New target for leftwing tax greed?

Discussion in 'Economy' started by Patrick2, Jul 22, 2011.

  1. Patrick2
    Offline

    Patrick2 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,576
    Thanks Received:
    104
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +104
    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.
     
  2. Flopper
    Online

    Flopper Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    15,192
    Thanks Received:
    2,696
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Washington
    Ratings:
    +5,281
    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.
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2011
  3. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    32,712
    Thanks Received:
    6,609
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +11,046
    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?
     
  4. Patrick2
    Offline

    Patrick2 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,576
    Thanks Received:
    104
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +104
    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.
     
  5. CitizenPained
    Offline

    CitizenPained Dissident-Jude

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    1,151
    Thanks Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Denver
    Ratings:
    +138
    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?
     
  6. CitizenPained
    Offline

    CitizenPained Dissident-Jude

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    1,151
    Thanks Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Denver
    Ratings:
    +138

    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.
     
  7. expat_panama
    Offline

    expat_panama Silver Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2011
    Messages:
    2,461
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +253
    [​IMG]

    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.
     
  8. Patrick2
    Offline

    Patrick2 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,576
    Thanks Received:
    104
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +104
    You're confused - "america" isn't paying his interest - he's just not being taxed on it.
     
  9. Patrick2
    Offline

    Patrick2 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,576
    Thanks Received:
    104
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +104
    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.
     
  10. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    32,712
    Thanks Received:
    6,609
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +11,046
    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....)
     

Share This Page