Tax increases by removing deductions!!

[Feeblemind 1]

Well,

The government is trying once again to stick it to the working men and women of this country the presidential tax code committee has brought forth a solution to simplify the tax code, just eliminate deductions!! www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/10242005_Home_Mortgage_Interest_Deduction.asp

It pisses me off they have to keep taxing the working folk to provide for those who refuse to get off their dead asses and support themselves. Yes I understand some folks are truly disabled and we need to give them a hand. With that said, being a public servant the vast majority of those in the system are just LAZY!! End of rant.

Send e-mail to your local representatives to tell them to vote against this change.

Fire Safety Tip: Don't fry bacon while naked

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

The government is trying once again to stick it to the working men and women of this country .

"to eliminate this deduction for persons paying interest on larger mortgages, possibly those exceeding $250,000 to $350,000. "

You don't understand, they are only sticking it to the RICH with big houses. (or those moderate or small houses in high cost of living areas).

Didn't you know that sticking to the average guy and claiming it's only sticking it to the rich is very fashionable nowadays.....

Climb aboard the bandwagon.

c'mon

everybody's doing it

I would like to see anybody for this change to list the value of their house. Certainly anyone who rents or has a low value house should be for it since they aren't affected in a negative way - those guys are easy (students, renters, if you live in a trailer (I'd love to live in my camper BTW, it would be so much simpler), have a cheaper house, live in a very low cost region where houses are cheap, etc). But what about the others????

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[GTAVercetti 0]

If you live anywhere near an urban area and the surrounding suburbs (particularly where I live) you would PRAY for a "large" mortgage of 250,000 dollars.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[rehmwa 2]

What I don't get here, is that if they want to eliminate the deduction, do it then for EVERYBODY. Setting an arbitrary cutoff point just means redistribution. And I'm normally a big fan arbitrarilianeousnessesserarywichenheimer.

either it's right or it's wrong

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[AlexCrowley 0]

yeah no shit. My condo 20 miles outside of Boston cost more than that.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[billvon 3,100]

>The government is trying once again to stick it to the working men and women of this country . . .

They've already done that. Now they're just paying for it.

Want to get mad about taxes? Get mad when the money is spent. Getting mad about paying it is like spending like a sailor on your credit card then getting mad when the bill comes. The time to avoid that large bill is not when it's due, it's when you spent the money that you now owe.

Also, if I were you, I would be VERY suspicious of a credit card company that sends you a $10,000 bill, then also sends you a letter with an offer of an "easy payment plan! Cut your credit card bills and pay just $10 a month!" Taking them up on such a 'tax cut' is a good way to get very screwed.

We (or our children) will have to pay back every cent of the debt, which is right now approximately $35,000 a person. Pay now or pay more later; your choice.

[Feeblemind 1]

Quote

"to eliminate this deduction for persons paying interest on larger mortgages, possibly those exceeding $250,000 to $350,000. "

You don't understand, they are only sticking it to the RICH with big houses. (or those moderate or small houses in high cost of living areas).

The median price home in California exceed $350,000. and that is for a 1400 sq. foot house in avg. Joe surburbia.

So if I understand you correctly anyone who owns a house exceeding $250,000 is rich?

Fire Safety Tip: Don't fry bacon while naked

[kallend 2,144]

Quote

Well,

The government is trying once again to stick it to the working men and women of this country the presidential tax code committee has brought forth a solution to simplify the tax code, just eliminate deductions!! www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/10242005_Home_Mortgage_Interest_Deduction.asp

It pisses me off they have to keep taxing the working folk to provide for those who refuse to get off their dead asses and support themselves. Yes I understand some folks are truly disabled and we need to give them a hand. With that said, being a public servant the vast majority of those in the system are just LAZY!! End of rant.

Send e-mail to your local representatives to tell them to vote against this change.

I don't see why a deduction is allowed for a mortgage in the first place. I'd like to see a flat or graduated tax on all income above the poverty level, and no other deductions.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

So if I understand you correctly anyone who owns a house exceeding $250,000 is rich?

Hello Feeblemind -
That is how many in the country feel. I'm not one of them. What I wrote was mockery of the prevailing attitude in determining tax increases and decreases and how they are accounted - specifically the eroding disparity of it. So I'm not sure what's worse, that you actually took my mockery seriously? or that you actually took my mockery seriously.

It leads one to believe that a lot of people think that 'socking' to one group unequally compared to all other groups is considered fair.

Either that, or you are just having fun with your screen name.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I'd like to see a flat (deleted nonsense here as a flat tax above a base amount defines a graduated rate by exempting the base amount) tax on all income above the poverty level, and no other deductions.

or credits

Yay, Kallend for Minister of Finance

Everybody pays 0 tax on the first ($xxxx) and then we all pay the same rate on everything above it.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[GTAVercetti 0]

Teve Torbes for PRESIDENT!!!

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[billvon 3,100]

>It leads one to believe that a lot of people think that 'socking' to one group unequally . . .

