California Constitutional Amendment Seeks 18% Top Tax Rate for Universal Medicare

Free Health Care is a Right   

The Assembly Constitutional Amendment ACA 11 proposal declares “Comprehensive health care coverage for every resident of California is a right” and seeks major tax hike to pay for it. 

The Tax Foundation does a Tax Analysis of the proposal. 

A proposed constitutional amendment (ACA 11) in California would increase taxes by $12,250 per household, roughly doubling the state’s already high tax collections, to fund a first-in-the-nation single-payer health-care system. The top marginal rate on wage income would soar to 18.05 percent—nationally, the median top marginal rate is 5.3 percent—and the state would adopt a new 2.3 percent gross receipts tax (GRT), at a rate more than three times that of the country’s highest current pure GRT. 

All told, the new tax package is intended to raise an additional $163 billion per year, which is more than California raised in total tax revenue any year prior to the pandemic.

These taxes, moreover, could be increased by simple majorities in the legislature, as the bill exempts the three new taxes from the constitution’s supermajority requirements for tax increases. If a future legislature decides that doubling the state’s tax collections was insufficient, the constitution’s supermajority requirement would not stand in its way. And while the new surtaxes are inflation-indexed (the payroll tax’s second bracket is not), the legislature is authorized to suspend inflation indexing at any time, which would lead to the particularly curious case of inflation-indexing the standard income tax brackets but not the surtax brackets.

New Tax Hikes 

  1. Surtaxes atop the current individual income tax structure beginning at $149,509 in income;
  2. A graduated-rate payroll tax system with the top rate kicking in for employees with more than $49,990 in annual income; and
  3. A gross receipts tax of 2.3 percent, excluding the first $2 million of business income.

And while 16 states either implemented or enacted individual or corporate income tax cuts in 2021, and more are looking to join them in 2022, California policymakers want voters to approve five new surtaxes, with a top rate of 2.5 percent atop the current 13.3 percent top marginal income tax rate and the proposed new 2.25 percent payroll tax, for a combined top marginal rate of 18.05 percent. This is more than 7 percentage points higher than the next-highest rates in Hawaii (11 percent), New York (10.9 percent), and New Jersey and the District of Columbia (both at 10.75 percent).

Issues with the proposal abound.

For instance, the payroll tax exempts employers with fewer than 50 resident employees, punishing small businesses for expanding and creating a meaningful tax cliff. Imagine, for instance, the overly simplified hypothetical of a company with 49 employees making $80,000 each. At 49 employees, the company has no payroll tax burden. Hiring one additional employee generates a tax bill of $90,000—more than that employee’s salary!

Grand Experiment

I highly doubt that even California residents are silly enough to vote for this, but who knows. 

Since it only impacts those who live and work in California, perhaps every outsider should root for this knowing full well it will backfire instantly causing a mad scramble to undo the Constitutional Amendment.

Passage is what the Progressive lunatics deserve, but the amendment affects innocent parties, not just the lunatics.

Thanks for Tuning In!

Like these reports?

If so, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish 

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Comments to this post are now closed.

