Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Setting aside whether it should be or shouldn't be...
...what's the rationale behind the mortgage deduction? What principle justifies giving that tax break to one set of individuals and in the process shifting the overall tax burden elsewhere?
lol.....you MUST be kidding me.
It is an INCENTIVE for EVERYONE to consider buying a home.
It is not for one set of individuals....it is there for all to capitalize on and work towards.
You seem to feel it is for an excluysive group...I guess you are right...it is for the group of people that set out to ahceive something and work hard AND SAVE so they can acheive it.
Liberal Tactics 101. Come into office, massively increase spending then claim you have to raise taxes to tackle this debt problem you were "left with"
Basically what he is saying is this. We are spending 1.6 Trillion more than we take in. thanks in part to my increasing the Budget over 20% each year. So Instead of getting this spending under control, I am going to raise 1 Trillion a year in new taxes so we can keep spending this much every single year. YAY!
OMG I can not believe these people.
The US government should not need to spend 3.7 Trillion dollars a year. This is crazy. Why do they need to spend nearly 12,000 dollars for each man woman and child in this country every year. This is limited Government? This is sure insanity.
Shut the fuck up you fucken spammer.
STFU?
Even as much as I disagree with all of your opinions they are of some value. You might learn to accept the opinions of others too; many time those who offer their opinions, which differ from your own opinions, provide the best evidence that their perspective of reality is distorted (by bias/prejudice, self interest, ignorance or emotion).
Simply because the echo chamber applauded the OP is no indication of the truth or honesty of your opinion and conclusion. Any criticism of President Obama will generate postive feedback from the uber-conservatives who makeup the echo chamber, so don't get too excited by the responses.
Those who wish to continue to cut taxes and complain about the deficit cannot be taken seriously. Simply listening to those who want to represent the R Party as their candidate for POTUS have offered no solution to our current and continuing economic woes, they offer the same illogic expressed in the OP and that truly is sad.
Supply side theory, massive tax cuts created the mess we are in today and this outcome was not and is not an accident. Grover Norquist and his Wed. Night group planned to destroy government long before Obama came on the scene. It was and remains an effort by oligarchal forces to transform American Democracy into a Plutocracy.
This is no conspiracy theory nor an idea based on prejudice or emotion. It's obvious in the writings and actions of the New Right, in the 5-4 opinons of the Supreme Court and the continued influence of media darlings and moguls who benefit from and will benefit more as we slide further into plutocratic rule.
Those who give up liberty for a little wealth and power are todays real enemies. Nineteen criminials knocked down the symbol of American capitalism; the purveyors of hate and fear, false pathos and greed hope to bring down American Democracy.
Don't feed the Trolls. He wasn't making a valid point other then illuminating once again that he's an insufferable bore.
Btw, our debt is a result of over spending, nothing else.
January 5, 2004
"Total investment flows to the US are declining, compounding the US dollar's two year fall, which McKibbin attributes to investor concerns about country risk.
"That happens in some smaller countries but is quite unusual in the US - at least since the second world war," says McKibbin."
The Heritage Foundation is even admitting the tax increases WILL raise revenues.
lol, that's heresy on the Right, isn't it?
Most of the truly wealthy have already admitted that taxes will need to be raised. The tax cuts went too far. The issue is to use tax increases in combination with real cuts in spending, and not to just continue increasing spending. At the same time, we know Medicare is going to have to change, no matter what Obama wants. With the aging population and continually rising healthcare costs, it is growing out of control. Raising the age at which Medicare benefits can be received is the only way to curb and control costs while leaving the program intact.
If Republicans really want to get something done, they better get off of this idea that there will be no tax increases, because only using cuts to balance the budtget will end up causing even bigger problems in the long run.
The GOP vision of Medicare reform is that of your 85 year old invalid grandmother fighting with a for-profit insurance company day after day trying to get her bills paid.
Setting aside whether it should be or shouldn't be...
...what' the rationale behind the mortgage deduction? What principle justifies giving that tax break to one set of individuals and in the process shifting the overall tax burden elsewhere?
You mean like allowing 47% of people to pay no federal income tax while shifting the burden to the other 53% who do?
The only lies here are that the war in Iraq cost $3T, and that said war was based on lies.Yeah....DAMN that recorded-documentation!!!!
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejph4LBdmmc]YouTube - WMD LIES - Bush Cheney Rumsfeld etc. - THE ULTIMATE CLIP[/ame]
Gee, yet ANOTHER mindless pic/vid from you.
Most of the truly wealthy have already admitted that taxes will need to be raised. The tax cuts went too far. The issue is to use tax increases in combination with real cuts in spending, and not to just continue increasing spending. At the same time, we know Medicare is going to have to change, no matter what Obama wants. With the aging population and continually rising healthcare costs, it is growing out of control. Raising the age at which Medicare benefits can be received is the only way to curb and control costs while leaving the program intact.
