Â Cranbury Forum | Bulletin | Info Sharing Â

Post a reply

Username

Subject

Message body

Emoticons

Font colour: Font size:

Close Tags

[quote="Jeff M."]Okay, I just saw this, but it really makes me annoyed.

COAH's raised the limits to $86,000 for a family of 4.  The reason being that a family at that level cannot afford a decent home in a town like Cranbury.

They then announce the following tax rebate structures.

Households earning up to $100,000 will average $1,115

Households earning between $100,001 and $150,000 will average $665 after getting $960 last year.

Those between $150,001 and $250,000 will get nothing after getting $745 last year.

So, we have families that supposedly can't get decent homes getting the maximum rebates?  Then under COAH they pay reduced taxes and they get maximum refunds.

Those who are struggling with 100K-150K incomes to live on their own merits in a good town like Cranbury are penalized for not wanting a handout. Those who make 150K plus get nothing for their hard work and tax contributions. A family with two 75K wage earners is penalized because they are working hard to support a family with government aid.

It's almost better to tell the wife or husband to stay home and try for a new COAH home if you're like me and have a small home in Cranbury anyway.

I can't tell what arguements the Dems are using.  Either homeowners need help or they don't, if they do then we can't reduce the tax rebates for those income brackets.  If they don't need help then we don't need COAH. Either people making 100K or under need COAH to get a home and if they do then why are they getting the biggest tax rebate program because certainly these individuals don't all have homes since COAH needs to build so many more.  Our state legislators want it both ways all for the unions and votes.

(http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/112-07022008-1557647.html)[/quote]

Options
HTML is ON
BBCode is ON
Smilies are ON

	Disable HTML in this post
	Disable BBCode in this post
	Disable Smilies in this post