67 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mike 2112
Mike 2112
3 years ago
Mish, this is California we’re talking about. Between drop-boxes and ballot harvesting they will get the votes they need to pass these amendments.
It should go down in flames, but it wont.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Just saw a story in the local paper that CA governor Newsom has plans with 45 colleges starting the fall of 2022 start a public service corps for college students.  Initially, 6500 students who perform 450 hours of public service work will receive $10k towards their education (I assume paid directly to the colleges).  The $146 million cost will come out of the state budget.  CA has a surplus to spend!  Step right up.
Casual_Observer2020
Casual_Observer2020
3 years ago
I’ve been out here over 10 years. A lot of proposals come and go. What amazes me is California continues to collect higher revenue despite losing taxpayers. The number of big taxpayers must be making up for the loss of middle tax payers.  The world needs a deflationary cycle but the problem is as foreign money continues to be laundered in real estate and other investments, it doesn’t seem to impact anything.  The real question is how much black money is there to be laundered from China, Russia and other places. It appears to be unlimited. 
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
The leeches pulling the wagons another step closer…..
Now attempting to shift the majority of top talent engineering, and other high value, workers: From neutrals+- of the theft rackets, to instead being added to the group of those preyed on in order to keep the rackets afloat. Effectively hitting the $100-$150K and up to $250-400K (my rough estimate) the hardest in practice. All in order to keep the leeches living off of Fed welfare instead of talent and effort, effectively just as flush as before. While attempting to, as always, drag out a few destitutes, in order to serve as marketing fodder aimed at fooling the easily so into believing the leeches are somehow altruistically helping anyone.
Even among the group ostensibly receiving “benefits” they did not have before: Much of whatever “benefit” accrues from the “medicare-for-all” nonsense, will go to dilettante children of the leeching classes. Genuine destitutes are already getting effectively free care, since they simply cannot afford to pay for any of it. And doctors and nurses don’t as a rule let people die in front of them. This is largely about making it cheaper for Daddy FedLeech, so he doesn’t have to keep fork over to the “Insurance” racketeers for his dilettante leechlings; as they “follow the Dead,” write elevator pitches for a “startup” (hey, it;’s the best they can do…) or pretend to possess some, any, form of creative talent; before joining the daddy’s leeching firm. As well as making sure there are enough productives available to rob, to allow the illiterate deadweights The Fed handed control of health care facilities to, to get oodles of taxpayer money, for not doing anything their doctors and nurses aren’t effectively doing already.
Only possible upside: What the income taxman steals from productives in this income bracket, will to a large extent come directly out of the funds currently being stolen in the form of mortgages and “home prices.” So the net effect may not be nearly as onesidedly ruinous for productive people as the leeches intended.
But still: TikTok 1, Silicon Valley yet another 0.
Anon1970
Anon1970
3 years ago
Before the Iron Lady (Margaret Thatcher) overhauled Britain’s income tax structure around 1980, the country’s maximum income tax rate on investment income was 98%, with the top rate on wage income at 78%, as I recall from one of my economics classes in college. In those days, Britain was known as the sick man of Europe.
How will these tax increases affect retiree income (non-wage)?
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  Anon1970
Thatcherism turned Britain into “Plague Island”!      The worst form of sickness.
honestcreditguy
honestcreditguy
3 years ago
crazy, screwsome at it again, instead of every friends wives, he is after anyone making a dollar….
Stan888
Stan888
3 years ago
If this passes then Apple will move out of California.
thimk
thimk
3 years ago
Benny Hill English TV comedian circa 1980’s did a parody skit  of the English healthcare system . 
Eddy
Eddy
3 years ago
Reply to  thimk
This is wonderful.  Thank you.  (And you can bet California’s single payer won’t be much better, so take the door on the right if you can.)
ohno
ohno
3 years ago
The libtards just don’t give up.  Everyday is a new disaster.
KidHorn
KidHorn
3 years ago
Another proposal to find an unaffordable way to pay for medical costs. Why doesn’t anyone address the real problem? Health care costs too much. It’s because the health care sector contributes a lot of money to both parties.
Six000mileyear
Six000mileyear
3 years ago
Reply to  KidHorn
And people make bad personal choices: Smoking, overeating, sedentary life, drinking, drugs, sexually transmitted disease, and unwanted pregnancy.
honestcreditguy
honestcreditguy
3 years ago
Reply to  Six000mileyear
obesity pandemic….go to beach and see why were slow moving bait…..wounded by overindulgence and vanity….
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
3 years ago
I’m guessing if passed it would be a positive for Austin real estate. 🙂
You can’t possibly make a great single payer work for any individual state because if you created a functional system the state would be overrun with retired people from other states looking for cheap supplemental healthcare beyond what Medicare provides, and whatever way you taxed it, you’d drive the tax donkeys OUT of the state. Recipe for failure. Doubt it makes the cut for even getting not he ballot.
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  Eddie_T

