Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Eliminate the Mortgage Interest Deduction Now
Shout Bits Blog ^ | 06/18/2012 | Shout Bits

Posted on 06/18/2012 9:48:44 AM PDT by Shout Bits

Shout Bits has argued that the Mortgage Interest Deduction is not so helpful to regular Americans, but with interest rates at historic lows, now is the time to eliminate this market distortion. Not only does the MID encourage buying unaffordable homes and promote market bubbles, the primary beneficiaries are wealthy individuals as large banks. Eliminating this deduction would actually help most ordinary homeowners.

For 2012, a couple filing jointly can claim an $11,900 standard deduction, even if they have no otherwise deductible expenses like mortgage interest. Therefore, the first $11,900 in mortgage interest paid by such a couple generates no tax savings for them. Today's national average 30 year fixed mortgage coupon rate is 3.8%, which means that a mortgage smaller than $313k (11900/.038) generates no tax savings for a couple filing jointly. Now, a $300k mortgage is not unheard of, but it is clearly not for the struggling working class.

Since the first $313k of a mortgage balance is not deductible, the tax incentive is to borrow as much as possible. After all, Uncle Sam is kicking in about a third of the interest expense above $11,900. Further, the tax code discourages paying down mortgage balances, since as interest payments fall, so does that tax benefit. This perverse incentive leads to speculative bubbles which burst when incomes fall below the point where an income tax deduction is available. The MID certainly contributed to the real estate crash of 2008.

Worse still, a recent study by Andrew Hanson at Georgia State University concludes that the tax code's reach into the mortgage market increases mortgage rates for modest homeowners. Mortgage lenders siphon off 9 to 17% of the government's subsidy intended for homeowners (as much as $1.7bln per year) in the form of higher rates. Not only does the MID not benefit smaller borrowers at all, according to Prof. Hanson's study, it costs them hundreds of dollars extra, even if they cannot take an interest deduction.

It is always wrong, corrupt, and perverting for the government to manipulate markets as it does with the MID, but now is the perfect storm of minimal benefits and maximum harm. Mortgage rates cannot fall much further due to structural cost limits, so the interest deduction benefit is nearly as small as it ever can be. Likewise, with tighter lending criteria, only the well-off can qualify for loans big enough to earn an interest deduction above $11,900.

With the Federal Government looking for ways to raise taxes, the very worst choice would be raise marginal rates. Instead, a flatter and broader based tax code is the answer that is more just and stable. Eliminating a deduction that only benefits the well-off, while harming modest borrowers and enriching big banks, is an obvious choice. The time is now.

Shout Bits is available on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/#!/ShoutBits


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: blog; blogpimp; consumers; debt; government; mortgage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-152 next last

1 posted on 06/18/2012 9:48:51 AM PDT by Shout Bits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits
The mortgage interest deduction is the government pretending to give you something, and you believing it.

The net result is to pump up the price of houses.

2 posted on 06/18/2012 9:51:45 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the sociopath.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

how about reducing spending?

I know its a radical thought


3 posted on 06/18/2012 9:52:07 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

The mortgage interest rates in the USA should be RAISED. There is no incentive to deposit money into a savings account or a CD. Funds would flow into banks like a busted dike if banks earned more on mortgages and could pay a decent return on savings.

Now, as long as the central socialist government’s income tax is such an outrage all deductions have to remain until the unwieldly mess of tax law is overhauled!


4 posted on 06/18/2012 9:54:11 AM PDT by IbJensen (If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Might as well eliminate the Standard Deduction too.


5 posted on 06/18/2012 9:56:17 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Mortgage interest paid to the note holder is income. It is taxed. It is not as if that money goes untaxed.

I don’t think the mortgagor should also pay income tax on the transaction.


6 posted on 06/18/2012 9:57:39 AM PDT by Jacquerie (Democrats soil institutions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

This would result in me having $5,000 LESS to spend on products and services that REALLY impact the economy.

The Feds would only use this $5,000 to by more votes.

