I always liked the idea of budget-based taxation, similar to the way that condos do special assessments: 1. Decide how much money the state needs in taxes to f

I always liked the idea of budget-based taxation, similar to the way that condos do special assessments: 1. Decide how much money the state needs in taxes to fund the various pieces of infrastructure (roads, schools, etc). 2. Value everyone's property. Divide up the tax proportionally based on property value. If your house is worth twice as much as your neighbor, you should pay twice as much tax. The interesting thing about this approach is that it creates a stable tax income rate for the state and mostly eliminates market fluctuations. Did the economy boom? Ok great, your house is now worth 50% more but so is your neighbor's house, so the ratio is the same and you pay the same tax as the prior year. Same mechanism works in reverse during a crash. With this method, the tax paid directly relates to the budget. Spending too much? It's not the economy's fault, it's yours: maybe try voting for different initiatives (or representatives) next time. This also aligns the incentives for older residents. If an area is economically static you should expect city budgets (and taxes) to increase roughly in line with inflation. If the area grows and develops and becomes a much more interesting place to live, it's no longer the same city. You have the option to pay for those increased services or you can move... similar to the way that you'll pay more rent if the landlord remodels your apartment building. But in fact, the effect is moderated: a house built in 1930 will probably be less valuable than new 2021 construction so the hold-out retiree should see taxes that increase at a rate less than the average.