If they
limit it to those who have resided in California for the last five years it
could work but the avowed reason for implementing it is to include illegal immigrants
then I doubt if that requirement would have been put in. I think this is used
to show how progressive they are and expect it not to pass. In that case it
would be a Democrat marketing ploy and nothing more. We will see if it passes.

prumbly
prumbly
3 years ago
Reply to  Eddie_T
Isn’t California also proposing to continue taxing you for 10 years even if you leave the state?
Casual_Observer2020
Casual_Observer2020
3 years ago
Reply to  Eddie_T
Not if retirement income is subject to state income tax, which it is, not only California but every other state that has an income tax. 
FooFooFed
FooFooFed
3 years ago
Needs 2/3 of the legislature vote just to get it on ballot. 
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  FooFooFed
I think this is just for the DONORcrat Party to claim that they wanted to pass single-payer.   Nothing more.    Just like the Obama administration did during its two terms.   Lots of boxes ticked, but in reality, it meant nothing, or in the case of things like Obolacare with its numerous hidden trapdoors (like the DCE which is making news now as it corporatizes Medicare), actually made things worse.
RonJ
RonJ
3 years ago
Is this why Pelosi was looking for property in Florida?
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
3 years ago
Reply to  RonJ
Most people with money want property here or Texas because of the Homestead act. It means that even if you get sued into oblivion, you can’t lose your primary residence. OJ Simpson used it to successfully retain a very nice home when he got sued into oblivion by by Nicole Simpsons relatives.
It also means Florida is home to a lot of scams and scofflaws because they can put the money into a property and not lose it.
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
You live in Palm Beach County I believe. My parents live there too and they are now 99 years old. The health care there for seniors is exceptional. Maybe that’s why she wants property in Florida or maybe she doesn’t want to be inhaling all the smoke from the wildfires in California. 
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
It’s going to be interesting to watch the TV coverages of the rising sea levels asFl sinks below the waves like Atlantis.
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
I was an early convert to global warming back in the early ’80s. My parents have a place on the inland waterway there near the inlet and I cut notches to record the high and low water levels. Forty-five years later those notches are still there and the water level has risen not even a quarter of an inch. I am not worried about Florida going under the waves soon.
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
And yet you see stories like the below.  In the next 30-50 years max, the Fl Keys and Miami will almost certainly be underwater.  Your story seems anecdotal, at best.
———–
The Cost of Insuring Expensive Waterfront Homes Is About to Skyrocket
New federal flood insurance rates that better reflect the real risks of climate change are coming. For some, premiums will rise sharply.
By Christopher Flavelle
Sept. 24, 2021
Florida’s version of the American dream, which holds that even people of relatively modest means can aspire to live near the water, depends on a few crucial components: sugar white beaches, soft ocean breezes and federal flood insurance that is heavily subsidized.
But starting Oct. 1, communities in Florida and elsewhere around the country will see those subsidies begin to disappear in a nationwide experiment in trying to adapt to climate change: Forcing Americans to pay something closer to the real cost of their flood risk, which is rising as the planet warms.
….
AND
Sea level rise is increasing fastest in populous coastal areas, study says
By Jackson Dill and Brandon Miller, CNN
Updated 8:12 PM ET, Tue March 9, 2021
(CNN) Coastal communities are experiencing sea level rise four times worse than global water rise, according to a new study released Monday.
Groundwater pumping, extraction of materials from the ground and sediment production are all happening near the coasts and that is causing the land to actually sink — compounding the effects of a rising sea level.
….
AND
ERIC NIILER SCIENCE
03.08.2021 07:00 AM
The Tide Is High—and Getting Higher