I think it's odd that there are a group of people that considers supporting your country by being in the military noble, but supporting your country by paying for said military is getting "socked." (Not saying you're in that group.)

[ReBirth 0]

hmmm...is that the same group that wants to make abortions illegal while wanting to penalize single mothers on welfare for having more children? Yeah...that group is crazy.

[Wopelao 0]

Some people will turn this comment as you being a righty, for wanting an equal tax paying opportunity for EVERYONE.


I'll give you a random number 5.

[billvon 3,100]

>for wanting an equal tax paying opportunity for EVERYONE.

Not possible. To do that you'd have to send everyone a bill for around $26,000 a year. We couldn't build debtor prisons fast enough to hold all the people unable to pay, and having 10% of the country in jail would be bad for the economy.

So you have to do some form of graduated tax. You could do a flat percentage, a progressive percentage (which is what we have now) a sales tax etc. No sane economist suggests a flat-amount tax, and as far as I know no one here is suggesting it.

So all schemes 'favor the poor' in that the poor pay less than their 'fair share.' The argument devolves to how you do the math.

[Wopelao 0]

Nope, not that everyone pays the same amount, but the SAME PERCENTAGE.

Very simple, people that make more will pay, lets say more?

[billvon 3,100]

> Nope, not that everyone pays the same amount, but the SAME PERCENTAGE.

So you're for a graduated tax. Often there are exemptions for poverty because a) people have compassion for the very poor and b) it's not worth it to process a return for $131; you lose money on the deal. Which means practically you get a tax where:

a.) the poor pay nothing
b.) the middle class pay a medium amount
c.) the rich pay a lot.

That's common to pretty much all schemes. Whether the percentages are exactly the same is a minor detail.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Some people will turn this comment as you being a righty, for wanting an equal tax paying opportunity for EVERYONE.

It's not equal, say the cutoff is $10,000 before you pay any tax and 50% for all income above $10k. If you make less than that you pay 0 dollars. If you make $20K you pay $5000, if you make $110K you pay $50k

that doesn't look like anyone is paying the same, it's actually a progressive tax. In fact the first guy pays 0%, the 2nd guy pays %25, and the third guy is paying over 45% tax. So it's progressive in both direct dollars and percentage.

Flat amount (user fee - everybody take the year's expenses and divide by the number of people) tax fee might be one concept of the most fair way to tax people, but it's not practical to split up the cost evenly. IMO it's not really fair either - just an opinion, but since it's a subjective argument, I can have an opinion. But maybe I'm just unreasonably jealous of the Bill Gates crowd.

Billvon - Your "socking" comment was completely a side track and confusing. And if everyone pays, it's not socking it, only if one group is singled out for unfair loading. This wasn't even a military thread. I'd love to read a new thread though if were trying to make a point though. Not saying you don't have a point.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>a.) the poor pay nothing
b.) the middle class pay a medium amount
c.) the rich pay a lot.

The only thing here is I have a problem with any group paying "nothing". Even a token amount would drive a higher level of interest in the way the nation is run.

I'd be more in favor of a VERY small percentage for the first XXX dollars, and then the 'regular' rate for all income above XXX dollars. It's still progressive, but it makes sure no one has a "free ride".

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[ReBirth 0]

As Bill pointed out, though, it's not worth it to collect below a certain amount. It would COST money to collect taxes from the poor.

[billvon 3,100]

>Billvon - Your "socking" comment was completely a side track . . .

OK, sorry, I will alter it.

No one is getting "socked." They are getting the opportunity to support their country. Rich people are better able to support their country than poor people. Indeed, rich people who support new wars (and who bankroll pro-war candidates) are the reason we have massive spending that we must balance via new taxes. So I have little sympathy for such people; they are paying their own expenses. Seems eminently fair.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

I don't see why a deduction is allowed for a mortgage in the first place.

It allows people with mortgages to have the same interest costs as land lords for whom the interest is a business expense which in turn encourages home ownership.

With a 33% combined state and federal marginal tax rate, without the deduction your pre-tax costs would be 50% higher to own your first few homes than to rent them. That's significant.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

As Bill pointed out, though, it's not worth it to collect below a certain amount. It would COST money to collect taxes from the poor.

And it's also what I said. And if you read "token" amount, then you have to decide if you want a group of citizenry that have ZERO vested interest in financial health of our economy (except how it suits them only). It's what we have now and it's a cause of many problems that even the simple gesture could mitigate.

KALLEND FOR MINISTER OF FINANCE

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Rich people are better able to support their country than poor people...rich people who support new wars (and who bankroll pro-war candidates) are the reason we have massive spending that we must balance via new taxes

very classist thing to say - I disagree and think it's degrading to people of all incomes to make those gross stereotypes.

In fact you are likely very well off, how can you live with yourself since the only thing that defines a person is their bank account?

still a total digression, if you have an axe to grind, I'm sure you have the right tools in your shop.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,100]

>very classist thing to say . . .

Which part? That rich people are better able to support their country through their taxes than poor people? That's just math. That people who vote for wars cause greater expenditures? That's easily proved.