Home : Blogs : Leigh Brown Charlotte NC Broker/Owner : North Carolina Real Estate>>Charlotte NC Real Estate Specialist

Have some skin in the game!

Now, hear me out. I voted this morning, no lines of course since it's an off year in our area...and for whatever reason a lot of people choose not to vote at the very time when their votes count more than ever (simple statistics, people!). And these are mostly local officials we're selecting, which affect each of us more than the figureheads in Washington. But I digress...

In having a conversation with a highly intelligent friend and client of mine, who also happens to be a fiscal conservative, we discussed some of the major flaws in our electoral system. First and foremost being that you should be a property owner in order to have the privilege of voting. Why would I say that? I think that you should have some skin in the game if you're going to be part of the process of selecting the people who set taxation rates and everything else. Why in the world does it make sense for people who do not own property, to have a say in property tax rates? That's just a very obvious example.

When you own property, you are very vested in the local community. I know that some will argue that renters are also vested....but not really-they can leave at any given time. If property values increase or decrease, it matters to them only in terms of their rental rates. But when you own property, you have some skin in the game. And these local races DO matter. So as a matter of logic-you'd have people voting who know they carry more weight-and as such, would presumably do more investigation of the different candidates and vote based on platforms and merit and not "i'll vote for him because he was raised by a single mother" kind of mentality.

And before you say that this suggestion would separate our society even further by class-I disagree. There are still areas in the US where property values are affordable for even lower-income families. I have worked with purchasers of every race and creed and familial status in every price range ($25,000 to over $1mm). But these are the people who work hard, protect their property, and are vested in their local communities. When the country was founded, only property owners could vote. At the time, that was designed to keep voting rights restricted to a select few. But now that anyone can own property (that is, anyone with a job and with decent credit), it begins to make sense.

I'm not trying to be a flamer here, would welcome any of your thoughts and comments on this election day! And go vote if you disagree with me-otherwise, I have had a say and you haven't. =)

Posted by Leigh Brown Charlotte NC Broker/Owner on 11/07/2006 10:03 AM

Comments (44)

election, politics, taxes

44 Comments on Have some skin in the game!

NOV

2006

Leigh, Maybe there should have been a "replies by register voters only" caveat in your post. I have enjoyed listening to the rants of various citizens and then watch their face fall as I ask if they voted or if they're even registered. My position is "Don't b*tch if you're not a player".

Registering to vote and paying attention puts skin into the game too. Anyone CAN own pretty, but not everyone has the ability to own property,

It's not geographically practical
In our society, we get to choose how to spend our money. If someone chooses to invest in something else, he/she is still very affected by what goes on in government, particularly local government.
In our society, not everyone has the money. The people with poor jobs and credit aren't proles or robots; they are affected.

IMO, property taxes are about the most ridiculous taxes there are -- the more you put into your place, the greater the value, the greater your taxes. But the focus of property taxes, (frequently schools) affects more than property owners.

All voters get to speak on all issues -- that's the little democratic hand raised in our form of government. While we send representatives, we do get to raise our hand on choices and issues. Having the sand to register and haul our butts to the polls represents some skin in the game. Choosing to pout and not vote is prole thinking. (There, I can flame with the best of them)

I'm glad you voted. I will be doing it too in about an hour!

Interesting post, Leigh.....very thought-provoking point you raised about being a property owner in order to have the privilege of voting. Not sure I agree with that, but it does make one think.....'skin in the game', there is merit in that thought.

And now, I'm off to VOTE!!

Ann Cummings

Freedom to vote, freedom to own a property or more, freedom of speech, freedom of writing (blogs included), and basically all of our rights and freedoms to do anything we want, all have some skin in the game.

I liked reading your post, and I voted first thing this morning, on the way to my office. no clouds, no lines, good atmosphere, perfect day.

Eli www.AbsoluteFloridaMortgage.com

I think our laws were originally set up to protect property owners. Therefore women couldn't vote. Women were not property owners they were considered property of their husbands.

