That was a classic. I miss Flip Wilson, I thought he was a comedic genius.

More than losing the interest deduction, [As a renter, it's no skin off my nose.] I dislike funding the health care proposal. Like most of these new programs, I suspect the devil is in the details, and I don’t like funding the devil.

It will however, affect sales of upper end homes, which are already getting hammered. I’m not saying this is necessarily a bad thing, but it goes contrary to what Obama has indicated that he wanted.

Obama seems to be using a shotgun approach to fixing the economy- and he seems to be using the “Dick Chaney Method” to shoot it.

You have a point in saying that builders could be right in going against Obama’s idea. But where else can we get the money?

My livelihood is in Real estate and this will affect me.

But if this bill does get approve I don’t really see it affecting the home buyers a great deal. Even if they cut down on the tax deductions.

Potential Homeowners will still find it attractive (tax avoidance wise) to buy homes simply because they’re not many loopholes in savings taxes for them as big as what they can get in buying a home.

Thanks for the post..

-Joe
http://RenoHomeBlog.com

Just a thought:

A procreation tax will disincentivise childbearing.

To some, this seems like a noble cause until you realize that our entire government, currency and economy are all built on top of a growing populace to support it. Even a demographic slimming down will cause armageddon.

Besides, the net present value to society is >0 for children despite the cost of education. Indeed, what causes many of our societal ills are foreign-born entitlement recipients in the way of SS, Medicare, etc.

However, any way you look at it, Government always gives a <0 NPV, so what we need is less government, more children; exactly the opposite of what many liberal “progressives” preach. (This is not a slam against them, just pointing out the paradox of a liberal progressive’s stance on children and government).

To get more government, you need more children.

The trouble I have with this is Obama’s socialist bent. What will be covered under universal health care? Will everyone be entitled to free kidneys and lapbands?

the mortgage interest deduction is a fine “tax advantage”……for the slightly wealthier class. it’s just another tax break that doesn’t affect your lower middle class. let’s take a family of 3 or 4. If that family owns a 150K home and pays 800/mo in mort interest as opposed to renting the same house for 800/mo there is no advantage as the standard deduction is 10,900 so there’s no reason to itemize. Now a similar (but wealthier) can own a 300K house for 1600/mo in interest or rent it for the same 1600/mo. They’ll itemize and get a deduction of $19200 for their interest. Of course, this assumes renting is in line with buying (wich it’s getting closer these days) and is a very generic example. i think it does show, though, that it’s a tax break that isn’t intended for your median income/median home owner, but really more for the 300K and above home owners. It’s a tactic that agents will use though. I’ve actually heard some of them tell clients (while showing them 125K-175K homes) “you’ll save 3000/year in taxes.” no they won’t. they’ll save NOTHING in taxes on mort interest for homes of that value (unless, of course, you’ve got a 10%+ loan).

If it helps to ease your troubled mind, don’t think of it as a subsidy. Consider it to be a tax cut–money that never makes it to Washington, D.C.

Once there, it will only be wasted subsidizing Lower Manhattan millionaires who took wild risks with other people’s money and are now being rewarded by Beltway politicians for their bad decisions.

In short, if you define “national interest” as “overwhelming public opposition to bail-outs for Wall Street” you will see that NAHB’s cozy little scheme is not as bad as the alternative you have proposed.

So you suggest that we continue to subsidize an industry that does NOTHING for the national interest, ie capital stock, factories, intellectual capacity and education, etcetcetc?

Massive subsidies to an industry and business that does nothing for the long term health of the US is silly. Maybe we should give tax credits to butterfly farms.

Target tax relief to industries that actually produce sustainable jobs an businesses.