Market Currents
The housing crisis is five years old. But for local governments that depend heavily on property...
-
Monday, December 26, 2011, 4:00 PM ETThe housing crisis is five years old. But for local governments that depend heavily on property taxes, the lag between falling home values and property re-assessments means the housing market bust is just beginning to ravage tax revenues.
Other date
Latest Macro Articles
This news story has 32 comments:
You can't expect to cut spending like everybody else does, can you?
Meredith is a one-trick pony, who hasn't known and won't continue to know her gluteus maximus from first base on municipal bonds. She did, however, help me make a bunch of money, buying muni funds after she incited panic in them a year ago. For that, she has my undying thanks.
Do you actually think union school teachers will accept wage concessions?
Actually the unnatural deployment of capital to the housing industry has been going on for many decades and started by Dems. You probably already knew that but you are too busy deflecting and not accepting responsibility.
So how about this for size? Obama apparently was really good at community organizing and fixing problems.
What has he fixed so far? NOTHING.
Now there are fees as long as your arm and leg that serve the same purpose - to extract more $$ from the public. The bureaucrats will get your money one way or another.
Much of the stimulus was spent subsidizing local government budgets. That money is now mostly gone and it's unlikely that another stimulus will pass.
-----------
Our whole economic system is built on the premise of ever increasing growth. When that growth stalls (or worse yet, declines), no one is sure what to do!
"no one is sure what to do!"
Nonsense. It is obvious what to do to all but the stupid liberal democrats who refuse to do the obvious and simply CUT THE FRIGGING SPENDING.
In seriousness, perhaps state governments spend some small amount for upkeep of national/coast guards, but in terms of city and municipal government, every dime of spending is non-defense spending---so what's stopping them from cutting them?
(On the other hand, as a small-government conservative, I do think a vast majority of federal spending *should* be defense spending---one that's smaller in dollar amounts than what we are spending now, but one that's vastly larger in percentage (at least of discretionary spending) than what we have now.)
If they cut spending, they won't stand a chance at getting reelected. And then they have to go work a real job.
If they cut spending, they won't stand a chance at getting reelected. And then they have to go work a real job.
----------------------...
finally I found somebody with whom I 100% agree
Farmland.
I've never set foot in Idaho. Boise States's football field is enough to convince me I never should.
Schools should be funded by fees, not taxes. In that case, parents can decide where their kids go to school AND PAY for them.
Unfortunately, what will most likely happen is that they will cut services and continue pay the bloated salaries and benefits of the local public unions.
Eventually the whole big brother approach to government will have to collapse.
Unfortunately, what will most likely happen is that they will cut services and continue pay the bloated salaries and benefits of the local public unions.
======================...
It has already happened