You know, i feel the same way about real estate (not that you should have to own the building....)-but if you're not a homeowner, how can you understand how buyers and sellers feel? I've mentioned before that i think there aren't enough barriers to entry in real estate, which is what keeps allowing the less-than-fantastic into the business in droves. All about raising the bar.

Mitchell-you're right that our laws were originally set up to protect property owners, which didn't include women or minorities of any shade. But that's changed as society has become inclusive.

Eli-if we don't vote or stick up to protect our freedoms, we will LOSE them most assuredly!

Ann-thanks for voting-the differences among us make life so interesting when we can talk and debate and not throw mud or sticks!

JudyAnn-I see your points, but would argue that if someone is investing at all in anything, there's a piece of real estate somewhere in the puzzle even if it's just a personal residence. I would challenge that there are few market investors who don't see the value in the limited commodity that land represents. And I didn't say that those with poor jobs and credit are merely proles. America provides a unique opportunity to change and improve oneself. But I for one don't think that those who can't manage their own credit should be in charge of managing goverment. And as you said-it does take 'sand' to go vote!! =)\

Chris-I hear ya, if you don't vote, don't complain. =)

Leigh - Interesting ideas!

Chris - that "don't b&^%h is PERFECT!

If you both get a chance- check out my post from earlier today.

VOTE!

Leigh, this is not directed at you personally, just what you wrote: I disagree. There is much more that we vote on besides what the taxes are going to be. In my state we have 3 referrenum questions that will become state law if they pass. None have anything to do with property, even remotely. Some people are young and haven't established themselves to own property yet. Many of them are serving our country in the military. You're saying they shouldn't vote for who's going to command them? Many people are old and can't afford their homes so they sell and move into elderly housing. The're not vested in the community? My daughter works at a pizza place. The owner rents an apartment. He shouldn't vote?

Going with your idea, only people who are currently in the military can vote for president, only people who are currently property owners can vote on taxes, elderly can't vote at all, they've had their turn. Oh, and more rules, if you are planning on selling in the near future and you will not be a property owner anymore, you cannot vote. But, if you plan on purchasing in the future you can vote because any new property laws will affect you. And if you plan on moving out of state, you must go to that state to vote. If you vote, then move unexpectedly, your vote will be erased. If enough people who voted move, and their votes affected the outcome, the law will be changed.

This is one of those silly ideas that once you've had your second cup of coffee goes away. It will pass.

(I guess you can tell I'm a bleeding heart liberal, lol.)

Mitchell, in some places that still holds true. My last name is not Pina. On my marriage license it's dePina, meaning, of the Pina's. I belong to my husband's family according to his culture. Ha! I don't use the de-. He didn't know what he was getting himself into when he married me!

Crystal, even though i disagree with you, I respect that you took the time to share your opinions! Mainly look at the overall idea structure-that there should be more of a requirement to be allowed to vote than merely living and breathing (which in some areas where the dead are apparently voting is still too much!). Surely even you bleeding hearts among us would agree that not everyone is 100% equal and fit for all decisions? ;) (this is why i read Harper's and the Atlantic Monthly-gotta know what the enemy is thinking).

Leigh, I used to work in a psychiatric nursing facility. One of the highlights was helping some (not all) of them fill out their mail in votes. Our right to vote is what makes us different than most of the world.

Speaking of the elderly - I would trust the judgement of an 80-year old that will never own property again over the judgment of a 30 year old homeowner. The 80 year old has so many experiences that a younger man or woman could even imagine.

I look forward to the day when my house is paid off so I can sell it, buy an RV and travel the country living free. I still want my right to vote. My forefathers dumped a lot of tea to give me the right to vote on taxes. Choosing not to exercise that right is also a choice. It's choosing to let others choose for me. Not having the ability to choose is a different story. Is it really a *right* to vote, or is it a *privilage* that can be given and taken away?