If you believe this money would be used to either reduce the deficit or produce something useful, you are just another useful idiot, with no concept of this adminstration’s behavior to date.


7 posted on 06/18/2012 9:58:41 AM PDT by G Larry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits
Yes, get rid of the MID and ALL other deductions.

Install a flat tax of around 3% across the board, everyone pays 3% on every dollar, no deductions, period.

Adjust the size of government to to fit the revenue.

8 posted on 06/18/2012 9:58:57 AM PDT by precisionshootist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
Or, alternatively, put a cap on mortgage interest ~ say 3.5% ~ and we will rapidly sell off the remaining 12 year overhang of excess housing.

Note, if current mortgage rates are 3% or so, all that means is if you can find the money to borrow, and you qualify for it, you can get a mortgage at that rate. If there's no money to borrow, you can't, and if you don't qualify, you have to pay a higher rate.

The article is, of course, a piece of propaganda since it starts off with a half truth about mortgage rates, and proceeds to rearrange the universe in that light.

9 posted on 06/18/2012 9:59:32 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

The effect it would have on homeowners would be the same as a massive tax increase.

Without COMPREHENSIVE tax reform, this is an idiotic idea.

Replace the income tax with a flat tax EVERYONE pays amounting to 8 percent of all income, no matter where it comes from, and you have a deal.

No more free riders. Everyone needs to have a stake in tax policy. With over 50 percent not paying taxes (you need to crank in the illegals), there’s no incentive to oppose tax increases on the producers.


10 posted on 06/18/2012 10:01:46 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs (Does beheading qualify as 'breaking my back', in the Jeffersonian sense of the expression?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
The mortgage interest deduction is the government pretending to give you something, and you believing it.

The net result is to pump up the price of houses.


No, the mortgage interest deduction is the government taking less of your money, just like every other deduction.

The net result of eliminating it right now would be to further depress the price of homes.

No sale.
11 posted on 06/18/2012 10:02:04 AM PDT by Dr. Sivana ("You forget, it isn't who you claim, but instead, who claims you. We don't claim you!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Mortgage Interest Deduction for homeowners puts them at more equal footing of landlords who get a similar deduction as a business expense.

Ending it would only cause more home foreclosures.


12 posted on 06/18/2012 10:02:04 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

>>Mortgage interest paid to the note holder is income. It is taxed. It is not as if that money goes untaxed.<<

You could say the same for car loans, unsecured loans, lines of credit and any loan that makes interest (pretty much all business loans).

No, the interest deduction was there to influence behavior: in this case to buy homes.

The underlying question is: should tax laws influence behavior or fund our government? It is more the former than the latter now.

Me? It would not affect me, since I have a 3.25% Mortgage. I don’t have a dog in this fight and am open to looking at the broader implications.


13 posted on 06/18/2012 10:04:32 AM PDT by freedumb2003 ('RETRO' Abortions = performed on 84th trimester individuals who think killing babies is a "right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Before subtractions my total deductions were 19k including mortgage interest. After subtractions this went down by 11k. The author is lying, obscuring the truth or hiding something.


14 posted on 06/18/2012 10:05:18 AM PDT by TheRhinelander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs; BlackElk
No more free riders. Everyone needs to have a stake in tax policy. With over 50 percent not paying taxes (you need to crank in the illegals), there’s no incentive to oppose tax increases on the producers.

BS. There are so many taxes besides the income tax, and of course the taxes paid by corporations and sole proprietorships are passed onto the so-called "free-riders". Very few people had to pay income tax when it was first introduced. The conservative position is to push for lower taxes in general.

When we start arguing about making sure everyone pays in one of the many taxes we are subject to, we are conceding big government. Hey, those of you who call yourselves constitutionalists as the Founding Fathers intended, how about serious income-generating tariffs so that the free-riders who sit offshore benefitting from our comparatively stable system and (what is left of) free enterprise have some more skin in the game? You will find a lot more in the original Constitution about that than about income taxes.
15 posted on 06/18/2012 10:08:05 AM PDT by Dr. Sivana ("You forget, it isn't who you claim, but instead, who claims you. We don't claim you!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
The article is, of course, a piece of propaganda since it starts off with a half truth about mortgage rates, and proceeds to rearrange the universe in that light.

