On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 15:01:48 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 24/07/2011 12:43 PM, John H wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:47:58 -0400, Wayne wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 06:15:23 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

Eliminate all mortgage interest deductions. That'll do it better.



At least it would be fair across the board. Might not be popular and
might have a somewhat detrimental impact on the housing market. It
would probably help the rental market though.

===========

Home ownership has always been part of the American dream and the
interest rate deduction is a tacit reaffirmation of that goal.
Without question home ownership leads to a more stable citizenship and
increased two parent family formation. Those were worthwhile goals at
the time and still are.

I'm not knocking home ownership. I think it's great. But, if the mortgage interest deduction were
removed, I still think people would want to buy a home. I don't think that would change. However,
for many people, the cost would have to come down far enough to offset the lack of the interest
deduction.

They do in Canada. In fact, the wealthiest Canadians I know all have
their homes free and clear of debt for some time. After your last
mortgage payment, you begin to pay yourself to live in your own home.
Real wealth builder strategy.

Too bad you're not one of them. In any case, this has little to do
with the US model that's been around for quite a while.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 17:50:29 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 13:43:42 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:50:50 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

On Jul 24, 12:34*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 06:15:23 -0700 (PDT), John H









wrote:
On Jul 23, 9:44 pm, Florida Jim wrote:
On 7/23/2011 9:35 PM, wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 20:58:14 -0400,
wrote:

On 7/23/11 7:55 PM, LilAbner wrote:
On 7/23/2011 7:45 PM, John H wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/3r5l8ur

I wonder if the Democrats realize that it doesn't take a 'yacht' to
have a head, stove, and bed.
Hell, I had that in my 21' Proline.

If they want to do away with a second home mortgage interest
deduction, then do it for *all* second
homes.
All boats and all second homes over a certain value...that'll do it.
What if you travel around in an RV and trailer a boat?

What if you live on your large yacht and have a very big dinghy?

LOL

Eliminate all mortgage interest deductions. That'll do it better.

At least it would be fair across the board. Might not be popular and
might have a somewhat detrimental impact on the housing market. It
would probably help the rental market though.

Somewhat detrimental? Gee, you think? I think it would be fine to
eliminate it, but not now. It is yet again one of those things that
have a great deal of impact on the middle class and virtually no
effect on the rich.

Gosh, you think?

Doing away with the deduction for boat owners does the same. But the
Democrats have never had a problem screwing with the middle class.

Really? How have the Dems in recent history "screwed" the middle
class? You mean by protecting SS and Medicare from Republican slash
and burn policies?

Go back and read the first post in the thread. That'll explain the statement.

Oh, and if that's not enough, read the Obamacare bill very carefully.

Oh, and there's 1) no such thing as "Obamacare" and 2) the Affordable
Healthcare Act has already helped millions and will soon help millions
more.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:58:51 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 24/07/2011 11:50 AM, John H wrote:
On Jul 24, 12:34 pm, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 06:15:23 -0700 (PDT), John H









wrote:
On Jul 23, 9:44 pm, Florida wrote:
On 7/23/2011 9:35 PM, wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 20:58:14 -0400,
wrote:

On 7/23/11 7:55 PM, LilAbner wrote:
On 7/23/2011 7:45 PM, John H wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/3r5l8ur

I wonder if the Democrats realize that it doesn't take a 'yacht' to
have a head, stove, and bed.
Hell, I had that in my 21' Proline.

If they want to do away with a second home mortgage interest
deduction, then do it for *all* second
homes.
All boats and all second homes over a certain value...that'll do it.
What if you travel around in an RV and trailer a boat?

What if you live on your large yacht and have a very big dinghy?

LOL

Eliminate all mortgage interest deductions. That'll do it better.

At least it would be fair across the board. Might not be popular and
might have a somewhat detrimental impact on the housing market. It
would probably help the rental market though.

Somewhat detrimental? Gee, you think? I think it would be fine to
eliminate it, but not now. It is yet again one of those things that
have a great deal of impact on the middle class and virtually no
effect on the rich.

Gosh, you think?