Voting is a privilege. That's why the vote is taken away from felons in jail...they gave up the privilege in exchange for taking away the rights of others. If we treat voting as a right, against all standards, we will lose it. Voting should be treated as a high privilege, with everyone who casts a vote taking the time to read up on candidates and issues before voting. Heck, you should take a quiz before you vote about the different candidates and their stances-i don't care which way you vote, but i most definitely think you should be paying attention to what you're doing.

I do trust the elderly-but my own grandmother, who suffers from Alzheimers, and wants to vote-i don't think she should be voting. Her mind isn't 100% sound but she's allowed to vote. That's not age discrimination or anything else-it's common sense. Not that all older folks have senility and such, it's an example.

If our citizens treated voting as a privilege instead of a right, I think voting would be taken a lot more seriously and we would have much higher turnouts. And i wouldn't need to think up cockamamie schemes like being a property owner to vote.

I understand there is a certain amount of cognition necessary to be able to vote. As I said, I worked in a psychiatric nursing facility. Not all the residents had the mind to vote. Many of them couldn't make day to day decisions such as whether it was too cold outside to go without a coat, or whether it was too hot inside to take the coat off. I also think that if I knew how each candidate really stood, I'd probably give up and not vote at all, lol. (And they say buyers are liars?!)

In my state felons are reinstated their right to vote as soon as they are free. Only 4 states bar felons for life. Since the majority of felons in prisons are black males, those states have a majority of whites voting. Talk about schewing the polls! I know you're going to say they gave up that right. Granted, this is not the forum to get into racial issues, so I will just say that I absolutely believe non property owners should have the right to vote. I also believe it should be a right that can only be taken away permanently when it's shown that you cannot make sound decisions, because I probably agree that someone who's incarcerated has given up their rights during that time.

i believe we can safely agree to disagree, Crystal! =) And that's the beauty of this place in which we live.

I can agree with your point of view. because most of the issues pertain to taxes.

In Missouri, voting is a right, so those without photo ID could use other forms today because the decision to make voters use photos was slammed through and not thought out. The right to vote is not in the US Constitution, the decision was left up to the states.

I did it! And, was sorry that I could only say Yes or No, because I have thought about my decisions and wanted to present my genius opinions.

The gist I'm getting from this stimulating exchange is that people need to VOTE, to exercise their right/privilege and if we could think up a wake-up tool, like property ownership or photo ID, etc. we would like to try it. If the proposition were made to the rabble that they must Vote about if they should own property to vote, I think the stats for voting would improve. I expect them to improve today in Missouri because the possibility of being dis-enfrancised provided a wake-up prod.

I beg your pardon, Leigh, that I didn't clearly get your intent at first. Poke, prod and keep those rabble roused, folks. We, the rabble, are what makes our country the best.

JudyAnn I could just hug your neck for getting my point after all these comments!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What a great post. I mailed in my votes ... VERY important issues on the table here. (and all the controversy that I can handle...I live just a few blocks from Pastor Ted Haggard... )

I am a Conservative and a multiple property owner in various juridisctions. I appreciate your "skin in the game" comment. Does that mean that I should have more than one vote?

How about those with a higher aggregate value than others getting more votes?

The Founding Fathers and The Framers dealt with this issue when the Constitution was drafted and were careful to steer clear of establishing an aristocracy of landed gentry.

As a Conservative, I'm going to side with the wisdom of the Framers and disagre with your radical propostion.

Now, passing a civics test to earn the right to vote ? That is a radical proposition I'd support. Intellectual "skin in the game" is preferable

Leigh, You did not disagreed with me, basically I wrote that I did vote first thing today...and naturally I'm a big beleiver that all of us need to, and should vote...it is our basic for freedom, for expressing our point of view, and yes, I do understand that you are Republican...and thats perfectly fine with me...lol.

