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.
In the context of housing as a scarce resource, I would tax vacant units up the wazoo.
blah blah blah I'm so sick of renters and liberals thinking people who own property need to be punished for doing as they please WITH THEIR PROPERTY they PAID for through their efforts. Housing is not a scarce resource. No one owes any starving artist or poor hipster moron with a minimum wage job a sweet pad in the center of San Francisco. They can go live in Kansas. Living in a great neighborhood in an expensive city is not a right, it's a choice!
I was making $437 every two weeks 13 years ago, I took a pay cut and a huge gamble to earn less than $16,000 a year after switching from a dead end job that paid $25k.
I will be a millionaire before 50. I just don't understand people who say it's not possible. In retrospect it was actually easy, and I kick myself everyday for the opportunities I passed over and advice I was to proud to take.
I almost got stuck in the dead end low wage doldrums too, but I decided I would do whatever it took to become comfortable even if it included the chance of dying on a battlefield in a third world crap hole over mineral rights. Then I took every opportunity that was afforded to me, and put tons of effort into it and considered any and all avenues regardless of how much pain it caused me. 16 hour days, weekends, full time school, full time work. Sacrificing $5,000 that took me an entire year to save here and there to pay into investments.
I'm so sick of hearing every jerk off these days complaining about being in low paying jobs, but then they tell you a long list of demands they have from prospective employment.
"I don't want to work weekends."
"I'd be on call, that sucks"
"I can't do that job because of a bad back"
"It's not near a bus route/it's too far to bike."
"It's dirty work, I have to clean other peoples crap"
"It only starts at x dollars."
"I don't like blue collar work"
Life is about opportunity and sacrifice.
And I'm tired of homeowners and conservatives thinking people who do not own property need to be punished. Just look at the enormous goodies we give homeowners, the mortgage interest deduction is just the tip of that iceberg. One of the favorite tax schemes among conservatives is to bundle a property tax cut with a sales tax increase - guaranteed to make every renter worse off.
Michigan Republicans created a steep "nonhomestead tax" which makes the school property tax rate on rental property FOUR TIMES the school property tax rate on owner-occupied primary residences.
Why should a renter be forced to subsidize homeowners? My rented home is my primary residence, is it my fault I don't own it? Why should it be taxed up the wazoo?
It would be better if the renter's primary residence had the same tax rate as the homeowner's primary residence. That's how I came up with the idea of overtaxing ONLY unoccupied residential properties.
Conservatives ask renters to make sacrifices to pay ridiculous rents and ridiculous taxes, while they fall over backward to give homeowners tax breaks, tax cuts, and other goodies.
Would you say that all of the above are necessary components of a living wage?
If not, which are necessary and which are not?
A living wage. Tax the rich not the poor. Inflation taxes the last people to get their hands on the new money. Up the minimum wage to drive inflation and tax the rich with it.
I don't care about a living wage. I'm just not in a position to pay the inflation tax.
Last edited by ContrarianEcon; 02-17-2015 at 07:32 PM..
And I'm tired of homeowners and conservatives thinking people who do not own property need to be punished. Just look at the enormous goodies we give homeowners, the mortgage interest deduction is just the tip of that iceberg. One of the favorite tax schemes among conservatives is to bundle a property tax cut with a sales tax increase - guaranteed to make every renter worse off.
Michigan Republicans created a steep "nonhomestead tax" which makes the school property tax rate on rental property FOUR TIMES the school property tax rate on owner-occupied primary residences.
Why should a renter be forced to subsidize homeowners? My rented home is my primary residence, is it my fault I don't own it? Why should it be taxed up the wazoo?
It would be better if the renter's primary residence had the same tax rate as the homeowner's primary residence. That's how I came up with the idea of overtaxing ONLY unoccupied residential properties.
Conservatives ask renters to make sacrifices to pay ridiculous rents and ridiculous taxes, while they fall over backward to give homeowners tax breaks, tax cuts, and other goodies.
Step back from a pure $$ objective...
There are well known and well established connections between owner occupied home ownership with social benefits and community stability. The tax code is part of the incentive to bring people into home ownership for those benefits while eliminating the tax deduction on other forms of interest costs. The same law you criticize also brought about the Low-Income Housing Tax credit which accounts for the vast majority of affordable housing in the US... that's affordable rent for low income families.
For every renter, there is underneath a person who owns that property. More taxation on that property owner will simply mean higher rents. Remember, the property owner assumes all risks associated with property ownership which includes any repairs and maintenance. That risk has to be mitigated in some form. The tax law on rental/investment property is not the same as the clause that defines mortgage interest deduction of owner-occupied properties.
