New target for leftwing tax greed?

[Patrick2]

As I've said, there's no greed like government greed, and leftwingers never met a tax they didn't like.

In the current crisis I've heard a number of times leftwingers suggesting wiping out the mortgage interest deduction. This is stupid in a number of ways. First, many people bought homes based on their being able to afford them only with the deduction. This is changing the rules in the middle of the game. Especially in the current bad times, that will drive many people into foreclosure, depressing the housing market, the proximate cause of the recession, even lower. Secondly it will put the purchase of a home out of reach of many people, having a further negative effect. I've given up on leftwingers ever grasping that raising taxes in a recession is about the stupidest thing you can do - but targeting homeowners is beyond stupid. The housing market has long been recognized as fundamental to the overall economy's well-being. In an ultimate irony, the recession brought on by the leftwing Community Reinvestment Act has not only made probably almost all the people it was supposed to help homeless, but now will do the same thing to the homeowners who were doing fine before leftwingers started meddling in the housing market. One never ceases to be amazed at the profound damage done by the left with their stupid, crude government policies.

 

[Flopper]

If the mortgage deduction is dropped, it should be slowly phased out over a number of years. The mortgage deduction goes back many years. It's purpose was to encourage home ownership.

We have so many deductions and credits to encourage the public to buy, sell, invest, marry, have kids, stay well, get sick, get rich, stay poor, etc.. We would be better off if we did away with all deductions and credits and just lowered the rates. We could eliminate half the IRS, billions in tax fraud, tax preparation, tax accountants, billions of hours wasted filling receipts/tax statements, and tax preparation.

 

[Care4all]

playing devil's advocate here:

but why should someone paying 1000 a month in mortgage payment, pay less in taxes than the person spending 1000 a month on rent?

 

[Patrick2]

playing devil's advocate here:

but why should someone paying 1000 a month in mortgage payment, pay less in taxes than the person spending 1000 a month on rent?

Because in effect, the renter is getting the same deduction, where a robust rental market exists. That's because the owner of the apartment building is getting an interest deduction on HIS mortgage, and in a competitive market, the savings will be passed on to the renters. The rental market is booming in most places in the US, because people can't or don't want to buy houses.

 

[CitizenPained]

If you can't pay for it, don't buy it.

Why should America be shouldering the burden for big banks? If they want to provide incentives, let them.

If person A gives $2,000/mo in mortgage and has a 6 per cent interest rate, why should America pay for his interest?

 

[CitizenPained]

playing devil's advocate here:

but why should someone paying 1000 a month in mortgage payment, pay less in taxes than the person spending 1000 a month on rent?

Because in effect, the renter is getting the same deduction, where a robust rental market exists. That's because the owner of the apartment building is getting an interest deduction on HIS mortgage, and in a competitive market, the savings will be passed on to the renters. The rental market is booming in most places in the US, because people can't or don't want to buy houses.

HAH. Commercial property owners are the greediest fuckers in the business! They do not pass on savings. They will charge the highest price they think they can get away with.

 

[expat_panama]

...Commercial property owners are the greediest fuckers in the business! They do not pass on savings. They will charge the highest price they think they can get away with.

So much for Marxist fantasy land. In real life people prosper if they're allowed to buy and sell when and where an exchange makes them better off. While owners ask as much as they can the renters offer as little as they can. In a free country everyone has a say, whether it's buying and selling rooms or medical care.

 

[Patrick2]

If you can't pay for it, don't buy it.

Why should America be shouldering the burden for big banks? If they want to provide incentives, let them.

If person A gives $2,000/mo in mortgage and has a 6 per cent interest rate, why should America pay for his interest?

You're confused - "america" isn't paying his interest - he's just not being taxed on it.

 

[Patrick2]

playing devil's advocate here:

but why should someone paying 1000 a month in mortgage payment, pay less in taxes than the person spending 1000 a month on rent?

Because in effect, the renter is getting the same deduction, where a robust rental market exists. That's because the owner of the apartment building is getting an interest deduction on HIS mortgage, and in a competitive market, the savings will be passed on to the renters. The rental market is booming in most places in the US, because people can't or don't want to buy houses.

HAH. Commercial property owners are the greediest fuckers in the business! They do not pass on savings. They will charge the highest price they think they can get away with.

What they can "get away with" in a competitive rental market is to pass through the deduction, and that that's true doen't depend upon any personal characteristics of the owners, but rather market forces.

 

[Care4all]

playing devil's advocate here:

but why should someone paying 1000 a month in mortgage payment, pay less in taxes than the person spending 1000 a month on rent?

Because in effect, the renter is getting the same deduction, where a robust rental market exists. That's because the owner of the apartment building is getting an interest deduction on HIS mortgage, and in a competitive market, the savings will be passed on to the renters. The rental market is booming in most places in the US, because people can't or don't want to buy houses.

HAH. Commercial property owners are the greediest fuckers in the business! They do not pass on savings. They will charge the highest price they think they can get away with.

yes, most businesses do the same...shoot, i did the same in my last job....the retail price or rent charged should be priced at the highest price the market is willing to pay for it...

(though, when i worked as a buyer for Dillard's Inc, we were taught to pass the savings on to the customer in the initial retail price and could be reprimanded if we tried to make an extra buck on the retail...if the buyer worked a deal or discount with the vendor, then we had to pass the savings on to the consumer....this was many moons ago, the corporation at the time had no temporary sales, yet their retail competitors had the high/low strategy....mark up the product high, so that you could promote at the low....so the market strategy for dillard's at the time to compete, meant putting the lowest price possible initially on the product....every day lows, instead of the high/low strategy....)

 

[uscitizen]

As I read the mortgage interest deduction it is to be maintained on one home but not multiple homes.
Why should we subsidize two homes?
If you can afford two homes you can afford to pay the taxes on the second one.

 

[uscitizen]

And I think they might want to put a cap on the mortgage that is deducatalbe. 1 million or so interest deduction?
Again if you can afford a 1 million home interest payment you can afford the taxes on the interest over 1 million.

 

[Flopper]

The deductions that are going away are the ones that most people don't claim. The ones that effect a lot of people maybe capped or reduced. So your tax preparation will be more complicated and most people won't know whether their taxes are going up until they actually do them.