Pretty much sums it up.

No further comment needed.

16 posted on 06/18/2012 10:13:25 AM PDT by going hot (Happiness is a momma deuce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
how about reducing spending?

How about both?

The author makes a good argument for eliminating the mortgage interest deduction.

Why are you trying to change the subject?

17 posted on 06/18/2012 10:13:34 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana
The net result of eliminating it right now would be to further depress the price of homes

No sale.

The net result would be to continue forcing the price of houses down to their actual value.

We have had lots of inflation over the past decades, it was simply disguised as a rise in housing prices due to the abandonment of sound mortgage underwriting principles.

The mortgage deduction just adds to it.

18 posted on 06/18/2012 10:14:02 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the sociopath.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Set your sites higher.

Eliminate the Income Tax.


19 posted on 06/18/2012 10:15:03 AM PDT by TruthInThoughtWordAndDeed (Yahuah Yahusha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana
The net result of eliminating it right now would be to further depress the price of homes.

Why should government be in the business of inflating real estate prices?

20 posted on 06/18/2012 10:17:52 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam

“The author makes a good argument for eliminating the mortgage interest deduction.”

Not really, he makes a good argument on cutting the knees out of the housing market.

Why do you think a tax increase is a good thing?


21 posted on 06/18/2012 10:18:42 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Tell ya what.
Eliminate property taxes so that we can truly own our homes and land, instead of paying rent on them to the government, and we’ll talk about getting rid of the mortgage deduction.
Until think go ‘way.


22 posted on 06/18/2012 10:20:56 AM PDT by Little Ray (FOR the best Conservative in the Primary; AGAINST Obama in the General.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TruthInThoughtWordAndDeed

All:

Yes, of course cutting spending is the largest challenge. The big three (military, Medicaid, and Social Security) cannot continue uncut without bankrupting the USA. The math is obvious.

I personally think a low flat tax like the one Steve Forbes proposed is the best answer to the necessary evil of taxation.

The article is targeted to one of hundreds of deductions that must be eliminated to get to that goal.


23 posted on 06/18/2012 10:21:53 AM PDT by Shout Bits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs
Only the Progressives think taxes are always good, with more taxes being better.

Here's what I think ~ the federal personal income tax, which is only one of many taxes, was sold to the people of this country by Progressive Republicans under the stipulation that it would never apply to any but the top 1% or 2% of wage earners.

Today it's ripping off 53% of wage earners.

That proves it is a fraud, and a failure.

Best to abolish the federal personal income tax as just another failed federal program that's long outlived its utility.

24 posted on 06/18/2012 10:22:50 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum; BlackElk
The net result would be to continue forcing the price of houses down to their actual value.

We live in a world where poeple already own homes, bought in good faith, who have taken a huge hit. We lost 25-30% value on our own home, pushing us underwater. That is an interesting form of "inflation." Push down the values even more, and more people start walking on their mortgages.

If the policy was being made in a vacuum, we could have a talk. I accept the lost value as part of the risk of buying the home, exacerbated by government policy and big bank monkey business.

In any event, my original point that we should eb talking about reducing taxes, and not figuring out which taxes could be raised is the true conservative position. I double-dog guarantee you that the increased revenue, if any, from eliminating the home mortgage deduction will be thrown away on crap, regardless of whether it is Romney crap or Obama crap.
25 posted on 06/18/2012 10:23:17 AM PDT by Dr. Sivana ("You forget, it isn't who you claim, but instead, who claims you. We don't claim you!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits
Here's a surprise for you ~ Social Security, Medicaid, and potentially the military, either have or can have their own separate funding mechanisms.

If you abolish SS and Medicaid you would, of course, need to refund about $6 trillion to the people you took it from and which is as yet unspent. You can't just take that money and build highways and resthomes for illegal alien workers. You need to give it back. That'll run the national debt up over $21 Trillion.

