U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate > Mortgages
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 03-30-2011, 12:17 PM
 
64,636 posts, read 66,158,228 times
Reputation: 43065

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
I disagree with this as well. No matter how you slice it, you keep saying the same thing, and it isn't true. Landlords don't hold unlimited power to pass on these costs... if that was true, then what keeps landlords from tripling their rents every year, just for the hell of it?

If I rent from a guy who bought his house in 1971, and has no more mortgage, then he has the ability to lower his rent all the way down to the cost of insurance and taxes (in theory.) He isn't forced to pass on higher costs to the renter. Taxes could quadruple, and he could lower his rents, and still make a profit.

If I rent from a guy with a 2008-vintage mortgage, he's up the creek without a paddle, and cannot lower his price without paying ME to live there. Guys like him have no choice but to pass on higher taxes and insurance costs to the renter, sure.

No comparable situation exists in the gasoline markets. There are no gasoline stations whose product has a cost basis with 1971 prices.


Thats where your missing the point. prices are based not on what you paid but where market forces take them. even if i had oil from 1971 it would be sold at wherever todays market is.

Where ever supply and demand takes rents is where they will be ...

extra demand from potential buyers not buying can put pressure on rents.....
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-30-2011, 12:18 PM
 
2,232 posts, read 4,378,933 times
Reputation: 1479
Quote:
Originally Posted by eggalegga View Post
My point exactly! I don't have kids, I'm a homeowner and the majority of my property taxes go towards school districts. I think Utah has the lowest per pupil spending ratio in the nation and parents are crying that we're not spending enough to educate their kids. Well, I don't see any of them giving up any of their child tax credits to fund the over burdened education system here. Yet there have been rumblings that some parents wouldn't mind paying higher property taxes to increase per pupil spending. Unfortunately, a property tax increase doesn't just impact parents. Why should I have to give up the one tax credit I get to claim for being a homeowner?
I agree with that. Add on to the fact that most of the money never gets to the classroom. D.C. has one of the highest amount spent per pupil, but one of the worst school systems.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 12:35 PM
 
22,770 posts, read 25,197,665 times
Reputation: 14506
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
Thats where your missing the point. prices are based not on what you paid but where market forces take them. even if i had oil from 1971 it would be sold at wherever todays market is.


i think we both understand how it works --- the discrepancy is that you talk as if rents cannot go down.

Last edited by le roi; 03-30-2011 at 12:47 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 12:49 PM
 
823 posts, read 1,956,138 times
Reputation: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post


i think we both understand how it works --- the discrepancy is that you talk as if rents cannot go down.
The rent is too damn high?


I would be OK with getting rid of the mortgage deduction, but only if they used the new money to cut the taxes of the top 2%. Anything else would be socialism.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 01:10 PM
 
22,770 posts, read 25,197,665 times
Reputation: 14506
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteyNice View Post
The rent is too damn high?
is that a question or a statement?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 01:36 PM
 
64,636 posts, read 66,158,228 times
Reputation: 43065
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post


i think we both understand how it works --- the discrepancy is that you talk as if rents cannot go down.
they can and have.... however if all across the country suddenly every owner of a home lost their tax and mortgage deductions and carrying costs shot up falling rents i dont think would be an issue, rising rents more likely would be the problem.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 01:52 PM
 
22,770 posts, read 25,197,665 times
Reputation: 14506
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
they can and have.... however if all across the country suddenly every owner of a home lost their tax and mortgage deductions and carrying costs shot up falling rents i dont think would be an issue, rising rents more likely would be the problem.
TaxProf Blog: 50-State Ranking: Mortgage Interest Deduction

removal of the mortgage interest deduction would disproportionately hurt primary homeowners in high-debt states like Nevada and California.

I'm extremely skeptical that you'd see landlords raising rents nationwide, over its removal.

And besides, you (and other landlords/homeowners) are pushing this contradictory narrative, that:
A) you are profiting from being a landlord
B) you would be forced to raise rents, with the removal of the mortgage interest deduction.

in my mind the two are mutually exclusive.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 03:51 PM
 
823 posts, read 1,956,138 times
Reputation: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
is that a question or a statement?
It's a reference....


YouTube - The Rent Is Too Damn High Party's Jimmy McMillan at the NY Governor Debate
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 04:00 PM
 
48,519 posts, read 81,048,183 times
Reputation: 17978
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndfmnlf View Post
Should the mortgage interest tax deduction be repealed? Some economists argue that the deduction is nothing more than a subsidy to homeowners at the expense of renters. Renters who can't claim the deduction will end up paying higher income taxes since the government will have to offset the loss of the subsidy by raising taxes elsewhere.

RealClearMarkets - Articles - Repeal Housing's Mortgage-Interest Deduction
Actaully the same could be said of any dedustion really. But yes it shuld but then other lophole and dedcution should ber eliminated also. There in fact is a reform that the IRS tax foerm is one page and 29 lines that does just their while broadenig the txa base and lower rates.One has to remmeber that renters actually are largely subsidise with rent laws and rental help for mnay. Do thsi would alos rasie the cost of rent if the landlord had to pay more. Afterall you don't believe renters do t apy the taxes and other thing o their apartemnt;do you. Its all figured in on rent cost plus a profit. Raise cost of rent porperty ownership and its passed o to renters. Renters are indirectly subsidised by the deduction allowed.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 06:23 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 20,726,186 times
Reputation: 8928
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post


i think we both understand how it works --- the discrepancy is that you talk as if rents cannot go down.

Sure, rents can (theoretically) go down, but how often does that happen? (Rents are going up in my area.)
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate > Mortgages
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top