Buffalo Bills want a new stadium – and for taxpayers to foot the bill

[Spartacus]

53 minutes ago, Arm of Harm said:

 

 

According to Beer League's post, season ticket prices are expected to be $12,500 per year, excluding the PSL. Suppose a husband and wife want to spend the next ten years going to Bills games. That's $250,000 over the course of ten years, plus the cost of 2 PSLs. You know what you could buy for $250,000? A house. How you spend your money is up to you, but I personally don't intend to simply donate the value of a house to a billionaire, even if people blow a lot of money on stupid stuff every day.

good for you

but you probably weren't a season tix holder in the past, either.

 

there will be 60k fans willing to fork over their life savings for tix.

[Alaska Darin]

1 hour ago, Spartacus said:

good for you

but you probably weren't a season tix holder in the past, either.

 

there will be 60k fans willing to fork over their life savings for tix.

"There's one born every minute."

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, Spartacus said:

good for you

but you probably weren't a season tix holder in the past, either.

 

there will be 60k fans willing to fork over their life savings for tix.

 

Don't know there'll be that many FANS willing to do so.  But there very likely are enough fans to buy up the PSL's remaining after the brokers get through.

[Spartacus]

3 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Don't know there'll be that many FANS willing to do so.  But there very likely are enough fans to buy up the PSL's remaining after the brokers get through.

and what-

those brokers are charitable organizations making contributions for the cause? 

only buying PSL's and tix so they can re-sell at an even higher price to some unsuspecting Bills fan

 

if only they had built in Batavia

 

Edited April 25, 2022 by Spartacus

[Ann]

1 hour ago, Spartacus said:

and what-

those brokers are charitable organizations making contributions for the cause? 

only buying PSL's and tix so they can re-sell at an even higher price to some unsuspecting Bills fan

 

if only they had built in Batavia

 

Well, Batavia is a place where you can currently buy a house for $250K, so there is that... 
 

[RochesterRob]

58 minutes ago, Ann said:

Well, Batavia is a place where you can currently buy a house for $250K, so there is that... 
 

  And for 250,000 dollars you are in high society there.   There really is excellent value all over WNY especially if you can do home improvement without the aid of a contractor.  

[Arm of Harm]

4 hours ago, RochesterRob said:

  And for 250,000 dollars you are in high society there.   There really is excellent value all over WNY especially if you can do home improvement without the aid of a contractor.  

 

It certainly could appear that way. But the way I see things, the government owns all real estate in NYS. As an individual, you can rent real estate from its owner. (They call it property tax, not rent, but it amounts to the same thing.) Once you get too behind on your rent payments, the true owner of the property seizes possession.

 

So . . . do you want your rent payments labeled rent payments, or do you want them labeled "property tax?" If they're labeled rent payments, your landlord is responsible for paying for a new roof or a plumber or stuff like that. But if your rent payments are labeled property tax, you yourself have to pay for that stuff. The government enjoys all the privileges of property ownership, and none of the responsibilities. If you significantly improve "your" property, the government will raise your rent (property tax bill). This, even though its contribution to the improvement will have been precisely nothing.

 

Utility rates are high, because utility companies must pay predatory property tax rates. Rail costs are high, because railroads must pay predatory property tax rates. Many factories and other businesses have closed, because they didn't want to pay high utility and rail costs, and because they didn't want to get hammered with predatory property tax rates. If housing prices are relatively low, it's because demand for housing is weak in relation to the supply. Demand is weak due to lack of jobs, which is due to businesses having left, which is due largely to kleptocratic property tax rates.

[Ann]

...
 

 

[Ann]

7 hours ago, Arm of Harm said:

 

Utility rates are high, because utility companies must pay predatory property tax rates. Rail costs are high, because railroads must pay predatory property tax rates. Many factories and other businesses have closed, because they didn't want to pay high utility and rail costs, and because they didn't want to get hammered with predatory property tax rates. If housing prices are relatively low, it's because demand for housing is weak in relation to the supply. Demand is weak due to lack of jobs, which is due to businesses having left, which is due largely to kleptocratic property tax rates.