Now, DOD, and this won't be popular ~ but DOD can exact tribute from client states. That's how it was done in the good old days. No reason we can't revise that custom.

26 posted on 06/18/2012 10:26:32 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Eliminating the mortgage deduction will absolutely crush the remaining breath out of US real estate. There are a huge amount of people that are paying their mortgages now, are not upside down but do not have enough equity to refinance at market levels today, would simply walk away from their home if they lose the tax deduction. I know I would.


27 posted on 06/18/2012 10:26:51 AM PDT by Cyman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

The answer is to do away with the income tax all together. It’s not the Govt’s business how much I make, what I pay for mortgage interest, how many kids I have, what I give to charity, if I am married etc, etc, etc...

The income tax has always been a scheme for Politicians to get into your personal business and then try and control your choices.


28 posted on 06/18/2012 10:27:21 AM PDT by JohnKinAK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

The borrower isn’t paying income tax on the transaction. The mortgage interest deduction is to allow the borrower to exclude from income tax money that is paid out as mortgage interest.

All other interest payments are with after-tax dollars, except if you borrow money for investment, in which case you can deduct the cost of borrowing from the gains of the investment.

When you buy a loaf of bread, the store pays tax on the profit, but you don’t get to deduct the cost of the bread from your taxes.

We should elimate all income tax deductions and charges for interest. No deductions for mortgage, no payments for interest received.

Of course, then the government couldn’t get favorable borrowing by giving tax exemption for their interest payments.


29 posted on 06/18/2012 10:27:21 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits
The minute you treat ordinary personal income the same as capital gains you might get a favorable response from somebody. There 100% of your personal expenses would be deductible ~ quite a jump in fact!

Why should only the rich get to write off that stuff.

30 posted on 06/18/2012 10:29:16 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana
“The net result of eliminating it right now would be to further depress the price of homes”

You got that right it would be an economic disaster. People just scraping by would walk away from their mortgage and rightly so since the rules of the game get changed in mid stream. If they wanted to spark an insurrection in this country that would be a good way to do it.

31 posted on 06/18/2012 10:29:56 AM PDT by MCF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Spending must be cut first or no tax scheme will ever be enough.

The flat tax folks need to beat the drum for spending cuts before deduction cuts.


32 posted on 06/18/2012 10:29:56 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
If you abolish SS and Medicaid you would, of course, need to refund about $6 trillion to the people you took it from and which is as yet unspent. You can't just take that money and build highways and resthomes for illegal alien workers.

The fact of the matter is the money has already been spent. You can't "give it back". It is gone. Whatever money there is in the future will be earned by future private sector workers and investors.

33 posted on 06/18/2012 10:30:06 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray; Shout Bits
Eliminate property taxes so that we can truly own our homes and land, instead of paying rent on them to the government, and we’ll talk about getting rid of the mortgage deduction.

Right on the mark. In my case, I'm paying HIGHER property taxes than my mortgage!

shout bits, what's your opinion?

34 posted on 06/18/2012 10:30:33 AM PDT by melancholy (Professor Alinsky, Enslavement Specialist, Ph.D in L0w and H0lder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits
If I were looking for a baby step in tax code reform, I would start with eliminating the deduct-ability of State and Local Tax.

No reason to get a federal subsidy for living in a high tax blue state/city.

This would also put more pressure on the high tax governments.

35 posted on 06/18/2012 10:30:36 AM PDT by lack-of-trust
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

“The net result would be to continue forcing the price of houses down to their actual value. “

Actual value is what someone wants to pay. Increasing taxes to discourage home ownership is nothing but market manipulation.

Why do you want to depress home values further?


36 posted on 06/18/2012 10:31:56 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam
Why should government be in the business of inflating real estate prices?

Keeping more of your money is not inflating prices. That is the same mindset that assumes it is all the governments money first. Taxing mortgage interest depresses the value. Why should government embark on a policy of charging people more for having a mortgage than they had been?