If Republicans really want to get something done, they better get off of this idea that there will be no tax increases, because only using cuts to balance the budtget will end up causing even bigger problems in the long run.
The GOP vision of Medicare reform is that of your 85 year old invalid grandmother fighting with a for-profit insurance company day after day trying to get her bills paid.
Eh, it's still better than Obama's death panels
Setting aside whether it should be or shouldn't be...
...what's the rationale behind the mortgage deduction? What principle justifies giving that tax break to one set of individuals and in the process shifting the overall tax burden elsewhere?
lol.....you MUST be kidding me.
It is an INCENTIVE for EVERYONE to consider buying a home.
It is not for one set of individuals....it is there for all to capitalize on and work towards.
You seem to feel it is for an excluysive group...I guess you are right...it is for the group of people that set out to ahceive something and work hard AND SAVE so they can acheive it.
But why should the income tax code be used as an incentive system, especially an incentive system that increases the cost of housing and is regressive by design?
I understand it's an incentive, but I could come up with all sorts of "good" things we might want to incent - but we don't get to write off expenses related to them.
Most of the truly wealthy have already admitted that taxes will need to be raised. The tax cuts went too far. The issue is to use tax increases in combination with real cuts in spending, and not to just continue increasing spending. At the same time, we know Medicare is going to have to change, no matter what Obama wants. With the aging population and continually rising healthcare costs, it is growing out of control. Raising the age at which Medicare benefits can be received is the only way to curb and control costs while leaving the program intact.
If Republicans really want to get something done, they better get off of this idea that there will be no tax increases, because only using cuts to balance the budtget will end up causing even bigger problems in the long run.
The GOP vision of Medicare reform is that of your 85 year old invalid grandmother fighting with a for-profit insurance company day after day trying to get her bills paid.
So what you are saying is you wish every single Old person in this country was Dependent on medicare? You do realize their are many Older people who still carry their own insurance right? Because it's Better than Medicare You can go to more doctors, get more drugs covered.
You just exposed you leftist tenancy. You Think all old people, Despite their means, should be stuck on Medicare. Lest they have to "fight day after day with a big bad evil for profit insurance company"
lol
Well, we didn't have a spending problem in 2000. If we cut all spending back to 2000 levels as a percentage of GDP, in 2010 we would still have had a shortfall of over $500 billion. So yes, we have a revenue problem as well as a spending problem. In order to reach those 2000 numbers as calculated by percentage of GDP in 2010, we would have had to cut spending by $792 billion and increased revenue by $502 billion.
Even if that were true, it's only because we are in a recession. The deficit would disappear once the recession went away, and there odds of a recovery would have been a lot better if government wasn't spending $3 for every $2 it takes in.
The deficit is always a spending problem. The mentality that says government spending must always increase no matter what the economy does is the cause of our problems. They idea that Americans don't pay enough in taxes is simply too absurd for words. We pay five times more than we should.
Setting aside whether it should be or shouldn't be...
...what's the rationale behind the mortgage deduction? What principle justifies giving that tax break to one set of individuals and in the process shifting the overall tax burden elsewhere?
lol.....you MUST be kidding me.
It is an INCENTIVE for EVERYONE to consider buying a home.
It is not for one set of individuals....it is there for all to capitalize on and work towards.
You seem to feel it is for an excluysive group...I guess you are right...it is for the group of people that set out to ahceive something and work hard AND SAVE so they can acheive it.
lol.....you MUST be kidding me.
It is an INCENTIVE for EVERYONE to consider buying a home.
It is not for one set of individuals....it is there for all to capitalize on and work towards.
You seem to feel it is for an excluysive group...I guess you are right...it is for the group of people that set out to ahceive something and work hard AND SAVE so they can acheive it.
You're going a bit far. Owning a home is an achievement only to those that wish to own a home.
Fair enough.
And on the same note, many government programs are there for only those that choose to use them....some prefer not to, but pay for it with their taxes anyway.
Just as some choose to not want to own a home and lose out on the deduction if they did.
Setting aside whether it should be or shouldn't be...
...what's the rationale behind the mortgage deduction? What principle justifies giving that tax break to one set of individuals and in the process shifting the overall tax burden elsewhere?
lol.....you MUST be kidding me.
It is an INCENTIVE for EVERYONE to consider buying a home.
It is not for one set of individuals....it is there for all to capitalize on and work towards.
You seem to feel it is for an excluysive group...I guess you are right...it is for the group of people that set out to ahceive something and work hard AND SAVE so they can acheive it.
I know it's an incentive. What's the rationale for that incentive?
I thought everyone considering buying a home is what caused the housing bubble.
PS, The mortgage deduction is only available to people who can itemize, right?