Ok, as someone who will be selling in the Buffalo area in the next few weeks, and who just finished interviewing Realtors... demand is insane right now.  Homes are priced high and still going up to $100K over ask. Houses are getting between 5-35 contract offers. Gap assurance is standard. Inspections are requested in under 50% of the contracts (two Realtors we interviewed made comments they feel for the inspectors who are not making any money).

{knock on wood} Our house here is going to sell for a lot more than the house we purchased in Florida. If anyone had told me that before we started this process, I'd have asked them what they were smoking. Hot, hot, hot does not begin to describe it, and the pricing + market is being driven by out of area people moving to the Buffalo area.

 

[Arm of Harm]

3 hours ago, Ann said:

Ok, as someone who will be selling in the Buffalo area in the next few weeks, and who just finished interviewing Realtors... demand is insane right now.  Homes are priced high and still going up to $100K over ask. Houses are getting between 5-35 contract offers. Gap assurance is standard. Inspections are requested in under 50% of the contracts (two Realtors we interviewed made comments they feel for the inspectors who are not making any money).

{knock on wood} Our house here is going to sell for a lot more than the house we purchased in Florida. If anyone had told me that before we started this process, I'd have asked them what they were smoking. Hot, hot, hot does not begin to describe it, and the pricing + market is being driven by out of area people moving to the Buffalo area.

 

First, congrats on getting a good price on the house you’re selling. Glad to hear that. 🙂 
 

The way I see things, economic activity is like a fire. Property tax is like pouring water on the fire. Easier to put out a small fire than a big one. With that in mind, property tax is most harmful to a business if the following are true: 1) It’s in a rural area, 2) It’s capital-intensive, like a factory, and 3) It’s something easily relocatable, also like a factory.
 

While property tax is also quite capable of sucking the lifeblood out of farmers, it’s not as though they can relocate their farmland to some other, less oppressive state. Property tax might make the owners of small farms poor, but it won’t extinguish local farming activity the way it extinguishes rural or semi-rural industrial activity. 
 

Property tax is the least destructive in a place like NYC. NYC is a huge financial center, meaning it’s a huge fire very difficult to extinguish. An investment bank or other financial institution is not like a factory. It does not require expensive industrial machinery, on which property tax must be paid. The owner or CEO of an investment bank is a lot less worried about his business’s property tax bill than is the owner of a semi-rural factory. 
 

So . . . is Buffalo more like rural or semi-rural New York State, or is it more like New York City? In the past it was more like rural New York State. Buffalo lost most of its factories, just like the rest of Upstate New York. Many of those factories might have been lost even had property tax rates been non-predatory. But the fact those rates were predatory assured that for the most part, new factories would not appear to take the places of those which had been lost. 
 

Buffalo’s recent resurgence is based on the fact that at least economically, it’s now acting more like NYC than like rural NYS. A call center is not capital-intensive: it does not require big, expensive industrial machinery. A property tax collector sucks much less blood from a call center than from a factory. Buffalo’s recent resurgence is based on call centers and other businesses which don’t get their throats cut by property tax collection, due to not being capital-intensive. 

[Spartacus]

2 minutes ago, Arm of Harm said:

First, congrats on getting a good price on the house you’re selling. Glad to hear that. 🙂 
 

The way I see things, economic activity is like a fire. Property tax is like pouring water on the fire. Easier to put out a small fire than a big one. With that in mind, property tax is most harmful to a business if the following are true: 1) It’s in a rural area, 2) It’s capital-intensive, like a factory, and 3) It’s something easily relocatable, also like a factory.
 

While property tax is also quite capable of sucking the lifeblood out of farmers, it’s not as though they can relocate their farmland to some other, less oppressive state. Property tax might make the owners of small farms poor, but it won’t extinguish local farming activity the way it extinguishes rural or semi-rural industrial activity. 
 

Property tax is the least destructive in a place like NYC. NYC is a huge financial center, meaning it’s a huge fire very difficult to extinguish. An investment bank or other financial institution is not like a factory. It does not require expensive industrial machinery, on which property tax must be paid. The owner or CEO of an investment bank is a lot less worried about his business’s property tax bill than is the owner of a semi-rural factory. 
 

