How We Agreed to Take Money From the Poor and Give to the Rich

GoodEnoughForMe

n.m.s.s.
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
6,110
Location
new alhambra
While my position at said company is neither here nor there, this article was a breath of fresh air to someone stuck surrounded by Realtors who look at anyone suggesting a change in the Mortgage Interest Deduction with a glare as if they wished you'd sink through the ground to hell itself.

For those who are not familiar, the Mortgage Interest Deduction (MID) is a tax break that is based on the price of your home mortgage, increasing as the value of your mortgage does, and only capped at a whopping $1 million dollars. To put it simply; it's a massive, massive tax break you only get if you own a house, and the more expensive your house, the bigger the tax break is.

A large portion of American household wealth is tied up in home ownership that is then inflated in value through policy and subsidy (largely the MID), thus compounding the desire for home ownership and concentrating wealth in the hands of those who can easily afford it, while putting pressure on those who own homes to continue to influence policy to inflate the value. This middle and upper class house help has been a policy of both parties for decades, and our cultural obsession with owning a house, even given its exaggerated value, and a successful campaign to make lower income housing programs icky, but upper class housing programs not actually government help and instead nothing at all because hahaha f poor people, has helped drive the massive wealth gap that defines much of the racial economic divide in America.

Some key facts:

The last time Boston accepted new applications for rental-assistance Section 8 vouchers was nine years ago, when for a few precious weeks you were allowed to place your name on a very long waiting list. Boston is not atypical in that way. In Los Angeles, the estimated wait time for a Section 8 voucher is 11 years. In Washington, the waiting list for housing vouchers is closed indefinitely, and over 40,000 people have applied for public housing alone. While many Americans assume that most poor families live in subsidized housing, the opposite is true; nationwide, only one in four households that qualifies for rental assistance receives it.

By 2019, MID expenditures are expected to exceed $96 billion.

There is another reason most MID benefits accrue to the top, even among homeowners: You have to itemize your deductions to claim it. Most taxpayers don’t bother because they don’t make enough money to justify the hassle. In 2014, 1.5 million households earning between $40,000 and $50,000 a year claimed the MID, receiving an average benefit of $14 a month. That same year, 6.5 million households with earnings above $200,000 claimed the MID and enjoyed an average benefit of $391 a month.

So why do we keep this “poor instrument” around, if the overarching goal of American federal housing policy is to create a nation of homeowners? Perhaps because the MID enjoys entrenched, unyielding support from a powerful real estate lobby. We often discuss the influence of the gun and pharmaceutical lobbies, but the real estate lobby has spent much more than either group. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the National Association of Realtors spent $64.8 million in lobbying efforts in 2016, making it second only to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in terms of dollars spent.

Question for the crowd; do you support the MID? Has it affected you in anyways? Do you currently utilize it? Have you hypocritically condemned housing support for the poor while being agnostic about it for those better off? And should we all agree to simply eat the rich?
 
So by "take money from the poor" you mean "give less money to the poor" and by "give money to the rich" you mean "take less money from the rich".
 
So by "take money from the poor" you mean "give less money to the poor" and by "give money to the rich" you mean "take less money from the rich".

I think he meant what he said. If you have a rational argument, present it. If I want to make up a ridiculous statement to attribute to him I can do it for myself. Contribute something or just go away.

As to the question posed, I've resigned myself to the idea that eating the rich is inevitable and drawing near, so I favor just getting it over with.
 
I think he meant what he said. If you have a rational argument, present it. If I want to make up a ridiculous statement to attribute to him I can do it for myself. Contribute something or just go away.
Ok, let me spell this out for you.

Giving the rich tax breaks = taxing the rich less = taking less money from the rich.
Offering less section 8 housing = giving poor people less free housing = giving less money to the poor.

Just pointing out that the language used in the title is deceptive.
 
Question for the crowd; do you support the MID? Has it affected you in anyways? Do you currently utilize it? Have you hypocritically condemned housing support for the poor while being agnostic about it for those better off? And should we all agree to simply eat the rich?
We have a similar setup in Norway. I don't think it's capped at all, but 29% of the cost of interest can be deducted.

I'm against it. It inflates the housing market by making it cheaper to own houses instead of any other capital investment, and it unfairly advantages those who can afford to buy a house (read: those who have parents who can afford to help buy a house) over those who can.

I would like to see it gone, but I can also recognize that it might be useful, as we in general want people to own their own home. So as a compromise, I then demand that rental costs should also be deductible with the same amount!

For the rest of the questions: I have a mortgage, so I do utilize it (not sure if I could actually avoid it...?). I have not condemned housing support for the poor, though I have questioned policies around the location and grouping of such publicly owned homes (having them spread out is much better). Finally, I'm not sure if the rich taste well -- and though I don't think it's actually achievable, I still aspire to be richer. I'd rather not fall into the 'being eaten' bracket... :undecide:
 
Last edited:
Ok, let me spell this out for you.

Giving the rich tax breaks = taxing the rich less = taking less money from the rich.
Offering less section 8 housing = giving poor people less free housing = giving less money to the poor.

Just pointing out that the language used in the title is deceptive.
It's the same thing in practice! I know I'm known for being pedantic at times, but come on!
 
Ok, let me spell this out for you.

Giving the rich tax breaks = taxing the rich less = taking less money from the rich.
Offering less section 8 housing = giving poor people less free housing = giving less money to the poor.

Just pointing out that the language used in the title is deceptive.

Opportunity cost...a basic concept of economics. Look it up, learn something, then maybe I'll consider having you "spell out" things for me. Currently you've not earned sufficient respect.
 
It's the same thing in practice! I know I'm known for being pedantic at times, but come on!

What he's missing is that the rich are only rich in the first place because they stole from the poor.
 
It's the same thing in practice! I know I'm known for being pedantic at times, but come on!
It's not at all the same thing. I'm pretty sure everybody in this thread would agree that actually taking money from the poor would be worse. If they were the same thing that wouldn't be the case.
 
It's not at all the same thing. I'm pretty sure everybody in this thread would agree that actually taking money from the poor would be worse. If they were the same thing that wouldn't be the case.

There are certainly some things that everyone in the thread but you would agree on. One of those things being that your attempt to derail the thread before it even gets started with your ignorance of basic economics is annoying.
 
I wonder why some poor people, mostly white people and mostly in America are up in arms every time somebody talks about taxing the rich. It is because they believe they will be rich someday or because are not aware they are dirty poor?
 
I wonder why some poor people, mostly white people and mostly in America are up in arms every time somebody talks about taxing the rich. It is because they believe they will be rich someday or because are not aware they are dirty poor?

Survival through obsequiousness. They won't fight against such abominations because they believe that without the crumbs they are allowed they will starve and only their bowing and scraping keeps the rich from cutting off their crumbs entirely.
 
I wonder why some poor people, mostly white people and mostly in America are up in arms every time somebody talks about taxing the rich. It is because they believe they will be rich someday or because are not aware they are dirty poor?
What would those stupid poor people ever do without enlightened liberals like yourself to show them the way? Think for themselves?
 
Moderator Action: That wasn't a good start. Thread closed for a cool-off. When it reopens, please move on from this little squabble. If you cannot engage with each other at any better level, I suggest you exercise your ignore lists.
 
Back
Top Bottom