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.
You have no idea what they CHOSE to do with their life.Government already screws the poor by prohibiting affordable home ownership options, thereby creating a class of rent slaves who have to pay more for housing and thus are exploited for vast profits.
Give me back my property rights and then I'll pay my "fair share" of tax.
Rights? please explain what right you have to housing.
Rights? please explain what right you have to housing.
It is a basic principle of property rights that a willing seller and a willing buyer should be able to enter into a property transaction without undue interference from government.
It is a basic principle of property rights that a willing seller and a willing buyer should be able to enter into a property transaction without undue interference from government.
So if you owned a nice house you would have no problem with your next door neighbor building a shanty and moving 9 people into it ?
So if you owned a nice house you would have no problem with your next door neighbor building a shanty and moving 9 people into it ?
As long as my neighbor's house doesn't pose a problem to me - e.g. reasonable setback requirements address fire risks created by my neighbor's house - I don't have a problem with it.
A lot of homeowners believe that they should be exempt from free markets in housing and that they are entitled to government promotion of ever-increasing property values.
If you want others to keep boosting your property value, go buy a house in a deed-restricted subdivision where property owners privately agree on what they can do with their property.
One way to address "over-occupancy" is through parking regulations. I lived in a town where overnight street parking was prohibited and only driveway parking was allowed on private property - there was no way 9 people in one house could all park cars in the driveway.
Why not take the deductions? Because you're complaining about them! They're optional!! Nobody is forcing you to take them!!! If they bother you that much then don't take them!!!!
If the deductions exist, of course I don't have a problem with someone using them... it's part of the tax code.
The point here is that the deductions shouldn't exist. No one should be allowed to take these deductions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmmjv
Does the right have any tax ideas that don't screw the low income people?
no, not really.
it's not just about income, though. They want someone who makes $500k in stock options to be paying 15% while someone who makes $500k performing brain surgery to be paying 35%. They want someone who earns a salary to play by one set of "capitalist" rules, and someone who owns billions to play by a totally different set of "corporate socialist" rules. Trickle down is pro-business, but it is not free market or free enterprise.
Is that 15% on ALL your income? Do you have untaxed compensation like employer-provided health insurance?
And if a minimum wage worker pays 15% of his income in taxes, do you expect him to be self-sufficient including paying for healthcare and saving for retirement?
As long as my neighbor's house doesn't pose a problem to me - e.g. reasonable setback requirements address fire risks created by my neighbor's house - I don't have a problem with it.
A lot of homeowners believe that they should be exempt from free markets in housing and that they are entitled to government promotion of ever-increasing property values.
If you want others to keep boosting your property value, go buy a house in a deed-restricted subdivision where property owners privately agree on what they can do with their property.
One way to address "over-occupancy" is through parking regulations. I lived in a town where overnight street parking was prohibited and only driveway parking was allowed on private property - there was no way 9 people in one house could all park cars in the driveway.
Spoken like someone who has never invested a substantial sum of money on property. You buy a house for say $100,000 its an investment. The vacant lot next to you was well maintained and only contributed to the neighborhood.
New owner set up a trailor court. Trailors of course only depreciate. With trailor courts come you know trailor trash. Its a fact. Drive through a few trailor parks.
Now your $100,000 investment is worth $75,000.
Deed restrictions which you would oppose protect the property owner and his or her neighbors.
My acres of land has the following restrictions.
1. No mobile homes/ trailors.
2. No more that 1 unlicenced car
3. No rental units. ie apartments, storage rentals etc.
4. Minimum sq ft of dwelling 1500 sq ft
5. No housing of farm animals such as cattle, pigs or chickens.
6. No kennels or keeping dogs outside.
I cant remember the others but they all make sense.
I prefer a simple tax based on all income from all sources with a deductable equal to the 90th percentile and a progresssive rate above that. Let the people that benefit the most from government pay for the government they own.
Seems to me the poor welfare person benefits from the Govt more than any citizen. You're saying they should pay the most ?
Maybe so.
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 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.