So . . . is Buffalo more like rural or semi-rural New York State, or is it more like New York City? In the past it was more like rural New York State. Buffalo lost most of its factories, just like the rest of Upstate New York. Many of those factories might have been lost even had property tax rates been non-predatory. But the fact those rates were predatory assured that for the most part, new factories would not appear to take the places of those which had been lost. 
 

Buffalo’s recent resurgence is based on the fact that at least economically, it’s now acting more like NYC than like rural NYS. A call center is not capital-intensive: it does not require big, expensive industrial machinery. A property tax collector sucks much less blood from a call center than from a factory. Buffalo’s recent resurgence is based on call centers and other businesses which don’t get their throats cut by property tax collection, due to not being capital-intensive. 

this may come as a shock

but you can make a lot more money from a factory than a call center employing minimum wage workers

 

in some cases, even enough extra to pay the property taxes

(you need to keep those teacher salaries and pension stocked from prop tax so they can push CRT indoctrination)

 

it's those other taxes, like income tax, imposed at every level that are also a challenge 

[RochesterRob]

46 minutes ago, Arm of Harm said:

First, congrats on getting a good price on the house you’re selling. Glad to hear that. 🙂 
 

The way I see things, economic activity is like a fire. Property tax is like pouring water on the fire. Easier to put out a small fire than a big one. With that in mind, property tax is most harmful to a business if the following are true: 1) It’s in a rural area, 2) It’s capital-intensive, like a factory, and 3) It’s something easily relocatable, also like a factory.
 

While property tax is also quite capable of sucking the lifeblood out of farmers, it’s not as though they can relocate their farmland to some other, less oppressive state. Property tax might make the owners of small farms poor, but it won’t extinguish local farming activity the way it extinguishes rural or semi-rural industrial activity. 
 

Property tax is the least destructive in a place like NYC. NYC is a huge financial center, meaning it’s a huge fire very difficult to extinguish. An investment bank or other financial institution is not like a factory. It does not require expensive industrial machinery, on which property tax must be paid. The owner or CEO of an investment bank is a lot less worried about his business’s property tax bill than is the owner of a semi-rural factory. 
 

So . . . is Buffalo more like rural or semi-rural New York State, or is it more like New York City? In the past it was more like rural New York State. Buffalo lost most of its factories, just like the rest of Upstate New York. Many of those factories might have been lost even had property tax rates been non-predatory. But the fact those rates were predatory assured that for the most part, new factories would not appear to take the places of those which had been lost. 
 

Buffalo’s recent resurgence is based on the fact that at least economically, it’s now acting more like NYC than like rural NYS. A call center is not capital-intensive: it does not require big, expensive industrial machinery. A property tax collector sucks much less blood from a call center than from a factory. Buffalo’s recent resurgence is based on call centers and other businesses which don’t get their throats cut by property tax collection, due to not being capital-intensive. 

  There has long been talk of local income tax such as on the county level.  This will level the playing field in terms of old industrial versus other forms of commerce.  I call dibs on Mars to establish my new call center and to exempt from Terran taxes.

 

  As to WNY housing prices 100K over ask has to be well the exception than close to the rule.  That kind of market is pushed by outsiders looking to capitalize on gains made in another market.  Plenty of people moving here from both coasts where they got in many cases over a million dollars for their old properties.  Really not a new things but the emphasis has shifted.  I did tours for Cornell University back in the 1980's and there were people who retired into the area and the value gained from their old property set themselves up as kings here.  Several wineries in the Finger Lakes at that time were the result of people of people having sufficient capital to buy 100 acres and buy the equipment and build the facilites without going into debt.   In 2022 I would say that most real estate transactions are very mundane when the buyers barely make the median income for the area on a local basis.

Edited April 26, 2022 by RochesterRob

[Arm of Harm]

1 hour ago, RochesterRob said:

  There has long been talk of local income tax such as on the county level.  This will level the playing field in terms of old industrial versus other forms of commerce.  I call dibs on Mars to establish my new call center and to exempt from Terran taxes.

