Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

All of that is absolutely true. However, Congress is trying to close Pandora's box, which has already been priced into the purchase of homes to date, and thus would negatively affect the principal value of everyone who owns a home at this very moment, should that portion of the tax bill become law. The mortgage deduction truly is Pandora's box, and you have to be very careful in how you shut it or you'll negatively impact middle class America directly and direly, and rich people have already hit the taxable income cap for deductions, so they're not impacted regardless.

It's a de facto tax increase on the middle class. It'll play about as well as Fiddler on the Roof at a KKK rally.

Then we might as well pull the trigger and watch the housing prices fall. Eventually, we all must stand in our truth. The biggest fiscal problem affecting EVERYONE, including government, is credit and borrowing. It's time we face it.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

Then we might as well pull the trigger and watch the housing prices fall. Eventually, we all must stand in our truth. The biggest fiscal problem affecting EVERYONE, including government, is credit and borrowing. It's time we face it.

If it really is a problem (and I don't see how it is, but I am a caveman) then just grandfather houses bought before the law takes effect and let the sale of those properties have some kind of one-time sheltering to reflect the loss in the resale value. Problem phases out for all new homes immediately, and for all legacy homes as the years go by.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

The biggest fiscal problem affecting EVERYONE, including government, is credit and borrowing.

No, the biggest problem is refusal to collect appropriate revenue from the 1%. That's where our debt comes from.

If you want to hit spending hit the military-surveillance complex, not middle class tax relief. The former is where the big savings is, with budgets 3 or 4 times larger than necessary, all for make work and corporate welfare.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

If it really is a problem (and I don't see how it is, but I am a caveman) then just grandfather houses bought before the law takes effect and let the sale of those properties have some kind of one-time sheltering to reflect the loss in the resale value. Problem phases out for all new homes immediately, and for all legacy homes as the years go by.

There's already a reflection of the loss; you claim it on Schedule D of the 1040, year over year untill the full loss has been accounted for. And where was this "sheltering" in ~2008 during the first housing bust? If these people are treating these things as investments, let them take the loss. That's the risk of doing that. Those who actually live there will value their home for what it is.

As for credit being a problem, you and I may not have heavy debts, but you should see how bad it is for some people, even carrying it back to when credit was easier. Being in P2P lending, I see it all the time. It's about high time they be held accountable for their avarice.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

No, the biggest problem is refusal to collect appropriate revenue from the 1%. That's where our debt comes from.

If you want to hit spending hit the military-surveillance complex, not middle class tax relief. The former is where the big savings is, with budgets 3 or 4 times larger than necessary, all for make work and corporate welfare.

To paraphrase the arguments against those who go after "a sliver of" Planned Parenthood, the entire DoD budget accounts for about 10-12% of the entire yearly budget for the country; hardly anything.

However, I will give both sides the point that every little bit helps. The biggest thing we need to do, when addressing spending, is to put EVERYTHING on the table. One interesting thing I've seen with the budgets is that whomever likes something declares that "mandatory spending", and what they don't like is declared "discretionary spending". Let's put absolutely everything on the table. The only things I see as "mandatory" are Constitutionally required payments and minimums for creditors. Everything else must be fair game.

 

[joecct]

<img src="https://i.makeagif.com/media/5-19-2015/eLvgto.gif"> </img>

If I was a rich man.....

If housing prices fall, does the appraised value also drop which causes a drop in property tax revenue, which causes.....?

 

[Kepler]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

If housing prices fall, does the appraised value also drop which causes a drop in property tax revenue, which causes.....?

True, but not a good reason to keep prices artificially high. That's like the private prison industry lobbying to keep pot criminalized because of all the revenue they'll lose if those people aren't imprisoned.

 

[unofan]

If I was a rich man.....

If housing prices fall, does the appraised value also drop which causes a drop in property tax revenue, which causes.....?

Rates to rise because local budgets still need to be paid.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

Rates to rise because local budgets still need to be paid.

Or they could always diminish the local budget. Too much to ask, maybe?

 

[Kepler]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

Or they could always diminish the local budget. Too much to ask, maybe?