A trove of historic records show that dredging and sea level rise are making nuisance high tides worse along the US coasts.
LIVING NEAR THE ocean is a dream for many people. But in recent years, the effects of climate change have made it a dicey proposition. Hurricanes have become more intense, leading to bigger storm surges and heavier rainfall that pound coastlines, erode beaches, and destroy homes. That storm threat has been compounded by so-called nuisance flooding that occurs during high tides, even during calm weather and clear skies. A new study shows that nuisance flooding is exacerbated by dredging and the construction of piers and jetties that were intended to make coastal living easier but are in fact redirecting the flow of incoming ocean water and making high tides higher than ever before.
Published Friday in the journal Science Advances, the study compared high and low tide ranges measured during the past 70 years with an older database of historic tidal measurements made in the mid-1800s and recently found in stacks of old boxes stored in an annex of the National Archives in College Park, Maryland. The researchers found that out of 40 coastal tide gauges operated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), nearly half had measured more nuisance flooding days because of higher local tide ranges. Cities built along coastal estuaries showed the biggest tidal changes.
These daytime floods have hit coastal residents in places like Miami; Norfolk, Virginia; and Charleston, South Carolina. “Even though they are not killing people, these nuisance flooding events are costing us a lot of money, destroying property, and are preventing people from getting to work,” says study author Thomas Wahl, an assistant professor of civil, environmental and construction engineering at the University of Central Florida.
….
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
I have been hearing those stories for a very long time now and after decades they have not become true. At some point you have to assess what you have been told and what you see with your eyes. For places like Miami and Norfork they have a ground sinking problem and not a rising sea problem. I remember when they claimed that there will be expanding deserts. Deserts are not expanding but the opposite with higher evaporation. I remember when they said that snow would vanish except in the very high elevations. That didn’t happen. I remember when they said the Arctic would be ice-free by now and it isn’t. After decades of failed predictions maybe one should ask themselves why the predictions were wrong. You tell me why these predictions haven’t been right and tell me why I should put my trust in those who are consistantly wrong?
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
Those stories document actual impacts occurring due to climate change.  I have many more I could post. Sea levels are rising and there is a progression of effects , including increases in general and flood insurance along costal properties, especially in FL.
You can choose to “believe” or not. [shrug]
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
Post studies and not CNN articles if you want creadibility. Sea levels are rising but at a very slow rate with no recent acceration. Insurance rates going up because housing prices on the coasts have been going too as well as inflation. Do you know how much coastal real estate prices have gone up in Florida? You can believe whatever you want too. Considering the number of people moving to Florida I would say that they don’t have the same worries are you have.
Mike 2112
Mike 2112
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
The feds raising flood insurance rates doesnt mean the sea levels are rising. It could be b/c of rising costs for limber and copper, etc and it could be b/c they’re talking their book and want everyone to think sea levels are rising (remember: it’s the feds)
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
You remember correctly. I am in Palm Beach County.
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Nice place to live. Lots of Canadians there too.
thimk
thimk
3 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
yes and homesteading in Florida puts  cap on property insurance increases . Nice touch  
Okienomics
Okienomics
3 years ago
On the plus side, by having a single payer system, CA can deny medical care for anyone refusing experimental therapeutics, so that’s progress, right?
RonJ
RonJ
3 years ago
Reply to  Okienomics

