‘Housing for All’: Democrats push for big government response to soaring rents

[danielpalos]

Yeah, we're only $22 Trillion in Debt. Let's spend more money we don't have.

funny, right wingers. tax cut economics is money we don't have.

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Nobody takes you seriously ever! Especially the "free chicks".

i won't mind once i get my "bonus". i love "hard working women of morals."

 

[danielpalos]

Which is why the terms would have to be unconditional. UI is a leftist idea, so I say let's meet them halfway and then see how much they support it.

Our programs now take from the working and give to the non-working. UI would be taking from the working and giving to all. As a person who is the giver, I wouldn't mind being a giver and taker for a while. I get so sick of giving and watching the takers walking the streets or driving along the highways while I'm working.

If you really weigh the benefits, it makes so much more sense to replace our social programs with UI. It would inspire more people to work, it would eliminate fraud which costs us billions every year with our social programs, it would disable Democrats from telling people how the Republicans are going to take away this or take away that, it would allow people of different classes to live in peace, it could solve our never-ending problem of medical care and college tuition. It would solve most of the problems we have in this country today.

Things always look better on paper than when its applied.
Especially, when it comes to government application.

This is true, but what we're doing now certainly isn't working. We are putting our children and grandchildren in debt, creating a government dependent society, encouraging lower income people to breed at a much higher rate than the working, and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, and turning Americans against each other socially and politically.

I would be willing to try it out. At least I could advance myself instead of advancing the users who never advance at all. As a society that rewards people for being irresponsible, IU would do the opposite which would reward people for being responsible. I can't see how it could be much worse than it is now.

Try it out. Is there any government entitlement program which has ended, cut off people receiving cash from the government?

did you know, nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Tax cut economics that adds to the debt is simple Income Redistribution.

History doesn't agree with you............the equation is jobs gained and revenue...........and your side is WRONG like always..........

Your side taxes people to death and then wonders why they are living in tents and companies are leaving.................

Because you are idiots.

cite your links, fake news right winger. Tax cut economics is simple Income Redistribution. Who gets rich and who gets to pay off the Peoples' Debt?

 

[Dschrute3]

Yeah, we're only $22 Trillion in Debt. Let's spend more money we don't have.

funny, right wingers. tax cut economics is money we don't have.

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Government stealing less from Citizens, is a good thing. Tax Revenue isn't the problem. Spending is. Till folks except that, the nation is doomed. Spending more money we don't have, isn't the answer.

 

[night_son]

‘Housing for All’: Democrats push for big government response to soaring rents

Dear Senate Democrats, good effort, but tax credits won’t solve this crisis. Working people need Housing-For-All: 10 million homes in 10 years.

Personal responsibility, not government dependency.

 

[danielpalos]

Yeah, we're only $22 Trillion in Debt. Let's spend more money we don't have.

funny, right wingers. tax cut economics is money we don't have.

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Government stealing less from Citizens, is a good thing. Tax Revenue isn't the problem. Spending is. Till folks except that, the nation is doomed. Spending more money we don't have, isn't the answer.

the right wing can't budget?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Let's just say what you think has any truth to it and I don't make a profit. Do you think I do all this work around here for free? Do you think I spend all that time screwing around with categorizing expenditures, spend two days before taxes preparing, assuming the responsibilities of major repairs or replacements like roofs, furnaces, driveways is something I do for a hobby?

I didn't do this as a social obligation. I don't have those resources. Like everybody else, when I take huge responsibilities and have major bills to pay, I need a sufficient income to take care of it. If I was going to do something for charity, it certainly wouldn't be this. It takes up any and all of my free time. I would have put my hard earned money in the market or commodities.

I didn't say you should...or have insulted you in any manner for what you choose to do or whether you make a profit or not, etc. This is just two different sides of the subject we are discussing. Or...I thought it was.

There is, but you seem to be ignoring the other side of the argument and only focusing on yours.

