U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [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 02-23-2013, 06:17 PM
 
Location: Hong Kong
1,329 posts, read 873,662 times
Reputation: 217

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nybbler View Post
The narrowing of the consumer loan interest deduction to the mortgage interest deduction happened in 1986. Trying to tie that to events in 2002 is bizarre.

You just keep beating your anti-suburban anti-car drum over and over, as if repetition will substitute for actual evidence. And you have none.
You misunderstood me.
I am saying that the Mortgage interest deduction contributed to the Housing boom

There's plenty of evidence in my posts, on Youtube, on the KunstlerCast, and right in front of your own eyes. Wake up, Nybbler.

 
Old 02-23-2013, 06:32 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,014 posts, read 102,634,943 times
Reputation: 33082
^^Yes, it's really too bad about that mortgage interest deduction. It certainly would have been far better to keep real estate ownership out of the hands of the masses. Far better for all of us to have remained renters.
 
Old 02-23-2013, 06:36 PM
 
Location: North Baltimore ----> Seattle
6,473 posts, read 11,107,012 times
Reputation: 3117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
^^Yes, it's really too bad about that mortgage interest deduction. It certainly would have been far better to keep real estate ownership out of the hands of the masses. Far better for all of us to have remained renters.
How much does the mortgage interest deduction really effect homeownership rates though? I don't think its elimination would turn us into a nation of the huddled masses vs. the elites (more than is already happening through other means).
 
Old 02-23-2013, 06:39 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,014 posts, read 102,634,943 times
Reputation: 33082
Quote:
Originally Posted by HandsUpThumbsDown View Post
How much does the mortgage interest deduction really effect homeownership rates though? I don't think its elimination would turn us into a nation of the huddled masses vs. the elites (more than is already happening through other means).
Well, we won't know unless we eliminate the mortgage interest deduction, and I don't think that would be likely to fly. A home is the largest investment the average person has. It's a way to build wealth. Many people would not be able to afford homes if there was no interest deduction.
 
Old 02-23-2013, 06:54 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,990 posts, read 41,998,698 times
Reputation: 14810
At the least I think the mortgage interest deduction's cap should be lowered, I don't think it's good policy for loans to for expensive houses to be deductible, if people want to live in and invest expensive homes that shouldn't have a tax preference over other investments.
 
Old 02-23-2013, 07:23 PM
 
Location: Hong Kong
1,329 posts, read 873,662 times
Reputation: 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
^^Yes, it's really too bad about that mortgage interest deduction. It certainly would have been far better to keep real estate ownership out of the hands of the masses. Far better for all of us to have remained renters.
If homeowners can deduct some of their housing expense, why not renters?

The main problem, of course, which contributed to the housing bust was the aggressive Loan-to-Value amounts offered by banks. Of course, that "helped poorer people to get into homes" - but look at the result !
 
Old 02-23-2013, 07:41 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,014 posts, read 102,634,943 times
Reputation: 33082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geologic View Post
If homeowners can deduct some of their housing expense, why not renters?

The main problem, of course, which contributed to the housing bust was the aggressive Loan-to-Value amounts offered by banks. Of course, that "helped poorer people to get into homes" - but look at the result !
In some states, Maryland, Minnesota, and Indiana, possibly others, renters can deduct that portion of their rent that goes for property taxes. I think this is appropriate and should be extended to the fed. income tax. (Evidently it's just on state taxes in those states.)

https://www.google.com/search?q=stat...ient=firefox-a
 
Old 02-23-2013, 09:32 PM
 
229 posts, read 248,617 times
Reputation: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
^^Yes, it's really too bad about that mortgage interest deduction. It certainly would have been far better to keep real estate ownership out of the hands of the masses. Far better for all of us to have remained renters.
.... it's not free though. You think they just write it off and nothing is lost? I'm sure it amounts of billions and billions of lost tax revenue. What about oil subsidies? Just let it go up to its true market value.... you're paying for all these subsidies one way or another. Nothing is free. The difference here is that we ALL have to pay for these stupid things. Socialism?

The whole point of this thread is: suburbia wouldn't be so popular or even affordable if people paid its true costs to live there.

Not everyone needs a house. This whole apartment/shared-housing phobia is just ridiculous. People would rather choose to live in trailer parks than building a god damn apartment building. Seriously, why do trailer parks still exist? Just build an apartment building there. Tons of money will be saved and your square footage won't change.
 
Old 02-23-2013, 09:54 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,072 posts, read 16,094,154 times
Reputation: 12647
There are apartments in suburbia. I explicitly avoided one as a 1bd apartment at the apartment complexes I was looking at, which were basic '70s apartments and not anything fancy, were running in the $650. When I factored in that I really wanted a two-bedroom as I work from home and that allows me to have a separate, defined space as an office which I find very helpful in getting in work mentality, that rose to $800 a month. The house I'm renting is $950 a month for a 3bd. The 3bd units in that apartment complex were $1000 a month. Now, I pay some extra expenses (water, trash) that are sometimes included in your rent at an apartment although certainly not always.

To me, it's a no brainer. I have hardwood floors, nice kitchen appliances, wash and dryer, backyard, no shared walls, two-car garage, in a better neighborhood for $150/month more than the 2bd apartment. Not a hard choice. It's not like apartments aren't an option in suburbs.
 
Old 02-23-2013, 09:59 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,014 posts, read 102,634,943 times
Reputation: 33082
Quote:
Originally Posted by im_a_lawyer View Post
.... it's not free though. You think they just write it off and nothing is lost? I'm sure it amounts of billions and billions of lost tax revenue. What about oil subsidies? Just let it go up to its true market value.... you're paying for all these subsidies one way or another. Nothing is free. The difference here is that we ALL have to pay for these stupid things. Socialism?

The whole point of this thread is: suburbia wouldn't be so popular or even affordable if people paid its true costs to live there.

Not everyone needs a house. This whole apartment/shared-housing phobia is just ridiculous. People would rather choose to live in trailer parks than building a god damn apartment building. Seriously, why do trailer parks still exist? Just build an apartment building there. Tons of money will be saved and your square footage won't change.
So are you proposing setting up a tent somewhere? Last I checked, apartments cost money too.
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.


Closed Thread

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 > Urban Planning
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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