 

  As to WNY housing prices 100K over ask has to be well the exception than close to the rule.  That kind of market is pushed by outsiders looking to capitalize on gains made in another market.  Plenty of people moving here from both coasts where they got in many cases over a million dollars for their old properties.  Really not a new things but the emphasis has shifted.  I did tours for Cornell University back in the 1980's and there were people who retired into the area and the value gained from their old property set themselves up as kings here.  Several wineries in the Finger Lakes at that time were the result of people of people having sufficient capital to buy 100 acres and buy the equipment and build the facilites without going into debt.   In 2022 I would say that most real estate transactions are very mundane when the buyers barely make the median income for the area on a local basis.

 

The last time property ownership was possible in an English-speaking nation was 1065. Then the Normans invaded England in 1066, and England ceased to be free. The Normans were bloodthirsty tyrants, known for taking as much as they possibly could. In one case a man had hidden his most valuable possessions. He was imprisoned by a Norman, and one tooth was pulled out each day. When he'd lost half his teeth he finally revealed where his possessions were hidden. 

 

Prior to the Norman invasion, an Englishman could own property on an alloidal basis. Meaning, the property was yours yours, and the government could not impose property tax. After the Norman invasion, all property was owned on a fee simple basis. In this case, fee is short for fief. This meant that the property was sort of yours, sort of your feudal lord's; to whom you owed a duty or tribute. Today, the government serves as the "feudal lord," and property is still owned fee simple. As bad as the Normans were, there was once a certain amount of sense to property tax. Back then the economy was based mostly on cash or barter. An inspector could eyeball some farmland, judge how much it should produce, then demand a percentage of that in the form of property tax. Property tax was originally a form of income tax.

 

NYS now has an actual income tax. Also a corporate profits tax. Also various consumption taxes, including a sales tax, gasoline tax, cigarette tax, hotel tax, restaurant tax, rental car tax, etc. Most property tax bills are sent to properties which don't produce income, such as owner-occupied houses.

 

If property tax no longer serves as an income tax, what is its current function? The other taxes I'd mentioned--such as sales taxes, income taxes, and corporate profits taxes--are based on current economic activity. Suppose there are those who don't want government spending levels constrained by the current level of economic activity. Maybe they want to be able to tax and spend based on both current economic activity and economic activity which had ended decades ago. When a factory closes, it leaves behind large numbers of retired workers. Those retirees live in houses, and those houses are subject to property tax. High property tax rates allow the government to financially benefit from a factory decades after the factory has closed.

 

Because property tax is such a viable path to government over-consumption, public sector unions and other entities which benefit from the over-consumption are going to be highly resistant to the idea of getting rid of it. If a local income tax does get imposed, that tax will likely be in addition to property tax.

[RochesterRob]

2 hours ago, Arm of Harm said:

 

The last time property ownership was possible in an English-speaking nation was 1065. Then the Normans invaded England in 1066, and England ceased to be free. The Normans were bloodthirsty tyrants, known for taking as much as they possibly could. In one case a man had hidden his most valuable possessions. He was imprisoned by a Norman, and one tooth was pulled out each day. When he'd lost half his teeth he finally revealed where his possessions were hidden. 

 

Prior to the Norman invasion, an Englishman could own property on an alloidal basis. Meaning, the property was yours yours, and the government could not impose property tax. After the Norman invasion, all property was owned on a fee simple basis. In this case, fee is short for fief. This meant that the property was sort of yours, sort of your feudal lord's; to whom you owed a duty or tribute. Today, the government serves as the "feudal lord," and property is still owned fee simple. As bad as the Normans were, there was once a certain amount of sense to property tax. Back then the economy was based mostly on cash or barter. An inspector could eyeball some farmland, judge how much it should produce, then demand a percentage of that in the form of property tax. Property tax was originally a form of income tax.

 

NYS now has an actual income tax. Also a corporate profits tax. Also various consumption taxes, including a sales tax, gasoline tax, cigarette tax, hotel tax, restaurant tax, rental car tax, etc. Most property tax bills are sent to properties which don't produce income, such as owner-occupied houses.