My side is this: most of us landlords don't make much money on rental income. Much of what you pay is what you would otherwise pay if you owned a house: taxes, insurance, utilities, repairs, updates, mortgage.........

In some cases (like mine) when I had to take a loan out for major repairs, those loans have to be repaid.

This year I was lucky, I actually made a little profit. My tax preparer has a lot of landlords, and she told me I was the only one last year that showed a profit. All her other landlord clients were in the red as they are most every other year.

Big companies probably make out, but rental property is just part of their portfolio. They are very diverse in their investments. When one investment isn't working out, then they dump that investment and put their money elsewhere.

So if the government made regulation that stopped their profit, they would be selling out probably to somebody that would charge even more for rent.

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed, means more people can pay more rent and help cover upgrade costs.

You do know the apartment staff payroll will also go up don't you?


So will the rents ...once again you don't do anything productive


.

Yes, I understand economics. It won't go up as much as the benefit. Inflation is less than five percent in the restaurant industry with a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage.

The point you all always seem to miss, is that higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

No the point you miss is right now 50% of Americans make $15 dollars or less, you don't understand a lick of economics...


It's trickle up poor.. Everything will cost more.


.

 

[danielpalos]

‘Housing for All’: Democrats push for big government response to soaring rents

Dear Senate Democrats, good effort, but tax credits won’t solve this crisis. Working people need Housing-For-All: 10 million homes in 10 years.

Personal responsibility, not government dependency.

No more corporate welfare!

 

[Wyatt earp]

Life is real good for Communist/Democrat hucksters. Ask Bernie Sanders.

Yup once again we really only have two choices

Rich private citizens

Or

Rich politicians


Pick your poison



.

 

[Wyatt earp]

‘Housing for All’: Democrats push for big government response to soaring rents

Dear Senate Democrats, good effort, but tax credits won’t solve this crisis. Working people need Housing-For-All: 10 million homes in 10 years.

Personal responsibility, not government dependency.

No more corporate welfare!

Corporate welfare ( tax breaks) produces jobs and trickles down to more 2nd and 3rd tier company's moving to an area for more jobs ..



.

 

[danielpalos]

I didn't say you should...or have insulted you in any manner for what you choose to do or whether you make a profit or not, etc. This is just two different sides of the subject we are discussing. Or...I thought it was.

There is, but you seem to be ignoring the other side of the argument and only focusing on yours.

My side is this: most of us landlords don't make much money on rental income. Much of what you pay is what you would otherwise pay if you owned a house: taxes, insurance, utilities, repairs, updates, mortgage.........

In some cases (like mine) when I had to take a loan out for major repairs, those loans have to be repaid.

This year I was lucky, I actually made a little profit. My tax preparer has a lot of landlords, and she told me I was the only one last year that showed a profit. All her other landlord clients were in the red as they are most every other year.

Big companies probably make out, but rental property is just part of their portfolio. They are very diverse in their investments. When one investment isn't working out, then they dump that investment and put their money elsewhere.

So if the government made regulation that stopped their profit, they would be selling out probably to somebody that would charge even more for rent.

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed, means more people can pay more rent and help cover upgrade costs.

You do know the apartment staff payroll will also go up don't you?


So will the rents ...once again you don't do anything productive


.

Yes, I understand economics. It won't go up as much as the benefit. Inflation is less than five percent in the restaurant industry with a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage.

The point you all always seem to miss, is that higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

No the point you miss is right now 50% of Americans make $15 dollars or less, you don't understand a lick of economics...


It's trickle up poor.. Everything will cost more.


.

link? That is not what I have been reading.

 

[danielpalos]

‘Housing for All’: Democrats push for big government response to soaring rents

Dear Senate Democrats, good effort, but tax credits won’t solve this crisis. Working people need Housing-For-All: 10 million homes in 10 years.

Personal responsibility, not government dependency.

No more corporate welfare!

Corporate welfare ( tax breaks) produces jobs and trickles down to more 2nd and 3rd tier company's moving to an area for more jobs ..