Doing away with the deduction for boat owners does the same. But the
Democrats have never had a problem screwing with the middle class.

It is all about debt-tax slavery. The Status of Liberty should be
draped with a huge chain and signage "DEBT". Would be a good prank to pull.

You have no stake in this great country. You're an ignorant little
troll of a man.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 19:22:25 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 15:29:27 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:51:56 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

On Jul 24, 12:38*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 06:26:02 -0700 (PDT), John H









wrote:
On Jul 24, 8:40 am, Harryk wrote:
On 7/24/11 8:37 AM, Florida Jim wrote:

On 7/24/2011 6:39 AM, Wayne B wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 20:01:05 -0700 (PDT), North Star
wrote:

What the 'ell are you whining about??
We don't get a mortgage interest deduction on our income taxes for our
principal home.. let alone cottages or boats.
No wonder the USA is in such deep debt.... no one wants to pay their
fair share of taxes.
It's not that simple. Actually I think that most people do want to
pay their fair share but it gets complicated when the rules change in
mid-stream. People make long term financial decisions based on the
tax structure in place at that time, and then they have to live with
that decision expecting the rules to stay the same.

It should be that simple. The tax code is a quagmire that needs to be
simplified, not expanded. Same with legislation.

It's a quagmire because the people with money pay lobbyists big bucks to
have exemptions written into the tax code for them. The rich simply do
not want to pay their fair share of taxes.

Neither do the 47% who pay *no* income taxes.

That again? You might want to look for another right-wing talking
point, as that one is complete nonsense.

Look it up.

It's a nonsense statistic. I'm sure you're including all the poor
people who barely squeak by. Not much of a number, but it's a great
right-wing talking point.

...reported by the New York Times.

Whatever you say. But, it's a fact.

It's also a fact that most of the space between the earth and the moon
has nothing in it, but that doesn't say much about either.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 19:24:02 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 15:30:05 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:53:14 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

On Jul 24, 12:40*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:47:37 -0400, John H
wrote:









On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:35:45 -0400, I_am_Tosk wrote:

In article 755e3f2f-d08f-4c7d-a527-
, says...

On Jul 23, 11:01 pm, North Star wrote:
On Jul 23, 8:45 pm, John H wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/3r5l8ur

I wonder if the Democrats realize that it doesn't take a 'yacht' to have a head, stove, and bed.
Hell, I had that in my 21' Proline.

If they want to do away with a second home mortgage interest deduction, then do it for *all* second
homes.

Why do they pick only on boat owners?

What the 'ell are you whining about??
We don't get a mortgage interest deduction on our income taxes for our
principal home.. let alone cottages or boats.
No wonder the USA is in such deep debt.... no one wants to pay their
fair share of taxes.

Donnie, how do you define 'fair share'. Remember, we have about 47% of
our population who pay *no* federal income taxes.

He defines it exactly as he thinks Harry would...

Actually, I was trying to avoid a **** storm.

You _are_ a **** storm. Well, actually just a little ****.

Just can't stay away from the name-calling, can you?

Does it satisfy some inner need? Does it make you feel more
intelligent?

No, but it certainly is an apt description.

Greg was correct.

Goodbye.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 20:06:54 -0400, Harryk
wrote:

On 7/24/11 7:31 PM, Florida Jim wrote:


Also Let us know what you find out about the registry cleaning utilities.

Computer maven herring playing with the windows registry...should be
fun, fun, fun.

Whew... you really have to be careful messing with the registry. I
don't recommend it, but I'd suggest making a backup first. Even then,
it might not be possible to recover.

On 7/24/11 8:27 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 20:06:54 -0400,
wrote:

On 7/24/11 7:31 PM, Florida Jim wrote:


Also Let us know what you find out about the registry cleaning utilities.

Computer maven herring playing with the windows registry...should be
fun, fun, fun.

Whew... you really have to be careful messing with the registry. I
don't recommend it, but I'd suggest making a backup first. Even then,
it might not be possible to recover.