That's up to the voters who ultimately approve what's in the budget through the election of representatives to town council, mayor, state leg, etc.

Local needs tend to be underfunded because it's so easy to demagogue property tax. In fact one thing that pushes federal spending higher is compensating for all the state and local funding that state and local pols shirk to protect their incumbency.

Ultimately it's all on the voters who let themselves be convinced by the "taxes are bad, m'kay" argument to forgo needed spending. Without a responsible and educated electorate, democracy does not function.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

It's a de facto tax increase on the middle class. It'll play about as well as Fiddler on the Roof at a KKK rally.

But it would not be a tax increase for the poor...and wouldn't hurt them. They don't own. Having said that, if this results in a tax cut for the rich...then the middle class takes it and the poor is unaffected.

 

[mookie1995]

But it would not be a tax increase for the poor...and wouldn't hurt them. They don't own. Having said that, if this results in a tax cut for the rich...then the middle class takes it and the poor is unaffected.

If one owns a house they are super rich

 

[Kepler]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

But it would not be a tax increase for the poor...and wouldn't hurt them. They don't own. Having said that, if this results in a tax cut for the rich...then the middle class takes it and the poor is unaffected.

The Poors are affected whenever the rich dine and dash on their taxes because the first and deepest cuts when there are revenue shortfalls is programs for the Poors because (1) we treat the Poors like sh-t and (2) they don't vote so f-ck em.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

If one owns a house they are super rich

Not necessarily. Per the census, the poor own at about half the rate of the rest of society. A mortgage deduction helps them much less.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

But it would not be a tax increase for the poor...and wouldn't hurt them. They don't own. Having said that, if this results in a tax cut for the rich...then the middle class takes it and the poor is unaffected.

Global elite are trying to make it so no one owns, but rather rents. Why, in Austin, would single family homes be torn down for duplexes, complexes, and high-rises?

 

[joecct]

Rates to rise because local budgets still need to be paid.

There are locations that have laws on the books that limit the % that property taxes can increase over the previous year. Some jurisdictions require a hyper or super majority to pass a larger increase.

The consequences are usually felt in the next election.

Not all tax increases are bad. They have to be for the right purposes and timed correctly as to not occur during a recession. And if I hear one more "but it's for the children," I'm throwing that arsehole out of office ASAP.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

If rates are continuously rising, perhaps there's a change happening elsewhere that is filtering its way accordingly?

 

[St. Clown]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

But it would not be a tax increase for the poor...and wouldn't hurt them. They don't own. Having said that, if this results in a tax cut for the rich...then the middle class takes it and the poor is unaffected.

When you make it harder to purchase a home for the middle class, the middle class starts looking for other options. Either they move to cheaper, smaller homes, or they start renting. They start to encroach upon what had previously been the domain of those poorer than the middle class. Adversely impacting the middle class will dislocate the poorer people from their current homes by driving up those prices, even if only marginally, to a price the poor can't afford going forward. These things do not happen in a vacuum.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

When you make it harder to purchase a home for the middle class, the middle class starts looking for other options. Either they move to cheaper, smaller homes, or they start renting. They start to encroach upon what had previously been the domain of those poorer than the middle class. Adversely impacting the middle class will dislocate the poorer people from their current homes by driving up those prices, even if only marginally, to a price the poor can't afford going forward. These things do not happen in a vacuum.

And then what, the poor demand Section 8, and then renters don't want to rent out to a person that isn't section 8 because they don't get the huge kickback from the government?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 5.0: Can a blind nut find a squirrel?

When you make it harder to purchase a home for the middle class, the middle class starts looking for other options. Either they move to cheaper, smaller homes, or they start renting. They start to encroach upon what had previously been the domain of those poorer than the middle class. Adversely impacting the middle class will dislocate the poorer people from their current homes by driving up those prices, even if only marginally, to a price the poor can't afford going forward. These things do not happen in a vacuum.

^^^^^^^^^^

Correct. This is documented in "The Two Income Trap" by Elizabeth Warren. Also points out how housing prices are driven up by the middle classes search for good schools.