.

So does unemployment insurance.

 

[Dschrute3]

Yeah, we're only $22 Trillion in Debt. Let's spend more money we don't have.

funny, right wingers. tax cut economics is money we don't have.

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Government stealing less from Citizens, is a good thing. Tax Revenue isn't the problem. Spending is. Till folks except that, the nation is doomed. Spending more money we don't have, isn't the answer.

the right wing can't budget?

Both Parties are addicted to spending other peoples' money. Like i said, Tax Revenue isn't the problem. The Government sets new records annually for Tax Revenue. So it's stealing plenty of Citizens' money.

Spending is the problem. Obama and Bush really screwed so many future generations. They should be ashamed of themselves for leaving them a shocking $22 Trillion Debt.

 

[eagle1462010]

Things always look better on paper than when its applied.
Especially, when it comes to government application.

This is true, but what we're doing now certainly isn't working. We are putting our children and grandchildren in debt, creating a government dependent society, encouraging lower income people to breed at a much higher rate than the working, and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, and turning Americans against each other socially and politically.

I would be willing to try it out. At least I could advance myself instead of advancing the users who never advance at all. As a society that rewards people for being irresponsible, IU would do the opposite which would reward people for being responsible. I can't see how it could be much worse than it is now.

Try it out. Is there any government entitlement program which has ended, cut off people receiving cash from the government?

did you know, nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Tax cut economics that adds to the debt is simple Income Redistribution.

History doesn't agree with you............the equation is jobs gained and revenue...........and your side is WRONG like always..........

Your side taxes people to death and then wonders why they are living in tents and companies are leaving.................

Because you are idiots.

cite your links, fake news right winger. Tax cut economics is simple Income Redistribution. Who gets rich and who gets to pay off the Peoples' Debt?

The Historical Lessons of Lower Tax Rates

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Both Parties are addicted to spending other peoples' money. Like i said, Tax Revenue isn't the problem. The Government sets new records annually for Tax Revenue. So it's stealing plenty of Citizens' money.

Part of that is our fault......actually most of it.

It's like Dr Walter William's once asked "If I ran for Congress, and I promised my voters I would bring them nothing back from Washington, would you vote for me?"

 

[danielpalos]

Yeah, we're only $22 Trillion in Debt. Let's spend more money we don't have.

funny, right wingers. tax cut economics is money we don't have.

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Government stealing less from Citizens, is a good thing. Tax Revenue isn't the problem. Spending is. Till folks except that, the nation is doomed. Spending more money we don't have, isn't the answer.

the right wing can't budget?

Both Parties are addicted to spending other peoples' money. Like i said, Tax Revenue isn't the problem. The Government sets new records annually for Tax Revenue. So it's stealing plenty of Citizens' money.

Spending is the problem. Obama and Bush really screwed so many future generations. They should be ashamed of themselves for leaving them a shocking $22 Trillion Debt.

Yeah, right. Your guy is not helping reduce the debt.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Now, Ray.....focus like a laser: where is that 'income' coming from???

It is stolen from producers and given to those who will vote for the Leftists.


The single greatest bar to accruing wealth is taxation.....and the reason for that taxation is to buy the votes of those with their hand out.


There has never been starvation in this country.....so, what is your argument for coercion, confiscation, and vote-buying?


Americans have always taken care of their own.

I agree 100%, but with the system we have today, we are taxed to fund these programs so Democrats can buy votes. The only control we have over our money is who we elect to spend it.

Take Commie Care for example. Is anybody stupid enough to believe that DumBama and the other Democrats gave a shit about whether we had heath insurance of not? It's silly. All they really wanted to do is create more government dependents and buy votes. So if you worked at Walmart sweeping floors, you could get a great policy for next to nothing, but floor sweepers generally vote Democrat. If you are a middle income earner, Commie Care is unaffordable, but it's likely you vote Republican.