“That’s not misinformation,” he said. “I’m
just quoting the data. All of this can be looked up. Fact-checkers can
look at it. I know I’ll never have any problems with allegations of
misinformation, because I just quote the data.”

Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
And would companies no longer have to subsidise healthcare costs for their employees? Would it in principle lower the costs of companies in California? There are a lot of unknowns to explore. Vermont tried the single payer route and failed. 
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
I had forgotten about the Vermont experiment until you brought it up again.
The key point in there is at that there are varying levels of coverage in a state (and especially a country). Of course the Government unions have the fattest and best health care and they won’t accept anything less. Bringing everyone else up to that level always breaks the bank.
Many in other countries like Realist don’t understand that the best US plans dwarf anything available in Canada or Europe or anywhere else because they are Cadillac plans with incredible coverage with access to the very best treatments, doctors and facilities. Everyone can’t be brought up to that level and no one is willing to accept less than what they have now.
That’s why I prefer tiered care. If you have money, you should be able to buy the best and get it immediately. It’s part of the incentive to work hard.
thimk
thimk
3 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
yes and an incentive to take care of yourself .
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
If you haven’t lived in the US it can be hard to understand the health system. On top of it many countries like to mask their problems with their own health systems by saying it’s worse in the US. I see it happen all the time. The French system is good enough but many of its hospitals are dumpy and the nurses and doctors are underpaid so the system is under pressure. They too have a big problem with health deserts. Fortunately they have a parallel private system that is better in some ways and they complement each other. They can give you the cadillac treatment if your mutual plan is good. Of course everyone knows it isn’t free because they do pay taxes. The twenty percent VAT hits anyone who buys anything and no way to escape it but at least you don’t have to worry about the bills or losing your coverage when you are sick. 
My daughter is a doctor in Vermont and she likes it there. 
Casual_Observer2020
Casual_Observer2020
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
The low in  Burlington, VT on Friday is -13F. 
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
I have a Cadillac plan among Cadillac plans. Need a hernia fixed. A month ago they said they could do it in 3 months. Got pushed out to 5 months yesterday. Will end up costing me very little… at such time as they deign to do the work.
Hooray?
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
Where do you live?
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
Yeah I also wonder where you live (and if your wait is Covid related as in if the Covid epidemic didn’t exist would you still have to wait).
A guy on my hockey team had minor knee surgery a few months ago and didn’t have to wait at all and he’s already back on the ice after finishing his rehab.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Maybe it’s time to look into a little medical tourism…
alin_s
alin_s
3 years ago
Progressive lunatics aka the democrat party. I like how you use semantics to trick into believing that this is not the democrat party you keep voting for. 
thimk
thimk
3 years ago
Gavin sitting on a chunk of change lick’n his chops,  garnered from state capital gain tax ,  ready to deploy for social services /government over reach . what ever happened to the water/energy/fire  crisis  ?     any plans to address that ? Better not upset Caly, they control a major port .  Here’s a somewhat related issue . 
dbannist
dbannist
3 years ago
I currently pay 680 a month for a plan with unlimited coverage.  The most I will ever pay for health care for any thing I can possible come down with is 500 a year.

If I switched plans to a lower deductible I’d pay 5k a year max for anything I can come down with and only pay 340 a month, or half the price, however my coverage would be capped at 300k per event, meaning if I get a 2 million dollar cancer problem, I’d be on the hook for 1.7 million of it.  Obviously, I chose the 680 a month plan just in case.

However, California’s proposition is interesting.  If they pass it I could go to the lower plan and if I get an expensive cancer I simply up and move to CA and sign up for their health system.  Viola!  I’m covered by the state!  Woohoo!

Of course, I’d be greatly burdening their system, along with all the other sick people who’d do the same.  There are still cheap places to move to there as well, just not on the coast or Tahoe.

Felix_Mish
Felix_Mish
3 years ago
Reply to  dbannist
What’s your age?
By way of comparison, I paid $5 a month for health insurance for a few years … when I paid for health insurance … which was sometimes. Odd that I can’t find such a plan nowadays. Those pesky ageists! There outta be a law. 🙂
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  dbannist
I pay under $350/month for virtually unlimited coverage via Medicare part A, part B & part D and a supplement plan ‘N’.  My only annual out-of-pocket costs are the one-time part B annual deductible of around $220 and $20/office visit.  I get to choose my own MD’s, hospitals and so forth.
Medicare is the real thing that everyone should have!
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
I would expect to see a lot more richies with California “vacation homes”
Doug78
Doug78
3 years ago
Will people still have to pay health insurance or will the measure replace that need?
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
Probably good as long as the treatment is in CA.
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
“A proposed constitutional amendment (ACA 11) in California would increase taxes by $12,250 per household…..”