Right now, due to oversupply, houses are not overpriced. I build my own house. I know what every part of its construction cost. The houses that are already built (in many areas) are selling for less than the cost of the materials that went in to build them plus the cost of teh land (and we are not talking about expensive land areas; we paid $11K/acre, a smallish portion of the total cost).

If such a change were to be implemented as part of a larger tax overhaul, and not merely a tax increase on note-holding home-owners, it would have to be phased in so as not to shock the system.
37 posted on 06/18/2012 10:32:08 AM PDT by Dr. Sivana ("You forget, it isn't who you claim, but instead, who claims you. We don't claim you!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits
It does not take a genius to figure that when interest rates are at a record low the interest deduction is not as valuable. It also does not take a genius to figure that such low rates are rare and will not always be around.

This article does not seem that well thought out.

If you think what we are experiencing is a real estate collapse just wait and see what happens if interest deductiblity is removed.

38 posted on 06/18/2012 10:35:53 AM PDT by arrogantsob (Obama must Go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lack-of-trust
If I were looking for a baby step in tax code reform, I would start with eliminating the deduct-ability of State and Local Tax.

No reason to get a federal subsidy for living in a high tax blue state/city.

This would also put more pressure on the high tax governments.


I like your way of thinking, except that I would simulataneously raise the standard deduction so that we don't wind up with a net tax increase. Oh, and lets also raise the $600 threshold for reporting income. That is so 1970's. Make it more like $3K. Cuts out lots of paperwork.
39 posted on 06/18/2012 10:36:02 AM PDT by Dr. Sivana ("You forget, it isn't who you claim, but instead, who claims you. We don't claim you!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Eliminate the unconstitutional departments of Education, Homeland inSecurity, energy, labor, health and human services, communist arts and propaganda, ATF, HUD, etc. and then we will talk about screwing the middle class out of their only tax deduction.


40 posted on 06/18/2012 10:36:24 AM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam
You sure blew that one again rogue yam. The Social Security money wasn't spent ~ it was BORROWED. See that $6 trillion on the books? That's the $6 trillion that was collected for social security that has not been spent on social security.

The government borrowed it and then took it out and spent it on prostitutes in Columbia (for one thing), and various other things ~ but it was a dedicated tax and the initial obligations remain ~ it must be spent on payments, or it must be refunded. You simply cannot write it off the books ~ or else!

41 posted on 06/18/2012 10:37:25 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

How would you force banks to lend money to people at 3.5%?

SHouldn’t we let private lenders and private borrowers decide for themselves what the value is of the money they are lending and borrowing, without government interference?

IF we eliminated the mortgage interest deduction, the cost of houses would come down, and poorer people would be able to afford houses.

The mortgage interest deduction drives up the price of houses, and only helps rich people, because poor people can’t really get any benefit from the interest deduction (either as the article says they are doing standard deduction, or their marginal tax rate is only 15% anyway).

Rich people have large mortgages, and are in a high marginal bracket, so they benefit more. Because this is a targeted tax item, essentially government is paying rich people to help them buy houses.

But logic dictates that government subsidies don’t help the people receiving the subsidies, when targeted. People have an idea of what something is worth. They are willing to pay that much. Let’s say that, for a particular house, someone is willing to part with $300,000 of their own money. Or, looked at another way, they can afford $3000 per month for that house.

Now, government says they will throw in another $500 a month in mortgage interest deductions. (I’m making up all the numbers, so they don’t work out based on percentages or anything).

Will the people buy the same house, and pocket the $500? No, they will still be willing to pay $3000 a month, but now they can spend $3500 a month. And since they are competing for houses with others, the bid price on the houses will go up to that $3500. So all the government did was drive up the cost of the house.

But poor people don’t GET $500 a month from the government to buy a house, because they don’t pay income taxes. So even if they scraped together enough money to pay $3000 a month for the house, they couldn’t outbid the rich people who get the $500 government subsidy.

