Senate Passes Sweeping Republican Tax Overhaul Bill

[Great-Kazoo]

Lots of people take handouts from the government that don't need them... that doesn't make it right.

Just because lots of people move every 5 years and/or take out a new note every 5 years doesn't make it wise financially.

In your scenario that 5 years paid on a 30 year mortgage will end up being nearly 100% interest the way it's amortized. Sure you can write some of that off (depending on income situation) but crunch the numbers on what interest is on 60 months @ roughly $2k per month and you end up with a pretty crazy number that you are paying to "rent" a home. Sure you can get some appreciation but you can also lose a lot of money in value too. Factor in realtor fees and you've got a whole lot of large #'s that aren't in your favor.

Don't even get me started on people who go out and refinance to "save money"on their mortgage ....eesh.

It's already been mentioned though that this is off topic. I referenced a post earlier with a short statement that was largely tongue-in-cheek that has spun off into a conversation that should be contained within a thread topic all it's own.

Just know that you don't HAVE to pay on a mortgage for 30 years and "getting the write-off" certainly isn't worth the true cost of money.

Is your mortgage paid off?

[Zundfolge]

Just because lots of people move every 5 years and/or take out a new note every 5 years doesn't make it wise financially.

Yeah, that was my point.

[Eric P]

I never understood why there should ever be deductions on your taxes for life choices.

Why should most tax payers subsidize the mortgage banks for people to purchases houses? You want property, don't ask renters to subsidize you.
Why should most tax payers subsidize those who give to charity? Give to charity because it makes you feel good, not to gain a discoutvon taxes.
Why should most tax payers subsidize those who breed more children than they could support? If you can't afford kids, don't make childless folks subsidize your kids.
Why should most tax payers subsidize tesla, Toyota, ect so people buy over priced go carts?

We need a flat tax, no deduction, no credits, no more tax lawyers. Government controls us and our choices through taxes. This needs to end.

Bravo to a good 1st step in minimizing government control. Hopefully Trump gets some repubs with balls to finish off the deductions

[Irving]

Who says the rest of the citizens are subsidizing anything? Everything you mentioned is an economic stimulus and is available to everyone and has nothing to do with whether the action can be afforded or not. This is like asking "how come poor people get coupons and everyone else has to pay more?" That's just not The way that coupons, or taxes work.

The reality is that the more simple taxes become, the more everyone will pay.

[Eric P]

Government is not for economic stimulus. Private industry, inventors and entrepreneurs stimulate the economy without stealing money (taxes) to force a stimulus.

Taxes depress the economy, no matter the good intention. Keep government as small and invisible as possible. The less it steals, the better.

[Eric P]

And why should a government pinhead or a committee of pinheads pick winners and losers vs those who know more? Or those who can't afford to bribe the pinheads.

[Irving]

I think we're having crossed signals here. The examples you gave can easily be viewed as tax breaks for engaging in activities that stimulate the economy. Of course taxes depress the economy, but I'm talking about the breaks specifically.

I can just as easily see the other side of the argument that since the government is the essence of unchecked greed, that any discount must surely be shifted to someone else.

We can disagree on that point.

[Irving]

And why should a government pinhead or a committee of pinheads pick winners and losers vs those who know more? Or those who can't afford to bribe the pinheads.

You've lost me here. I assume you have a lot more to say on the subject, but I can't hang in the conversation without the rest of your context.

[Eric P]

I think we're having crossed signals here. The examples you gave can easily be viewed as tax breaks for engaging in activities that stimulate the economy. Of course taxes depress the economy, but I'm talking about the breaks specifically.

I can just as easily see the other side of the argument that since the government is the essence of unchecked greed, that any discount must surely be shifted to someone else.

We can disagree on that point.

Yes. Anyone who uses a tax break, passes there share of the government burdon to others. That's what I mean by subsidising others activity. Everyone should pay an equal share regardless of life and economic decisions. If 100% took advantage, taxes go up even more negating any stimulus, and even depress. I can't find the report now, but for every dollar stolen in taxes, only 85 to 87 cents is spent. The rest is lost to pay bureaucrats and create do nothing jobs. Whereas a dollar spent freely by us is utilized 100%.

[Eric P]

You've lost me here. I assume you have a lot more to say on the subject, but I can't hang in the conversation without the rest of your context.

When law makers create tax breaks to favor 1 industry over another. You get tax breaks to install solar power vs a coal stove. The pinhead are favoring the solar industry by making poor economic choices seem cheaper, keeping the solar industry afloat. How many tesla cars would not be sold if consumers paid full price and the government didn't install charging stations? Another example of pinheads picking a winner.

Government needs to scale back to just essential services and national defense. Stop playing robin hood. Kill every subsidy. Go back to the pre great deal economy.