Even using a mild registry "cleaner" can create serious problems, and if
they are in the registry itself, they are difficult to resolve.
But, hey, Herring is up to the task. :)

On 24/07/2011 4:42 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 15:37:38 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

Boats are a little different since they are
typically financed over a much shorter period of time and are a luxury
item with no overall benefit to society much as I hate to say it.

Unless you consider the people who build and maintain boats. We saw
this with the "luxury tax" a while ago. Boat builders laid off
thousands of workers.

The same could be said about the rapid depreciation rules on corporate
jets. It causes these planes to be turned over faster and helps the
aircraft builders.
It should also be noted, most of these small planes are not actually
owned by the fat cat corporations you think of. They belong to small
charter airlines and leasing companies.

Then Obama should like th tax, because it unemploys people.
--
Obama, enslaving Americans with debt-tax slavery for a spending binge.
Doesn't even borrow real money, Bernanke just creates it like a
counterfeiter. .

On 24/07/2011 6:32 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 18:51:36 -0400,
wrote:

On 7/24/11 6:42 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 15:37:38 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

Boats are a little different since they are
typically financed over a much shorter period of time and are a luxury
item with no overall benefit to society much as I hate to say it.

Unless you consider the people who build and maintain boats. We saw
this with the "luxury tax" a while ago. Boat builders laid off
thousands of workers.

The same could be said about the rapid depreciation rules on corporate
jets. It causes these planes to be turned over faster and helps the
aircraft builders.
It should also be noted, most of these small planes are not actually
owned by the fat cat corporations you think of. They belong to small
charter airlines and leasing companies.

We need to shut down corporate subsidies and corporate welfare. The only
tax breaks a business should get should be directly related to the
hiring of people in the United States.

Since we manufacture most of these planes here and all of the
maintenance people work here (as opposed to a lot of major carriers
who have offshored their maintenance) this might qualify.

I would still be willing to look at a flat tax with no deductions.

I agree. Flat rates and fewer deductions is best. It would also allow
government to lower the rate as not as many holes exist. I say this as
many a corporation and "rich" are existing the US as their headquarters.

An example, why should Seagate who makes drives in Taiwan and China,
selling them elsewhere in the world outside of the US pay US taxes at
35% when they can go to a country with 15%? And if US wants to tax
them, so what? Then US citizens can pay the higher rates just for the
product shipped to the US.

Once gone, pretty hard to attract them back.
--
Obama, enslaving Americans with debt-tax slavery for a spending binge.
Doesn't even borrow real money, Bernanke just creates it like a
counterfeiter. .

On 24/07/2011 6:22 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 15:01:48 -0600,
wrote:

On 24/07/2011 12:43 PM, John H wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:47:58 -0400, Wayne wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 06:15:23 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

Eliminate all mortgage interest deductions. That'll do it better.



At least it would be fair across the board. Might not be popular and
might have a somewhat detrimental impact on the housing market. It
would probably help the rental market though.

===========

Home ownership has always been part of the American dream and the
interest rate deduction is a tacit reaffirmation of that goal.
Without question home ownership leads to a more stable citizenship and
increased two parent family formation. Those were worthwhile goals at
the time and still are.

I'm not knocking home ownership. I think it's great. But, if the mortgage interest deduction were
removed, I still think people would want to buy a home. I don't think that would change. However,
for many people, the cost would have to come down far enough to offset the lack of the interest
deduction.

They do in Canada. In fact, the wealthiest Canadians I know all have
their homes free and clear of debt for some time. After your last
mortgage payment, you begin to pay yourself to live in your own home.
Real wealth builder strategy.

Too bad you're not one of them. In any case, this has little to do
with the US model that's been around for quite a while.

Even if you are in the US, it still makes sense to pay your house off.
Sure, some of the interest is recoverable as a tax deduction, but what
about the 70% you just gave to the bank? Once paid off, sure, you don't
get the deduction, but you don't ave to make any payments either.

Typical fleabagger math, give banks $1 so you can get at most, 30% back.
Real stupid, you 70 cents short.
--
Obama, enslaving Americans with debt-tax slavery for a spending binge.
Doesn't even borrow real money, Bernanke just creates it like a
counterfeiter. .