With Universal Income, that would all end. People who work will contribute tax dollars and get something in return, and people who don't will starve or find themselves in a precarious situation. Either that or they will find a way to live dirt cheap which would preserve our remaining good neighborhoods. It would mean less poverty babies, less people to support, and the working could actually start having larger families.

I hate to make people sound like breeding dogs or something, but it isn't that much different. After all, how successful of a breeder could you be if you mostly bred dogs with genetic flaws vs prize animals that everybody would want to buy?

"The only control we have over our money is who we elect to spend it."

Why???

Why have anyone 'elected' to spend it???

Marvin Olasky, in "The Tragedy of American Compassion," explains that human needs were taken care of by other human beings- not by bureaucracies. The important difference was that the latter may take care of food and shelter...but the former also dealt with the human spirit and behavior.
Welfare programs today, are Liberal….conservatives don’t look for material solutions, but understand that changing values is what solves the problem of poverty..


And here is the major difference between current efforts and the earlier: charity was not handed out indiscriminately- "no prophane or diselut person, or openly scandelous shall have any pairt or portione herein."

The able-bodied were expected to find work, and if they chose not to, well....it was considered perfectly appropriate to press them to change their mind.
Olasky, "The Tragedy of American Compassion," chapter one.

Charles Chauncey, told members of the Society for Encouraging Industry, and Employing the Poor (Aug. 12. 1752), that they were "restrained as to the distribution of [their] charity; not being allowed to dispense it promiscuously, but obliged to take due Care to find out suitable Objects; distinguishing properly between those needy People who are able, and those who are unable, to employ themselves in Labour...."






It is based on a lack of understanding of human nature: those accepting largesse without working for same hate themselves, and learn to hate the giver as well.
"If you pick up a stray dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. That is the principal difference between dogs and men." Mark Twain.

 

[danielpalos]

This is true, but what we're doing now certainly isn't working. We are putting our children and grandchildren in debt, creating a government dependent society, encouraging lower income people to breed at a much higher rate than the working, and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, and turning Americans against each other socially and politically.

I would be willing to try it out. At least I could advance myself instead of advancing the users who never advance at all. As a society that rewards people for being irresponsible, IU would do the opposite which would reward people for being responsible. I can't see how it could be much worse than it is now.

Try it out. Is there any government entitlement program which has ended, cut off people receiving cash from the government?

did you know, nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Tax cut economics that adds to the debt is simple Income Redistribution.

History doesn't agree with you............the equation is jobs gained and revenue...........and your side is WRONG like always..........

Your side taxes people to death and then wonders why they are living in tents and companies are leaving.................

Because you are idiots.

cite your links, fake news right winger. Tax cut economics is simple Income Redistribution. Who gets rich and who gets to pay off the Peoples' Debt?

The Historical Lessons of Lower Tax Rates

It is not Your money if we have Any Problems in our Republic.

Congress has the Power to Tax, for that reason.

Any more Problems, right wingers?

 

[danielpalos]

Looks like tax cut economics doesn't work.

 

[Dschrute3]

Yeah, we're only $22 Trillion in Debt. Let's spend more money we don't have.

funny, right wingers. tax cut economics is money we don't have.

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

Government stealing less from Citizens, is a good thing. Tax Revenue isn't the problem. Spending is. Till folks except that, the nation is doomed. Spending more money we don't have, isn't the answer.

the right wing can't budget?

Both Parties are addicted to spending other peoples' money. Like i said, Tax Revenue isn't the problem. The Government sets new records annually for Tax Revenue. So it's stealing plenty of Citizens' money.

Spending is the problem. Obama and Bush really screwed so many future generations. They should be ashamed of themselves for leaving them a shocking $22 Trillion Debt.

Yeah, right. Your guy is not helping reduce the debt.

True. And Trump never claimed to be a 'Fiscal Conservative.' So, the shocking Debt continues to rise. The Swamp Creatures will continue to spend money they don't have. It is what it is.