Eli, i'm honored that you who are non-Republicans among the crew will welcome me anyway. ;) And just for the record-I never vote straight party-I vote item by item, and only register R to get the opportunity to vote in the primaries that are closer to my beliefs than the others. I personally think both parties are so freaking far from where the country started we need to scrap it all and start over. Since when should all politicians be those lawyers with deep pockets??? Brian, i just think SOMETHING radical is required to shake up the status quo. Nothing frightens me more than apathy. And Derek/Mariana-ouch! what a neighbor to have...

Well, Leigh...the offerings (choices) could be more dynamic for one. Where the hell is the next Reagan (for our team) or Jack Kennedy (for the blue team)?

Leigh. Nobody wants to come to to the ballpark because they think the game has been tainted.

The party lines are blurred. This "Republican" in the White House looks ,more and more like LBJ with his spending on guns and butter simulatneously. Then again, are you really going to trust Hillary to keep you safe from the bogeyman? Yep, the lines are blurred and noone likes what they see. THAT is the apathy play.

We need strong leadership. I'm sick of voting the lesser of two evils; that's what I've done since 1996 (when i proudly voted for Bob Dole)

Sorry everybody to get political today...BUT...it IS election day.

I get your post, Leigh. It sounds like you are as upset as everybody with the apathy. I wish I could give you a better answer. Where the hell is Tip O'Neill when you need him most? You could call the guy a raving liberal, he could refer to you as a fascist, and you could still sip a pint with him at 5PM

Tip O'Neill-now there's a name from the past and oh, how i used to enjoy his commentary!!! the intelligent commentary seems to be a thing of the past-the current folks are all rhetoric.

And i love Bob Dole and Liddy too, proud to have her as a NC Senator.

You know, when I was a kid, I dreamed of being President. Told everybody who would listen from about the 7th grade onwards. I still run into teachers and friends' parents who ask about those political aspirations. And i tell them that i have no desire to sit in that chair, it's just a lightning rod for controversy. The real power is in the local businessperson who creates jobs and opportunities. And as I've told many a Democratic friend-you'll be a Republican, too, when you make enough money and pay enough in taxes.

Leigh, Let me see, you must own property to vote. Like Brian I also own multiple properties. Now in my opinion a renter definitely has a vested interest (skin in the game) in whether or not property taxes go up or down. Why? Because they are the ones paying them. If taxes go up, rents go up. There are many reasons why people don't own property. And many have nothing to do with the ability to own. I just don't see your reasoning at all.

Your statement that anyone can own own a home is not even close to being the truth. How about the single mom that works 2 jobs to support her family and still only makes $300 to $400 a week? How about all the folks that work hard providing all the services that us select few are accustomed to? I mean, the last thing they need is for us to say "Oh I am sorry you can pick up my garbage but since you can't buy a house we are not going to let you vote. After all you have "no skin in the game".

In my opinion, cruel. But hey, it's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

Bryant, you must be tired. =) I was hoping that by this late portion of the day my perhaps-too-subtle point would appear (read these last few comments pretty please). =)

Ok I WILL come back to this one in the morning.

Leigh, you didn't understand me between the lines...so I will state it...I AM A Republican. I have been a D for many years, and I've "cross the line" to R just before 1998 elections. I feel good with my decision, I think all of this over here is getting out of proportion...but as Brady mentioned IT IS election day after all....And I firmly beleive that each one of us is entitle to hold on to his opinions/beleives...this is exactly why the US is the biggest democracy nation on the globe, right?

Ok - I have read, and re-read and re-read the post/comments. I somehow misunderstood (??) the post originally... Now that I have read/re-read/re-read/re-read... I must say that I do not think that I could disagree with you more. I MUST say that I am with BB (Broker Bryant) and BB (Brian Brady), here.

I am quite the "R" - with "D" tendencies. I am also an American History buff. If we remove the right to vote from ANY law abiding citizen- renter or owner or investor or landlord ... we are damaging the very fiber that our country was founded on. Some of the most intelligent people I know are not in a position to own a home- or chose not to. And? Some of the most ignorant __________'s (fill in the blank) are landlords.

However, all this said- you are entitled to your opinion, and are brave to post it.

