|
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Jul 24, 10:24*am, John H wrote:
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.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
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. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:47:58 -0400, Wayne B
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. Not according to some right-wing assholes in Congress, however. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 06:13:46 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote: On Jul 23, 9:35*pm, wrote: On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 20:58:14 -0400, Harryk 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 Please read your post. At what are you laughing? What if??? I was laughing with Wayne. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:07:20 -0400, Disgusted wrote:
On 7/24/2011 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. And why do these congress critters, on both sides, yield to the lobbyists. Oh...they're looking out for our well being. NOT!! That's certainly true for many of them. The solution is not to ignore the vast differences in programs that are put forward between the two major parties. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
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. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 06:24:15 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote: 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. Your right wing nonsense is showing again... |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 7/24/11 12:07 PM, North Star wrote:
On Jul 24, 10:24 am, John wrote: On Jul 23, 11:01 pm, North wrote: On Jul 23, 8:45 pm, John 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.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. Well isn't that convenient, that would make sure you didn't pay any taxes. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 24/07/2011 7:58 AM, Harryk wrote:
In , says... 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? My new yacht has two heads and two showers. It's the best of the best. I wonder where my lobsta' boat went? I see you dream a lot. -- Obama, enslaving Americans with debt-tax slavery for a spending binge. Doesn't even borrow real money, Bernanke just creates it like a counterfeiter. . |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:07:20 -0700 (PDT), North Star
wrote: Donnie, how do you define 'fair share'. Remember, we have about 47% of our population who pay *no* federal income taxes.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. ====== Good plan Don. You should move down here and start chipping in. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 7/24/2011 12:07 PM, North Star wrote:
On Jul 24, 10:24 am, John wrote: On Jul 23, 11:01 pm, North wrote: On Jul 23, 8:45 pm, John 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.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. Govt. defined poverty level or real poverty level? |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Jul 24, 1:03*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:03:03 -0400, John H wrote: Now, $400,000 divided by 360 payments gives $1111 as the amount towards principal, which would leave $856 of interest paid each month. That would give me a deduction of $10,272. That's a pretty significant deduction. That is not how interest works. You will be paying more like $1417 the first month and it will go down slightly from there over the loan because you are paying the interest on the unpaid balance. Your first year's interest will be more like $17000. I have a spread sheet I could run to give you the monthly interest/principle amount for each payment that I put together for a friend that I loaned the money to buy their first house. That's OK. I think I was calculating average interest, not front loaded. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
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. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
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? |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Jul 24, 12:07*pm, North Star wrote:
On Jul 24, 10:24*am, John H wrote: 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.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. Well, if I were wanting lots of votes, I'd define 'poverty level' in such a way that at least 47$ of the population didn't pay taxes and was beholden to me. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
In article e7abb17c-a5e5-4770-83ac-4a2d683a2b03
@bl1g2000vbb.googlegroups.com, says... On Jul 24, 10:24*am, John H wrote: 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.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. Don, you have me intrigued. Please show me, fiscally how this would work. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:47:58 -0400, Wayne B 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. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:55:10 -0700 (PDT), John H wrote:
On Jul 24, 12:07*pm, North Star wrote: On Jul 24, 10:24*am, John H wrote: 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.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. Well, if I were wanting lots of votes, I'd define 'poverty level' in such a way that at least 47$ of the population didn't pay taxes and was beholden to me. Please change $ to %. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:35:53 -0400, Disgusted wrote:
On 7/24/2011 1:44 PM, John H wrote: On Jul 24, 1:03 pm, wrote: On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:03:03 -0400, John wrote: Now, $400,000 divided by 360 payments gives $1111 as the amount towards principal, which would leave $856 of interest paid each month. That would give me a deduction of $10,272. That's a pretty significant deduction. That is not how interest works. You will be paying more like $1417 the first month and it will go down slightly from there over the loan because you are paying the interest on the unpaid balance. Your first year's interest will be more like $17000. I have a spread sheet I could run to give you the monthly interest/principle amount for each payment that I put together for a friend that I loaned the money to buy their first house. That's OK. I think I was calculating average interest, not front loaded. Here's a good amortization table generator: http://www.bretwhissel.net/cgi-bin/amortize That could answer Fl Jim's question about mortgage interest. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 19:55:06 -0400, 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. Why do they pick only on boat owners? It's all sinners that own RVs, a little shack, in the woods, or any place other than your home. I'm far from rich. If they take away the Mortgage Deduction it will cost cost another thousand a year, in taxes. that with increased cost of health care, if they cut Medicare, and no COLAs and or reduced Social Security, would pretty much put us in the poor house. the GOP is pushing medicare cuts to finance the tax cuts for the wealthy. they say it will create jobs problem is, THIS is the economy AFTER pushing massive tax cuts for the rich. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 23/07/2011 7:44 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. That would in the long term be an excellent idea for many reasons. First is that the system encourages too much debt. And if 1/2 the homes were clear title, a melt down in real-estate prices would have never occurred. There are also other benefits to it, this is just one biggie. You can't force or bargain much with a home owner that has clear title and no pressures from the banking. I know a 62 year old in the US out of work with a mortgage, sad....and grossly stupid. Desperately seeking work when he could be retired. The sooner you are out of debt for your home, the sooner you pay yourself to live there. People underestimate how much slavery comes with debt. -- Obama, enslaving Americans with debt-tax slavery for a spending binge. Doesn't even borrow real money, Bernanke just creates it like a counterfeiter. . |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 24/07/2011 8:03 AM, John H wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:45:25 -0400, Florida wrote: On 7/24/2011 9:15 AM, 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. Fair would be nice. Agreed. There is no housing market currently. Actually there is, but it would get a hell of a lot worse without the interest deduction. Why should the IRS be involved in giving perks for taxpayers receiving loans? Already discussed. The IRS didn't do it, our presidents and congressfolk did it. At current loan rates, are we talking a lot of money in interest deductions? Well, look at this: Basic info Interest rate [?] 4.250% APR (annual percentage rate) [?] 4.560% Loan type [?] 30-year fixed Points [?] 0.500 Loan amount [?] $400,000 Pre-payment penalty [?] None Lock period [?] 30 days Monthly payment Principal& interest [?] $1,967 Now, $400,000 divided by 360 payments gives $1111 as the amount towards principal, which would leave $856 of interest paid each month. That would give me a deduction of $10,272. That's a pretty significant deduction. The IRS is trying to manipulate our lives with deductions, exemptions, and credits. Not the IRS, your president and congressfolk. *It's not fair* That's what I said up front! Not really quite correct. $400K mortgage @ 4.5% over 30 years is about $329.6K in interest plus the principle of $400K. A financial commitment of $730K. Your mortgage deductibility is determined by the interest portion of the $2027 monthly payment, which is almost $17.9K deductibility the first year and $582 the last year. People bitch about not being rich need to know you can't be truly rich and in debt. Debt costs money for no other value than the advance of money. But how many would guess if in the 2nd year of the mortgage, you put just $10K extra down on the principle, keep the payments the same, you would save $26K? Easiest money you would ever save. As it is all that interest that makes you poor and banks rich. -- Obama, enslaving Americans with debt-tax slavery for a spending binge. Doesn't even borrow real money, Bernanke just creates it like a counterfeiter. . |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Jul 24, 1:40*pm, Harryk wrote:
On 7/24/11 12:07 PM, North Star wrote: On Jul 24, 10:24 am, John *wrote: On Jul 23, 11:01 pm, North *wrote: On Jul 23, 8:45 pm, John *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.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. Well isn't that convenient, that would make sure you didn't pay any taxes..- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I don't pay any taxes??? I bet I pay as much federal/provincial/municipal taxes as some of the so called high flyers in here. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Jul 24, 1:55*pm, Wayne B wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:07:20 -0700 (PDT), North Star wrote: Donnie, how do you define 'fair share'. Remember, we have about 47% of our population who pay *no* federal income taxes.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. ====== Good plan Don. *You should move down here and start chipping in. I'd probably feel rich down there. I could afford to hire FlatulentJim to mow my lawn! ;-) |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 7/24/2011 2:43 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. Either that or buy less house.There is no law that says you must buy the most expensive house you qualify for. People and governments should live within their means. After the dot com bubble burst, a lot of folks American Dream went up in smoke. Similar thing is happening now except the government is to blame this time. Allow jobs to go off shore. That ain't good. Encourage people to spend what they don't have. That ain't good. Force banks to write shaky loans. That ain't good. Believing Senator Barney when he says everything is fine with Fanny and Freddy. That ain't good. Bailing out the banks and letting them horde the money. That ain't good. Paying out ridiculous bonuses to Wall St. execs. That ain't good. Starting wars without even informing Congress. That really ain't good. The only ray of sunshine I see is the election isn't too far away. I hope we've learned from our mistakes |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 7/24/2011 3:22 PM, North Star wrote:
On Jul 24, 1:55 pm, Wayne wrote: On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:07:20 -0700 (PDT), North Star wrote: Donnie, how do you define 'fair share'. Remember, we have about 47% of our population who pay *no* federal income taxes.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. ====== Good plan Don. You should move down here and start chipping in. I'd probably feel rich down there. I could afford to hire FlatulentJim to mow my lawn! ;-) I'm not too proud to offer my lawn mowing services. Problem is you couldn't afford to make it worth my while. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:43:29 -0400, John H
wrote: On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:47:58 -0400, Wayne B 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. I don't disagree. One thing in favor of the current policy is that because interest payments front load into the early years of the mortgage, buyers receive the greatest benefit from the deduction when they need it most. 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. Still, it's not fair to people who financed a boat with the expectation of deductible interest to have the rug yanked out from under them. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 7/24/11 3:34 PM, Florida Jim wrote:
On 7/24/2011 3:22 PM, North Star wrote: On Jul 24, 1:55 pm, Wayne wrote: On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:07:20 -0700 (PDT), North Star wrote: Donnie, how do you define 'fair share'. Remember, we have about 47% of our population who pay *no* federal income taxes.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. ====== Good plan Don. You should move down here and start chipping in. I'd probably feel rich down there. I could afford to hire FlatulentJim to mow my lawn! ;-) I'm not too proud to offer my lawn mowing services. Problem is you couldn't afford to make it worth my while. As if there aren't 100 Latinos who are smarter and harder working than you are, and ready, willing and able to do landscaping and yard work. You can't compete for work with decent, hard-working folk like that. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 15:37:38 -0400, Wayne B wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:43:29 -0400, John H wrote: On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:47:58 -0400, Wayne B 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. I don't disagree. One thing in favor of the current policy is that because interest payments front load into the early years of the mortgage, buyers receive the greatest benefit from the deduction when they need it most. 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. Still, it's not fair to people who financed a boat with the expectation of deductible interest to have the rug yanked out from under them. Amen, especially if, as in your case, the boat really *is* used as a second home. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:43:29 -0400, John H
wrote: On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:47:58 -0400, Wayne B 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. Some maybe, but it would be a huge disincentive. |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 24/07/2011 1:20 PM, North Star wrote:
On Jul 24, 1:40 pm, wrote: On 7/24/11 12:07 PM, North Star wrote: On Jul 24, 10:24 am, John wrote: On Jul 23, 11:01 pm, North wrote: On Jul 23, 8:45 pm, John 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.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. Well isn't that convenient, that would make sure you didn't pay any taxes.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I don't pay any taxes??? I bet I pay as much federal/provincial/municipal taxes as some of the so called high flyers in here. I bet you do pay more. Now that I am retired, my taxable income has plummeted. Zero employment taxes for example, no more CPP/EI 16% or whatever it is as I don't care nor pay any more. CPP/EI (employee and employer) is not a small amount of tax. The only taxable income government sees from me is RRSP withdrawals and capital gains and dividends. More than enough to live on and not likely I will ever see the top 40% tax rate again. If I have a low gains/dividend year, I pull out enough from the RRSP to top up my income to the low 15% bracket and no more, maximizing tax efficiency. Or if I have too many realized gains, ease off RRSP withdrawals. No debts for over 2 decades, I don't need the cash flow for DEBT so I can keep realized income in the lower taxed regions of income. 100% legal like too. The person that really gets the screwing is the middle class worker. There is good reason too. While property and GST still bite me, I have the latitude of moving right out of Canada taking what taxes I pay with me, a worker slave or poor on welfare cannot do this. Economic freedom has its advantages. No Canadian civic or provincial taxes if you live in Ecuador or Costa Rica. Bottom line, government can only screw you where you have no latitude. Property, utility, gas, sin taxes and earned income taxes are the only sources they have you over a barrel. I didn't get away with anything, I paid plenty of taxes for 35 years. Just saved and invested enough that it is clear I never need to work for debt-tax slavery again. So why work for the government without the benefits? Nice byproduct of no-debt for so long. The money debt slaves paid to banks went into my account because I was not debt-greedy in my earlier years. -- Obama, enslaving Americans with debt-tax slavery for a spending binge. Doesn't even borrow real money, Bernanke just creates it like a counterfeiter. . |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
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? |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 24/07/2011 1:22 PM, North Star wrote:
On Jul 24, 1:55 pm, Wayne wrote: On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:07:20 -0700 (PDT), North Star wrote: Donnie, how do you define 'fair share'. Remember, we have about 47% of our population who pay *no* federal income taxes.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. ====== Good plan Don. You should move down here and start chipping in. I'd probably feel rich down there. I could afford to hire FlatulentJim to mow my lawn! ;-) Probably would feel rich. Palm Beach condos going cheap, was $1.3M in 2006, now $400K....cheap. But the tax liabilities....whoa. Most states have 40-60% tax increases on the way. A friend in Oregon just got his 74% property tax increases isn't too happy. Better off in Costa Rica with the other 75,000 Canadians that enjoy property tax guarantees for 20 years and their normal rates are not that bad. USA is going to have to consider this for the home retail market. Limit my property/utility taxes or no sale. -- Obama, enslaving Americans with debt-tax slavery for a spending binge. Doesn't even borrow real money, Bernanke just creates it like a counterfeiter. . |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 24/07/2011 11:55 AM, John H wrote:
On Jul 24, 12:07 pm, North wrote: On Jul 24, 10:24 am, John wrote: On Jul 23, 11:01 pm, North wrote: On Jul 23, 8:45 pm, John wrote: http://tinyurl.com/3r5l8ur I wonder if the Democrats realize that it doesn't take a 'yacht' to have a head, stove, and bed. Hell, I had that in my 21' Proline. If they want to do away with a second home mortgage interest deduction, then do it for *all* second homes. Why do they pick only on boat owners? What the 'ell are you whining about?? We don't get a mortgage interest deduction on our income taxes for our principal home.. let alone cottages or boats. No wonder the USA is in such deep debt.... no one wants to pay their fair share of taxes. Donnie, how do you define 'fair share'. Remember, we have about 47% of our population who pay *no* federal income taxes.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. Well, if I were wanting lots of votes, I'd define 'poverty level' in such a way that at least 47$ of the population didn't pay taxes and was beholden to me. Thing is when income tax was introduced to "screw the rich" only 4% paid income tax. Over the years, starting with 4% it has crept up to 53%. And hidden employment taxes from 0% to 12-16% on almost everyone with a wage earned income. Thing too is the economy grew faster with no income tax than it has ever since. Tax creep. Greedy government statism. Bigger government gets, the less for the 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. . |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 24/07/2011 12:41 PM, Harryk wrote:
In articlee7abb17c-a5e5-4770-83ac-4a2d683a2b03 @bl1g2000vbb.googlegroups.com, says... On Jul 24, 10:24 am, John wrote: On Jul 23, 11:01 pm, North wrote: On Jul 23, 8:45 pm, John 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.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. Don, you have me intrigued. Please show me, fiscally how this would work. Canada defines poverty level as $1038/month. But I defy anyone to live in Canada for that. What do the million pus tent families in the US get? But you are less likely to freeze to death in California. -- Obama, enslaving Americans with debt-tax slavery for a spending binge. Doesn't even borrow real money, Bernanke just creates it like a counterfeiter. . |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 24/07/2011 12:58 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 19:55:06 -0400, 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. Why do they pick only on boat owners? It's all sinners that own RVs, a little shack, in the woods, or any place other than your home. I'm far from rich. If they take away the Mortgage Deduction it will cost cost another thousand a year, in taxes. that with increased cost of health care, if they cut Medicare, and no COLAs and or reduced Social Security, would pretty much put us in the poor house. the GOP is pushing medicare cuts to finance the tax cuts for the wealthy. they say it will create jobs problem is, THIS is the economy AFTER pushing massive tax cuts for the rich. I will agree here, no talk of the huge war mongering military spending. Big fat cow doesn't look like either party is after big cuts there. -- Obama, enslaving Americans with debt-tax slavery for a spending binge. Doesn't even borrow real money, Bernanke just creates it like a counterfeiter. . |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
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. -- Obama, enslaving Americans with debt-tax slavery for a spending binge. Doesn't even borrow real money, Bernanke just creates it like a counterfeiter. . |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
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. -- Obama, enslaving Americans with debt-tax slavery for a spending binge. Doesn't even borrow real money, Bernanke just creates it like a counterfeiter. . |
Let's get them damn rich yacht owners!!
On 7/24/2011 4:00 PM, Harryk wrote:
On 7/24/11 3:34 PM, Florida Jim wrote: On 7/24/2011 3:22 PM, North Star wrote: On Jul 24, 1:55 pm, Wayne wrote: On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:07:20 -0700 (PDT), North Star wrote: Donnie, how do you define 'fair share'. Remember, we have about 47% of our population who pay *no* federal income taxes.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I would say that anyone earning above the 'poverty level', as defined by the gov't, should start paying taxes. even if at a minimal rate. ====== Good plan Don. You should move down here and start chipping in. I'd probably feel rich down there. I could afford to hire FlatulentJim to mow my lawn! ;-) I'm not too proud to offer my lawn mowing services. Problem is you couldn't afford to make it worth my while. As if there aren't 100 Latinos who are smarter and harder working than you are, and ready, willing and able to do landscaping and yard work. You can't compete for work with decent, hard-working folk like that. Ah yes. But a certain Cannuckite requested my services and thinks he can afford them. Besides, if he went the Mexicano route he'd probably be collared by INS and the IRS.for hiring illegals and not paying the SS and Medicare taxes. He could face jail time. He's better off letting me fleece him. Come on down Donnie. PS If you can't swing the air fare, I'll make you a loan, at reasonable rates of course. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:32 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com