Home Mortgage Interest Deduction

[La literatura]

Would it be better to get rid of the mortgage interest deduction and replace it with a lowered rate deduction?

[RaiderH8r]

Entitlement spending is 70% of the budget spending. ****ing around with the other 30% isn't going to fix shit.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Brock

Owning a home is already a giant pain in the ass, and people want to take away one of the few positive aspects?

If the deduction had never existed, I think housing prices would be much lower. So you've still have the pains, but you would've paid 40 percent less for the house, or some such amount, which would in turn save a ton of interest that might be as much or more as the deduction.

At least, that's my theory. The deduction makes home ownership cheaper than it ordinarily would, and that has to have some sort of impact on the market. It seems to me that along the line the various middlemen take advantage of that to up their profit, with prices passed along to the buyer. It's hard for me to believe that the big banks haven't figured out some way to skim off part of that massive amount of market intervention.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

Entitlement spending is 70% of the budget spending. ****ing around with the other 30% isn't going to fix shit.

I saw something the other day that I thought was a good point. Social Security and Medicare shouldn't be lumped in with the rest of government. They're independent programs that are independently funded with the premise that people are merely getting back what they paid in (minus some social engineering).

It seems to me that we should have three sets of books for the federal government: social security, medicare/medicaid, and "the federal government".

[Brock]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

If the deduction had never existed, I think housing prices would be much lower. So you've still have the pains, but you would've paid 40 percent less for the house, or some such amount, which would in turn save a ton of interest that might be as much or more as the deduction.

You think there's 40 percent profit in building a house? Maybe in some places where things are artificially more expensive like California. It definitely doesn't hold true here. Gross profit of 20 percent is a vain hope around here.

[KC native]

Originally Posted by Literature

Life is complicated. We need a complicated tax code to go with it. But if we did get rid of all credits and deductions, what would you think a good tax rate schedule would be?

No we don't need it to be complicated. We should not be using the tax code to modify behavior.

I don't know what the exact rates should be, but if all the nonsense were thrown out the statutory rates would be significantly lower than what they are today.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Literature

Life is complicated. We need a complicated tax code to go with it. But if we did get rid of all credits and deductions, what would you think a good tax rate schedule would be?

Life isn't fair. We need a really unfair tax code to go along with it.

[RaiderH8r]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I saw something the other day that I thought was a good point. Social Security and Medicare shouldn't be lumped in with the rest of government. They're independent programs that are independently funded with the premise that people are merely getting back what they paid in (minus some social engineering).

It seems to me that we should have three sets of books for the federal government: social security, medicare/medicaid, and "the federal government".

Then make those accounts individual accounts and be done with it. If people truly are "getting out what they put in" then just put it in each person's name.

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by Saul Badguy

Life isn't fair. We need a really unfair tax code to go along with it.

We need a tax code that follows life. The tax code currently just follows business innovations.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Literature

We need a tax code that follows life. The tax code currently just follows business innovations.

Is this true of all laws, or is it a phenomenon unique to the tax code?

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by Saul Badguy

Is this true of all laws, or is it a phenomenon unique to the tax code?

Is it true that laws follow business innovations?

[HonestChieffan]

Originally Posted by Literature

We need a tax code that follows life. The tax code currently just follows business innovations.

Good. More proof you are a complete moron. A tax code that follows life. This has potential.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Literature

Is it true that laws follow business innovations?

Is it true that laws should follow life? Should the speed limit be higher for high performance cars with better handling?

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

Good. More proof you are a complete moron. A tax code that follows life. This has potential.

He'll post that while bitching about what Romney legally pays.

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by Saul Badguy

Is it true that laws should follow life? Should the speed limit be higher for high performance cars with better handling?

Yes, laws should follow life. I don't understand your hypothetical. Can high performance cars with better handling not slow down to average speeds in real life?

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

Good. More proof you are a complete moron. A tax code that follows life. This has potential.

What do you think comes first: the tax code statutes and regulations, or the issues that the statutes and regulations cover?*



* Also, have you ever read a tax code regulation, or a revenue ruling, or a tax court opinion? Just wondering so I know if I'm talking with someone who is familiar with them.