(On a lighter note... did you know that you can't register as a Whig for the primaries? Don't ask me how I know this...)

~Mariana Wagner

I too voted early and I am proud that we get the opportunity to do so. Having the ability to have a say in what happens to me (whether or not I agree with the particular politician) that should not be taken lightly. You have some interesting points, but restricting voting on any issue to only those it would affect would be too cumbersome for an already faulty system in many locales. I respectfully disagree with your comments. In Arizona, we had 19 different propositions to vote on in addition to the candidate elections. So, by your standards, if I didn't own a home, I not only wouldn't be able to have a say in who represents my district, but also wouldn't be able to have a say on whether the local restaurant/bar I might want to dine in could have smoking. I may not own the business, but I still have a right to go there. Or how land should be preserved for the community good, etc etc.

speaking of having skin in the game, how about realtors that don't have any skin in the game!!!!

I see it all the time, realtors showing and selling homes, yet they rent an apartment? One of my big deals is "I walk the talk", own investment property, etc. It has paid off handsomely.

Okay, that's it. I announce, already. I've heard all the bellyaching, all the name calling, all the pointing fingers. I will clean up government. I will be republican environmentalist. I will be a pro-business Democrat. I will make Mitt my running mate and announce my bid for President in 2008.

(just a joke; this isn't a real announcement)

I don't know, Craig.. How about those agents that sold out last year? I wish I was one of them today.

It depends on what area of the country you are in. If I was in California, I would have sold last year and been buying in markets around the country that hasn't had much property value growth, like Indiana, Ohio, etc.

It would be professinally managed by someone else, as I work the business, not in the business..so for me, it doesn't matter what area of the country it's in as long as it's a good value.

Of course, I would be renting in California and Vegas after selling my home, and buying in other areas of the country.

I was talking to realtor in Vegas a few days ago. I asked how much a 2,000 sq. ft. home could rent for? She said about $1,500. How much is it worth? $400k!!!

That same home in Indianapolis rents for $1400 or so, and is worth 150k.

I would sell in Vegas, rent for $1,500, and funnel my profits to cheap areas of the country like Indiana

HHmmmmm..... where to start. Leigh, some good opinions and discussions. I shouldn't come out and say what I am .... so judgment isn't passed on..but I am a Republican. Now keep the comments to yourself... lol

WOW... I wrote that firs paragraph at 8:30 pm...I have been on the phone since then. It's now 11:20 pm...

So...back to my thoughts.... Leigh.... opinions and thoughts have what make America what is is today. Sometimes getting us in trouble... ;o) I would have to disagree about the statement that was made.... only people that own houses should be able to vote, because of the property tax issues. Let me pose a scenario for you. Would it be fair for me to make a new rule then.... only those with kids should pay property taxes, more so, school taxes?? I don't have kids, but part of my taxes go to school taxes. Just food for thought.....

Getting back to politics in general. I have alway felt this since High School....well, maybe more so when I came out of College. We NEED a 3 party system. I think Brian Brady mentioned it and a few others.... I am tired of seeing people vote for the next person in line.

example.... and I don't want to make this part of the discussion. I am not taking a poll here. But I have been watching TV all night... the election races. More Democratics are winning.... some that had no chance a few months ago. My opinion, but you know what is hurting the Republican's?? The War... and too many Democratics made the promise to get our troops out if they get elected. I AM SORRY.... BS I guarantee that many voters voted on their person of choice just based on this thought and this thought only. That is why our whole system has been upside down for so many years.

Here is why I say this. When Clinton won his first term... this old couple was interviewd and were asked who they voted for. "Clinton" And why? Because we needed change. I am sorry....but if you have 2 people....running against each other. Forget about the independents...sorry... but think about it. You have 2... one has pissed you off.... you go to the next person in line. And until we change this.... Gov't will not more forward as it should.

\Anyhow....just some opinion...

Bryant.... very good point. I know there was something....but I am just brain tired..... like I said... I started my comment over 3 hours ago... since then, there have been 10 new comments. Maybe something that I even mentioned was mentioned. I need to read all of these...