As conservatives, I believe we should push to eliminate all targeted tax deductions, in exchange for across-the-board tax rate reductions. We are so excited about cutting taxes that we support targeted deductions and credits, which really are just government spending used to force people to do what government wants them to do.

Like Obamacare — where the government could have avoided the unconstitutional mandate if they had just made it a tax credit — give everybody $5000 a year if they buy insurance; it’s like a $5000 fine for NOT buying insurance. That’s what happens when you let government give out targeted credits, like for higher education, or electric cars, or mortgage interest.


42 posted on 06/18/2012 10:37:39 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits
First, institute a flat tax. Second, make everyone who works pay it (as opposed to only half of the those who work), and then we can talk. Absent that development, your proposal would drive underwater homeowners even further underwater, as in "bankrupt".

Income tax rates are already set to explode next year, as well as taxes on capital gains and dividends. My family's taxes are due to go up by over $4,000, and no, Congress will not do a damned thing about it. Eliminating mortgage deductibility would cost us another $1,500+. At that point, I'll consider another country with lower tax rates, of which there will soon be many.

43 posted on 06/18/2012 10:37:48 AM PDT by andy58-in-nh (America does not need to be organized: it needs to be liberated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Why do you think a tax increase is a good thing?

What I think is a good thing is getting the government out of the business of deciding what people should buy with their own money.

44 posted on 06/18/2012 10:39:31 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Remember when people were flipping real estate and making huge profits after holding it for a year?

If you think that was real, you deserve to upside-down.

You just want to go back to the stupidity, as long as you make some money on it.

But not to worry. The hyperinflation you want so badly is just around the corner.

45 posted on 06/18/2012 10:40:33 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the sociopath.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam

Sure, it would pave the way for govt ownership of all property.

Both taxing or not taxing something are a means of control.


46 posted on 06/18/2012 10:42:33 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana

It should be clear that when 50% pay no federal income taxes it is almost impossible to stop higher taxes.

There will never be smaller government as long as there is a huge constituency which believes tax policy is used and should be used to punish those with more than it.

Your thinking on this is missing a critical element.


47 posted on 06/18/2012 10:44:58 AM PDT by arrogantsob (Obama must Go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
CT, when we lower the price of homes using monetary policy, we end up with more empty homes and fewer rental properties.

Rents go up on the poor and everybody else.

Until Obama showed up you could rent an apartment in Fairfax County ~ 2 bedroom 2 bath lr kit ~ for about $2,000 a month ~ give or take a few bucks. Now you can rent an apartment of comparable features for $3,700 a month.

At the same time we have a large overhang of unsold empty houses.

The people paying rent can pay rent but they can't qualify for those homes because ~ you guessed it ~ they went bankrupt! Banks won't loan to them. Not only that, the banks ~ even in the DC area ~ find it difficult to find funds to loan. Even banks accepting foreign deposits on 0% interest, and charging the depositors for the favor, don't have money to loan. That's all short term stuff. Home loans are long term.

We force banks to lend money at 3.5% the old fashioned way ~ put a cap on interest and infate M1

48 posted on 06/18/2012 10:46:21 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
The government borrowed it...but it was a dedicated tax and the initial obligations remain ~ it must be spent on payments, or it must be refunded. You simply cannot write it off the books ~ or else!

Apparently you are completely stupid on multiple subjects.

The government "borrowed" the money from itself and has spent the money. It is gone. Whatever the hand-waving involved, the money is gone.

Future Social Security and Medicare benefits will be paid with money taken from future private sector workers and investors.

Period.

This is reality. All the rest is just bluster.

If you think there is some moral debt that future workers owe to those who came before them and ran up a $16T national debt, I'd love to hear you explain in straightforward term why that is.

49 posted on 06/18/2012 10:46:53 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob

Read the posts on the thread ~ federal personal income taxes can be abolished and all income treated as capital gains. That way you’d have the rich on your side regarding what was a satisfactory deduction.


50 posted on 06/18/2012 10:48:13 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-152 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson