As the economy changed from agricultural to industrial, so did the way land was valued. Plots of land too small to feed a family became valuable because they were located close to where people worked. At this point in time land became an indicator of wealth rather than a producer of wealth. Despite the change of land's purpose, people did not question property tax while they lived at the same house and held the same job for most of their lives.
Today many people go through many changes, and some of these changes snowball, further rocking the boat. The best example is retirement. At this point in life one is supposed have paid off the mortgage and own their home outright. At this point the purpose of their income is to no longer acquire things, but to maintain a standard of living (until they die). The typical retiree's income is only a fraction of what it was when they were working. As a result, the amount of income tax this person is responsible for also decreases.
But real estate taxes continue to climb, becoming a bigger portion
of
these people's incomes. Because of such many retirees must leave
"their"
house because they can no longer afford to keep it. Many people feel
that
these people should move - after all a retired couple does not need
a six room house.
Sounds communist to me! "From each
according
to their abilities to each according to their needs"
Yes, few retired people need a six room house, but is it not theirs? When a teenager buys their first car, must that teenager give up their bicycle because they no longer need it? No.
One truly owns the shirt on their back. Once it's purchased, and the tax is paid at the time of purchase, it's yours. There are no taxes for owning that shirt; there are no "shirt police" ready to collect additional revenues.
In short nobody can truly own an item as long as there is a tax on
having
the item. The "tax" is best defined as a rent. If you do not like this
definition, then don't pay your property tax and see what happens!