First, show that they do.
I'll be especially interested in you showing that the tax cuts are ever 'funded' at all - the rest will be sauce for the goose.
Why would tax cuts ever have to be "funded?" That's like saying government is entitled to a certain sized piece of your hide. How do you "fund" taking less of my money?
You're spouting the terminology of Stalinism.
You're going a bit far. Owning a home is an achievement only to those that wish to own a home.
Fair enough.
And on the same note, many government programs are there for only those that choose to use them....some prefer not to, but pay for it with their taxes anyway.
Just as some choose to not want to own a home and lose out on the deduction if they did.
General question then, not necessarily at you specifically:
Why are so many conservatives then so enamored with tax simplication, the flat tax, the national sales tax,
all of which presumably get rid of the mortgage deduction for the homeowning special interest?
lol.....you MUST be kidding me.
It is an INCENTIVE for EVERYONE to consider buying a home.
It is not for one set of individuals....it is there for all to capitalize on and work towards.
You seem to feel it is for an excluysive group...I guess you are right...it is for the group of people that set out to ahceive something and work hard AND SAVE so they can acheive it.
But why should the income tax code be used as an incentive system, especially an incentive system that increases the cost of housing and is regressive by design?
I understand it's an incentive, but I could come up with all sorts of "good" things we might want to incent - but we don't get to write off expenses related to them.
becuase new home construction is a bsais for economic prosperity...why do you think it is used as a primary economic indicator?
Home construction is the root of an infiniate amount of industries.
Tax increases for the wealthy, get rid of obscene tax cuts for large corporations and defense budget cuts will help tremendously.
The reason we spent so much the last 5 or 6 years is because of unemployment insurance payments, Medicaid, food stamps, the EPA, discretionary spending, and spending on 3 wars.
Cutting Defense spending before we end those wars is idiotic. Why do don't we just shoot our own troops while we're at it. Tell Obama to get us the heck out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya.
I say cut food stamps, unemployment benefits, and pull back on the EPA, not just go after just those you despise.
But why should the income tax code be used as an incentive system, especially an incentive system that increases the cost of housing and is regressive by design?
I understand it's an incentive, but I could come up with all sorts of "good" things we might want to incent - but we don't get to write off expenses related to them.
becuase new home construction is a bsais for economic prosperity...why do you think it is used as a primary economic indicator?
Home construction is the root of an infiniate amount of industries.
Well, labor in general is a basis for economic prosperity - but we tax it as income.
Consumer expenditures drive growth, but we don't get to write off expenses related to shopping.
Buying durable goods and cars drives growth but we don't get a tax credit for those.
And incentivizing more home construction when we have a serious over-supply of housing seems a little perverse. Nevermind the perverse nature of the credit.
Liberal Tactics 101. Come into office, massively increase spending then claim you have to raise taxes to tackle this debt problem you were "left with"
Basically what he is saying is this. We are spending 1.6 Trillion more than we take in. thanks in part to my increasing the Budget over 20% each year. So Instead of getting this spending under control, I am going to raise 1 Trillion a year in new taxes so we can keep spending this much every single year. YAY!
OMG I can not believe these people.
The US government should not need to spend 3.7 Trillion dollars a year. This is crazy. Why do they need to spend nearly 12,000 dollars for each man woman and child in this country every year. This is limited Government? This is sure insanity.
UH are you really that dense??
The reality is that it is a republican tactic to increase spending while giving taxcuts which increases the debt so they can use that as an excuse to try to reign in spending and attack parts of the governemnt that they don't like, such as medicare which they were vehemently defending prior to the midterm when obama and the dems tried to cut waste from the program, while the right refuses to address the problem realistically.
For evidence of that one needs to only look at the wisconsin model of this tactic put forth by gov walker.
Usually when someone shoots their own dick off like that, they die a quick death.Once again Obama has shown his plan all along. Raise taxes.
He wants to remove home interest payments as a deduction.
Trust me, this will include everyone, not just those who make over $200k.
Also, he says he wants to remove charitable contributions as well.
Folks, this isn't all he plans to do. He's just telling us the part he thinks we want to hear.
I guess you can drop all the rhetoric over how he's cut taxes now. It was all smoke and mirrors anyway.
Obama, yesterday, stated essentially that America won't be a great nation until we become a socialistic one. A nanny state. As he said, in part::
-------"and so we contribute to programs like Medicare and Social Security, which guarantee us health care and a measure of basic income after a lifetime of hard work; unemployment insurance, which protects us against unexpected job loss; and Medicaid, which provides care for millions of seniors in nursing homes, poor children, and those with disabilities, Obama said. We are a better country because of these commitments. Ill go further we would not be a great country without those commitments.
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/04/...utm_campaign=Feed:+DakotaVoice+(Dakota+Voice)
