Unaffordable for seniors
Published: Sunday, Feb. 3, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Unaffordable for seniors
In response to the “Sense & seniors' taxes” item about Unity Township in “Greensburg Tuesday takes” (Jan. 22 and TribLIVE.com): Younger homeowners can supplement their income by working overtime or a second job; it is difficult for someone over age 75 to do so, as many have health problems.
Many senior citizens live on an income below the poverty level if their only income is Social Security.
Most of these senior citizens purchased their homes 45-plus years ago, never dreaming they could lose them during their “golden years” because they had to choose between paying property taxes or paying for necessities such as medication, home repair or utility bills.
People seem afraid that wealthier seniors, such as Arnold Palmer, would also benefit from the change in the property-tax law. So what? There aren't that many in Westmoreland County who are as affluent as he is and he probably donates more in a year than most of the senior citizens in Unity pay in property taxes.
Municipal and school property taxes should be abolished and replaced by increased sales and earned-income taxes, as the wealthier among us are in a better position than our senior citizens to afford the additional tax burden.
Beverly J. Myers
Mt. Pleasant Township
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- ACA deserves support
- Hunt where the deer are
- Harming, not improving
- About time for Gilpin
- Handled it well
- Remember Pearl Harbor
- Failing patients & public
- ObamaCare Obamination
- Nukes, not hoops
- Maybe problem is kids
- Menace unaddressed