In total, I paid more than $61,000 this year in taxes. The report from Amazon alone says I paid $1400 in sales taxes. It’s infuriating to see those numbers, then see people on Social Media saying taxes need to be raised. Why, I asked one of them, should someone who makes more pay a higher rate? If the percentage is the same for everyone, a person making $100k would pay 5 times in taxes what a person making $20k. That isn’t enough though. Some say that no one should have more than X amount of money.

The answer? Because, he said, they can afford it.

So because someone has more than you, you feel it is your place to steal what they have earned.

  • If someone takes my money for his own benefit, he is a thief.
  • If someone takes my money to feed his child, he is still a thief.
  • If someone takes my money at gunpoint, he is a robber and a thief.
  • If ten people take my money at gunpoint, they are a gang of thieves.
  • If a thousand of my neighbors take my money, they are no better.
  • If they all vote to have someone else take my money at gunpoint, at some point the left feels that this is legitimate.

The answer I get is “well, that’s called taxes.” I say bullshit. Taxes are so the government can provide for the general welfare. Taking someone’s money so courts, the military, and other services everyone benefits from is providing for the general welfare. Taking that money so Sharkeesh’a Negron and Juan Illegal* can sit at home and pop out a dozen kids without having to produce anything is not. It’s theft.

OK, I’m just working myself up, thinking that it takes me several months of work to pay my taxes.

To say the least, I am pretty grumpy and there will be some alcohol involved this evening. Of course, it will be taxed.

* As an example, see this post from 2010 where I outline just how profitable it can be to be an illegal immigrant.

Lowering the Bar

Remember when the left wanted to tax the rich? In liberal states, they are redefining rich downward– anyone making $125,000 a year will be taxed a state rate of 9.9% in Oregon. New York is going after those who make more than $125,000. Washington is adding wealth taxes to an ever lower amount of income.

Now they are even talking about stealing 5% of someone’s total net worth- on top of all of the other taxes.

Here is what Peter Schiff had to say about that, and it’s one of my favorite quotes:

If you tax 70% of what I make above a certain amount, what I am going to do once I hit that amount is simply take the rest of the year off, and furlough all of my employees. See you in February.

Property Taxes

The Florida house of representatives approved a ballot measure for this year’s election. The proposal would allow voters to approve an elimination of all non-school property taxes for homestead property. Sixty percent of those voting would need to approve it, then it would become part of the state Constitution. This proposal still needs to be approved by the state Senate in order to make it on the ballot, and it will have a much harder battle there, because the Democrats are absolutely opposed to it.

You will recall from my post of a couple of years ago:

In Florida, the tax assessor decides what the “fair market value” of your house is. The taxable value is then calculated by taking the market value and subtracting your homestead exemption. In order to have a homestead exemption, the owner of the property must live there as their primary residence. In other words, commercial and rental property doesn’t get a homestead exemption. The taxable value is then subject to being taxed. If you want more detail on how all of this works, click on this link to my previous post.

There are also numerous carve-outs for various groups.

  • The homestead exemption is $25,000 on the first $50k of value, then another $25,000 for the next $50k of value, but that second $25k is only for non-school taxes.
  • Additional exemption for residents 65 or older who make less than $38,686 per year
  • Total exemption for totally and permanently disabled veterans, surviving spouses, or first responders.
  • No property taxes for  active-duty personnel deployed outside the U.S.

The result of all of this is many people already don’t pay taxes. In my town, there are 1,000 homes total. Two neighborhoods were recently built in the town- my own, and one other. Those two communities have 200 homes in them, so 20% of the town’s homes. Those homes pay more than 50% of the town’s taxes. Many homes in the town, including those of three of the five city commissioners, pay no taxes at all.

As a result, taxes are very tilted. Renters pay more than owners (because landlords don’t get tax exemptions). Those who have lived in their homes for a long time don’t pay any (or very little) in taxes.

The left is pissed about this. They are all singing the same song- claiming that this is a tax break for so-called “boomers” because GenZ doesn’t own houses. Isn’t it odd that the left constantly wants corporations to pay taxes, but they finally understand that companies don’t pay taxes- instead, they treat taxes like any other expense, and pass those expenses on to the consumer.

The left claims that property taxes are essential for things like police and fire, but ignore that overall, ad valorum taxes are only 18% of local tax revenues. Still they claim the following would be affected, but are lying:

  • Law enforcement
  • Social services
  • Parks
  • Environmental programs
  • Fire districts
  • Emergency medical services
  • Schools
  • Roads

Law enforcement, fire, EMS, and police are specifically mentioned in the law and will have required funding. School taxes are exempt. What this leaves is Social services (giveaways), Parks and environmental programs (luxury items), and roads (already funded by gasoline taxes and tolls). What the left is upset about is the funding for things like learing centers and other graft that permits them to hand out money to their wealthy well connected patrons.

The Senate session ends March 13. The odds that this gets passed before then are long. It probably won’t happen.