But again..Bryant makes a great point..., I am going to go back and read again.

Eli, don't worry about this getting out of hand. It's a lively debate, that's all. Not one person has attacked another's character or person.

I, for one, love a debate that sends me Googling for the correct facts. Leigh got me thinking and Googling, and aparently a lot of others. As Jeff said, opinions and thoughts are what makes us American, and the fact that we can share them freely.

And, Brian, yes, you definately should have more than one vote, although I think the amout of votes should be tied to property value. You get 1 vote for every $200,000 in assessed value you have.

Great topic, Leigh. I hope you can tell that although I disagree with your opinion, I was having fun with it.

NOV

2006

Well, as a lifelong Republican, Crystal, I would insist that commercial properties be included. We refer to that as "gerrymandering" the districts economically.

Thanks, Crystal. I would encourage anyone who reads this long crazy post and all of the varied comments to read it all. It's an interesting chain of thought at this point! And I have to admit-my purpose and thought process in posting was that we as a nation sometimes need crazy opinions out there, to stir up the electorate and get a response. I'm sure you have all formed an opinion of me at this point, whether it's correct or not will be for you to decide when and if we ever meet. But read my posts and comments and you'll see that I'm pretty consistent. I just want people to have to THINK before they vote and I want them to PARTICIPATE.

Leigh.... if we are all civil in here and adults.... it's not so much forming an opinion of you. I mentioned this in a blog that I did last night...in regards to a 3rd party system. Even though I disagree with your statement, you are the one that got my juices flowing and started that blog. I don't want to post it in here, the title of it, unless you were okay with it...or posted it yourself, if you were okay with it.

I agree with your one statement though.... that we do need to stir things up. But the problem that I have with this is that we need to pick and choose what we stir up. And I don't think the tax issue is something to stir up. Meaning, those that own get to vote and those that rent don't. That would be more like a revolt to me. And Bryant makes a great point in regards to renters.

In any case.... opinions and thoughts are great and what made American what it is today. And taking that chance. But some of these things need to be thought out before acted on.

And like I said... if you want to endorse my current blog in your comments here, that would be great....since you are getting a very good discussion and feedback here. thanks, jeff

Thought provoking. Love the fact that we live somewhere thoughts are allowed with no fear of being murdered in your sleep for it. Ok so here are mine.

Try living in a state like Ohio where property taxes fund schools. Even the Court system is aghast at this and the schools suffer. Property taxes should be paid by those who own property. But what about those folk who can't afford to own? Or don't care for or are too infirmed to keep up a house? Should they lose their basic privileges to vote? I like it the way it is, sorry. As long as you vote, IMHO, you have a vested interest in what happens in our Country. I think the 'owning property to vote' idea was done already; Roman Empire and Medieval times?

Interesting, then states like Utah would have even less say than they do now, with the feds owning the majority of the land. And what would you say to someone who could die for their country, but not vote? They have a little more "skin" in the game than a landowner.

Keith-we'd give more credit to the landowners in Utah since they live in Utah. =) (just a joke, i'm already in enough trouble, i know!) I am a FIRM supporter of our military, I can't begin to name off all the guys I know who are serving (NC being the home to a very large portion of our military men and women). I'll grant them an exception. Especially since the majority of our military leans Republican!

and if you didn't read Jeff Belonger's post about the 3-party idea, go find it, it's excellent reading. one day i'll figure out how to backlink. =)

Leigh ... I hope you get oodles of points for this. You sure have provoked the thoughts out of many Rainers!! Cheers!

I don't know, Wagners. I think i've branded myself as a radical weirdo now and Matt and Caleb probably want to turn a blind eye. ;)

OCT

2007

Revived with a new comment: Hmmm. This is definitely something to think about. You are right about having some skin in the game, but that could so easily be abused.

Leave a response…

Name:

Email:
(optional)

Comment:

What does the graphic say?