 

If property tax no longer serves as an income tax, what is its current function? The other taxes I'd mentioned--such as sales taxes, income taxes, and corporate profits taxes--are based on current economic activity. Suppose there are those who don't want government spending levels constrained by the current level of economic activity. Maybe they want to be able to tax and spend based on both current economic activity and economic activity which had ended decades ago. When a factory closes, it leaves behind large numbers of retired workers. Those retirees live in houses, and those houses are subject to property tax. High property tax rates allow the government to financially benefit from a factory decades after the factory has closed.

 

Because property tax is such a viable path to government over-consumption, public sector unions and other entities which benefit from the over-consumption are going to be highly resistant to the idea of getting rid of it. If a local income tax does get imposed, that tax will likely be in addition to property tax.

  Don't worry.  Property tax still serves as a form of income tax.   As to your factory example we are at the end days of the factory workers who retired supporting a given community.  Locally, the real economy nosed dived sharply during the 1980's as it did in many locales around WNY.  Those workers who got buyouts or had enough to buoy themselves through retirement have been dying off and quite a number are gone due to death or relocation.  And those people had minimal inflationary pressure through that time.  The public financial burden will shift to those far less capable of assuming that responsibility in terms of wages.  40 years ago saw many large scale employers paying hourly wages of 15, 20, 25, dollars per hour or more.  I would imagine that very few rank and file wage earners making much more than 15 dollars per hour today.  Something is going to give in all this and things will get ugly as the state and counties pass more tax increases to offset the income loss by relocating or dead tax payers.  

[Arm of Harm]

2 hours ago, RochesterRob said:

  Don't worry.  Property tax still serves as a form of income tax.   As to your factory example we are at the end days of the factory workers who retired supporting a given community.  Locally, the real economy nosed dived sharply during the 1980's as it did in many locales around WNY.  Those workers who got buyouts or had enough to buoy themselves through retirement have been dying off and quite a number are gone due to death or relocation.  And those people had minimal inflationary pressure through that time.  The public financial burden will shift to those far less capable of assuming that responsibility in terms of wages.  40 years ago saw many large scale employers paying hourly wages of 15, 20, 25, dollars per hour or more.  I would imagine that very few rank and file wage earners making much more than 15 dollars per hour today.  Something is going to give in all this and things will get ugly as the state and counties pass more tax increases to offset the income loss by relocating or dead tax payers.  

 

Property tax is a regressive tax. The lower someone's income, the greater the percentage of that income which likely goes towards paying property tax. Consider for example two commission-only airplane salesmen, who live next door to each other in identical houses. This past year, salesman 1 sold a large airplane, and received a check for $100,000 as his commission. Salesman 2 sold 0 airplanes, and had an annual income of zero for the year. Their property tax bills for the year will be identical, unless Salesman 2 gets a small discount due to the Star program. Salesman 1's property tax bill might be less than 10% of his gross income. Whereas Salesman 2's property tax bill is much larger than his total income. While you are correct to imply that on average there's a loose correlation between income level and property value, that doesn't help Salesman 2. In the case of a retiree, there's a correlation between the income they earned in the past and the value of the property they own now. A high property tax rate is an opportunity for the government to take another bite of income earned decades ago.

 

I agree with you that there's a limit to the extent to which the government can milk retired factory workers. Those workers will eventually die off, and are in the process of dying off. As that revenue source dwindles, the government will need to either a) reduce spending, to live within the means of what local communities can afford, or b) increase tax rates. Given the political environment in NYS, option a) will not be taken seriously. An idea like that would die an instantaneous death if mentioned in any establishment-controlled board, committee, or political body. That leaves option b): continue to spend money at a very rapid pace, with complete disregard for what the local community can afford, and also with complete disregard for whether this spending is helpful or harmful to the community as a whole. For the government to continue to embrace option b) it will be necessary to raise taxes. Thus far the needs of the middle class and working class taxpayers have been completely irrelevant to the thoughts of most NYS politicians. I don't see the middle or working class taxpayers gaining any real power or relevance, even if yet another tax hike causes them to be less docile or gullible.