Your logic is also on shaky ground by equating home ownership with mortgage interest deduction. That only applies to home owners who have a mortgage. What you really meant to say is "Why are those with a mortgage given tax breaks while renters do not?" Think about that statement for second..... very carefully... before continuing down that line of reasoning (at the risk of sounding foolish).
PS> recall my previous posts and replies... I am by far not a conservative (nor a liberal)
There are well known and well established connections between owner occupied home ownership with social benefits and community stability. The tax code is part of the incentive to bring people into home ownership for those benefits while eliminating the tax deduction on other forms of interest costs. The same law you criticize also brought about the Low-Income Housing Tax credit which accounts for the vast majority of affordable housing in the US... that's affordable rent for low income families.
For every renter, there is underneath a person who owns that property. More taxation on that property owner will simply mean higher rents. Remember, the property owner assumes all risks associated with property ownership which includes any repairs and maintenance. That risk has to be mitigated in some form. The tax law on rental/investment property is not the same as the clause that defines mortgage interest deduction of owner-occupied properties.
Your logic is also on shaky ground by equating home ownership with mortgage interest deduction. That only applies to home owners who have a mortgage. What you really meant to say is "Why are those with a mortgage given tax breaks while renters do not?" Think about that statement for second..... very carefully... before continuing down that line of reasoning (at the risk of sounding foolish).
PS> recall my previous posts and replies... I am by far not a conservative (nor a liberal)
One man's tax incentive is another man's tax penalty. Not to mention social engineering. For every renter, there is a person who owns at least two properties, while the renter owns zero properties. For every renter, there is a redistribution of income from one person to another person - corporations are people too.
Low income housing tax credits have limited duration; many once-affordable housing properties have long ago become unaffordable when the tax credits expired and rents necessarily skyrocketed.
The private sector is entirely capable of building affordable housing. Their failure to do so both a failure of government and a failure of capitalism.
As I said, the mortgage interest deduction is only the tip of an iceberg of homeowner freebies. Homestead exemptions apply to ALL homeowners with or without a mortgage, these are of greater value to homeowners than is the mortgage interest deduction.
Renters experience greater risk than homeowners. Homeowners enjoy fixed P&I payments with a fixed-rate mortgage, while renters always face the inherent risks of rent inflation and displacement. Homeowners always will have a roof over their head without a mortgage hike, while renters are at the mercy of both the market and their landlord.
homeowners are bailing out of the tristate area because real estate taxes are killing them so your premise about a paid off mortgage is not true.
in fact a house cost 35k back in the 70's when we first bought homes. do you thing ditching payments on a 30k mortgage means much today in the scheme of things when real estate taxes are 14-20k a year ?
homeowners are bailing out of the tristate area because real estate taxes are killing them so your premise about a paid off mortgage is not true.
in fact a house cost 35k back in the 70's when we first bought homes. do you thing ditching payments on a 30k mortgage means much today in the scheme of things when real estate taxes are 14-20k a year ?
Homeowners are always free to ditch high property taxes and rent instead. Most renters are not free to buy a home and ditch their high rents.
renters are free to move to lower cost areas, smaller apartments , take on roomates , apartment share , get assistance if they qualify . renters can't usually max out standard deductions either, especially as a couple flying the empty seats and getting money back they never spent. they get to put money in piggy they never spent . home owners usually spend it on real estate taxes and mortgage interest and get little or nothing back they didn't pull out of piggy, no found bonus dollars there ..
the renter who goes from a 3 bedroom apartment when the kids live home to a 1 bedroom after they are out can see better cash flow than a homeowner paying high taxes and maintaining ,heating and cooling an entire house.
sorry pal but your argument as usual is weak at best.
Last edited by mathjak107; 02-18-2015 at 03:59 AM..
renters are free to move to lower cost areas, smaller apartments , take on roomates , apartment share , get assistance if they qualify . renters can't usually max out standard deductions either, especially as a couple flying the empty seats and getting money back they never spent. they get to put money in piggy they never spent . home owners usually spend it on real estate taxes and mortgage interest and get little or nothing back they didn't pull out of piggy, no found bonus dollars there ..
??? ??? ??? ??? ??? I've already taken on seven roommates here and there is literally no place I can afford to move into. Get assistance my *****ing ***, the waiting lists are ten years long.
I've already downsized a half dozen times, what happens when there's no further downsizing options? I'm down to a basement room in an 8-person house.
That homeowner can live for free by renting out rooms; I know several who have successfully done this.
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.