Oooooh.   That is {{{{{scary}}}}} bad……  when compared to the $20,761.56 that we are paying  for health insurance right now!   LOL     
And I no longer even have a 6-figure salary…

dbannist
dbannist
3 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway

Why not join a sharing group?  You’ll get excellent coverage for at most, 680 a month.  You’ll never pay more than 500 a year with the plan I’m on.  Every person I know who was paying 20-30k for health insurance and switched has been more than estatic at switching, and most are saving 15k or more a year over what they were paying and even getting better coverage.If you don’t want a religious sharing group (which I am a part of) I believe there are a few non-religious ones out there, but the pickings are slimmer.

Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  dbannist
Maybe because…
——–
California sues ‘sharing ministry’ health insurance plan
Associated Press
Jan 12, 2022
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California on Wednesday sued what the state’s attorney general called a sham health insurance company operating as a “health care sharing ministry” — one the state claims illegally denied members benefits while retaining as much as 84% of their payments.
The lawsuit names The Aliera Companies and the Moses family, which founded Sharity Ministries Inc. Sharity, formerly known as Trinity Healthshare Inc., is a nonprofit corporation.
But the state says Aliera is a for-profit corporation that collected hundreds of millions of dollars in premiums from thousands of Californians and others around the U.S. through unauthorized health plans and insurance sold through Sharity/Trinity.
Instead of paying members’ health care costs, the state alleges the company routinely denied claims and spent just 16 cents of every dollar in premiums on health care expenses.
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  Jojo
If it sounds too good to be true…  etc. etc.
dbannist
dbannist
3 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway

yes, that one is a sham.  Sadly, there are con artists in every profession, including health care.Others are not scams and are well funded with over a million members.  There are abotu 10 million members of health sharing networks and it’s not an unusual thing anymore.

dbannist
dbannist
3 years ago
Reply to  dbannist
That’s meaningless.  Blue Cross gets sued by the state all the time as well.

Besides, I’m all for getting rid of ponzi scheme type health care.  That’s what this is.

The one I’m a member of has over a million and a half members.  That’s a totally different thing that this sham you found.

RonJ
RonJ
3 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway
That is a lot of money for people to pay, to be told by a doctor, that they won’t treat them for Covid-19.
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  RonJ
Not the doctor.  It is the for-profit insurance corporations that are in the business of denying treatment.
klausmkl
klausmkl
3 years ago
I lived in Bay Area 31 years. The State will get this passed just watch. The mass migration will just continue. I live in Idaho now, The growth here is strong as folks migrate for greener pastures. In Idaho now the average price in my town, Eagle, is 1 million , this is amazing
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  klausmkl
I am waiting for the “mass migration” to happen for nearly 3 decades now, so that the traffic will get better.   But it never does!    
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway

Twice as many people on the planet now. There is no escape from them.

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
3 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway
Starting?
SACRAMENTO— California’s population dipped by 182,083 residents last year, bringing the state’s
total to 39,466,855 people as of January 1, 2021, according to new population estimates and
housing data released today by the California Department of Finance.
California’s negative growth rate of -0.46 percent represents the first 12-month decline since state
population estimates have been recorded. Three principal factors contributed in this year-over-year population decrease
Jojo
Jojo
3 years ago
Reply to  Tony Bennett
Only 20 million more to go!
whirlaway
whirlaway
3 years ago
Reply to  Tony Bennett
LOL.  Statistical noise does not a trend make!
dbannist
dbannist
3 years ago
Reply to  klausmkl
My mom lives in Eagle, ID.

Her home was purchased 7 years ago for 300k.  It’s now worth probably 700k.  Crazy price appreciation there.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.