 

[RochesterRob]

22 minutes ago, Arm of Harm said:

 

Property tax is a regressive tax. The lower someone's income, the greater the percentage of that income which likely goes towards paying property tax. Consider for example two commission-only airplane salesmen, who live next door to each other in identical houses. This past year, salesman 1 sold a large airplane, and received a check for $100,000 as his commission. Salesman 2 sold 0 airplanes, and had an annual income of zero for the year. Their property tax bills for the year will be identical, unless Salesman 2 gets a small discount due to the Star program. Salesman 1's property tax bill might be less than 10% of his gross income. Whereas Salesman 2's property tax bill is much larger than his total income. While you are correct to imply that on average there's a loose correlation between income level and property value, that doesn't help Salesman 2. In the case of a retiree, there's a correlation between the income they earned in the past and the value of the property they own now. A high property tax rate is an opportunity for the government to take another bite of income earned decades ago.

 

I agree with you that there's a limit to the extent to which the government can milk retired factory workers. Those workers will eventually die off, and are in the process of dying off. As that revenue source dwindles, the government will need to either a) reduce spending, to live within the means of what local communities can afford, or b) increase tax rates. Given the political environment in NYS, option a) will not be taken seriously. An idea like that would die an instantaneous death if mentioned in any establishment-controlled board, committee, or political body. That leaves option b): continue to spend money at a very rapid pace, with complete disregard for what the local community can afford, and also with complete disregard for whether this spending is helpful or harmful to the community as a whole. For the government to continue to embrace option b) it will be necessary to raise taxes. Thus far the needs of the middle class and working class taxpayers have been completely irrelevant to the thoughts of most NYS politicians. I don't see the middle or working class taxpayers gaining any real power or relevance, even if yet another tax hike causes them to be less docile or gullible.

 

  What it will boil down to is the Federal government printing money to float local school districts and municipalities via the states.  As the factory workers die off who worked up to 1980 or 1990 they are being replaced on average with people who have far less income to tax plus have to pay a mortgage and support kids.  Something has to give unless money is rendered unimportant in a real sense.  While we see some degree of imports of people coming in because they want to escape the cities plus avoid the inconveniences of the fun and sun states they will not replace the outgoing and dying on a 1 for 1 basis.  At some point home prices will have to move so the couple who has the husband working Jiffy Lube and the wife who works the school cafeteria can afford their own home versus being renters.  Trailers and trailer parks are on the decline in NY.

[Alaska Darin]

44 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  What it will boil down to is the Federal government printing money to float local school districts and municipalities via the states.  As the factory workers die off who worked up to 1980 or 1990 they are being replaced on average with people who have far less income to tax plus have to pay a mortgage and support kids.  Something has to give unless money is rendered unimportant in a real sense.  While we see some degree of imports of people coming in because they want to escape the cities plus avoid the inconveniences of the fun and sun states they will not replace the outgoing and dying on a 1 for 1 basis.  At some point home prices will have to move so the couple who has the husband working Jiffy Lube and the wife who works the school cafeteria can afford their own home versus being renters.  Trailers and trailer parks are on the decline in NY.

Just wait until mortgage interest goes back to traditional norms...

[RochesterRob]

8 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

Just wait until mortgage interest goes back to traditional norms...

  I remember a loan on some land I had at 8 percent during the mid-1990's and thought I was doing OK compared to the guys paying 8.75 percent or more during the same period.  Those days could very well be on the way back.  

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

20 hours ago, Alaska Darin said:

Just wait until mortgage interest goes back to traditional norms...

 

I am so happy right now we got ours refinanced to a pittance.  We had 25 years left on our 30 year...refi'd it last year to an interest rate so low that we knocked it down to a 15-year with the same monthly payment.  

 

Many people who bought in to this low-interest hot real estate market are going to get their faces ripped off.  And blame the banks, of course.

[RochesterRob]

30 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Monkey said:

 

I am so happy right now we got ours refinanced to a pittance.  We had 25 years left on our 30 year...refi'd it last year to an interest rate so low that we knocked it down to a 15-year with the same monthly payment.  

 

Many people who bought in to this low-interest hot real estate market are going to get their faces ripped off.  And blame the banks, of course.

  Read the fine print in your mortgage agreement.  The banks often leave an out to call in a note in case the rates change (in their favor).  The banks are not taking a bath on higher rates all by themselves.