Reconsidering the wisdom of home ownership

[Clev]

If I didn't have a family to raise, I'd be vandwelling full time, with a 5 acre plot out in Wonder Valley as my backup plan.

[Clev]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

It's not the rate, it's the amount. They are paying way more than most of us do. If they have earned income, they pay the same amount of SS taxes as we do, and get the same benefits. And if they don't pay into the system because their income is all capital gains, then they don't get to collect.

Okay, so just to confirm: you think that a person who makes $10,000 should pay the same AMOUNT of tax as somebody who makes $80,000,000?

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Clev

Okay, so just to confirm: you think that a person who makes $10,000 should pay the same AMOUNT of tax as somebody who makes $80,000,000?

That's not quite what I said, but think about it: what else is there that is priced according to your income? Yet a lot of people evidently think that it's somehow fair for people who make more money to pay far more for the government services they get. So I have to ask: what's fair about that?

[Varn]

Please remember that Slick Willie instituted loans for people who could not repay their loans. Raising the costs to those who could.

If you pay 80k for house and are making 10k you are paying too much. of your income. Move somewhere cheaper. There are houses available for 30K around here.

Living around here is not for everyone. We have winter, we have crime.

I have heard threats of "breaking down the system" and think, Where do these people get their water to flush the toilet and internet to order a pizza. Breaking down the system means no social services. No 911. No gasoline to burn in their SUVs or Honda ecomod machines.

[Clev]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

That's not quite what I said, but think about it: what else is there that is priced according to your income? Yet a lot of people evidently think that it's somehow fair for people who make more money to pay far more for the government services they get. So I have to ask: what's fair about that?

He can afford it. The 2012 federal budget is about $12,000 per human being. That's 4/5 of the total annual income of a minimum wage worker, yet ol' Bill earns that much in 116 seconds.

What's your alternative? How are you going to get all of the government services at the federal, state and local level to a flat price that somebody making the federal minimum wage of $15,080 can afford and still eat? And how much should Bill Gates pay to run his 200 foot yacht on the public waterways, since he obviously is using way more than his share of public services?

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Varn

Please remember that Slick Willie instituted loans for people who could not repay their loans. Raising the costs to those who could.

Yup. There were no dissenting voices, and Dubya not only expanded the program, but blocked state action to crack down on predatory loan practices, but yeah, let's blame Clinton.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Clev

He can afford it.

Oh? And I could afford to pay $50 for a hamburger. So when I visit a fast food place, should I have to bring my Form 1040, and the counter person will set the price based on my income? Is that fair?

What's your alternative? How are you going to get all of the government services at the federal, state and local level...

How about instead we work on getting rid of some of those government "services"? I sure don't appreciate my money (or even Bill Gates' money) being used to harass medical marijuana distributors in California, pay outside lawyers to defend the indefensible Defense of Marriage Act, or any of a myriad other things the government wastes our tax money on.

And how much should Bill Gates pay to run his 200 foot yacht on the public waterways, since he obviously is using way more than his share of public services?

I don't know. How much does it cost to maintain the waterways? I'm not a boater myself, but I know that around here you have to register boats just like cars, and at least some of that money goes to maintain boating facilities. Which seems pretty fair: those who use them pay for them.

[Frank Lee]

Looks like most everyone in MN is getting mailings from their local skool districts, begging for yes votes on levies. Interesting part is, these mailings (and newspaper "articles" too) never delve into the districts books at all. I wonder what the voters would think if they were presented with data (as opposed to having to take some initiative and find it) that shows the current, about-to-expire levy brings in $310,000... and the superindentent alone soaks up about that much. Think the outcome would be different?

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Looks like most everyone in MN is getting mailings from their local skool districts, begging for yes votes on levies. Interesting part is, these mailings (and newspaper "articles" too) never delve into the districts books at all. I wonder what the voters would think if they were presented with data (as opposed to having to take some initiative and find it) that shows the current, about-to-expire levy brings in $310,000... and the superindentent alone soaks up about that much. Think the outcome would be different?

No, it wouldn't. In this area all that information is readily available and easily obtained as a public disclosure. The school budget always passes because most of the people who move here do so for the school system, which is excellent and is heavily subsidized by the large number of business properties in the district. The parents who have children attending school always vote for the budget (which always increases every year) because they are receiving some real benefit for their taxes paid.

In the rare event that a budget is voted down (as occasionally happens in some other districts in the area) they simply reschedule the election until it passes.

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by Clev

He can afford it. The 2012 federal budget is about $12,000 per human being. That's 4/5 of the total annual income of a minimum wage worker, yet ol' Bill earns that much in 116 seconds.

What's your alternative? How are you going to get all of the government services at the federal, state and local level to a flat price that somebody making the federal minimum wage of $15,080 can afford and still eat? And how much should Bill Gates pay to run his 200 foot yacht on the public waterways, since he obviously is using way more than his share of public services?

The alternative is to cut those services. You are assuming that we need or want "all of the government services at the federal, state and local level". But to those who are pro-government, cutting the budget at all is anathema.

The dirty little secret is that the "the total annual income of a minimum wage worker" is usually augmented by things like food stamps and other handouts from government programs. Bill Clinton proudly announced that during his regime it was the end of "welfare as we know it". He was actually being honest, because the subsidies didn't end. Not for the rich, with corporate subsidies and tax loopholes, nor for the poor receiving transfer payments and benefits through government social programs.

Even if the government were to confiscate all of Bill Gates' wealth, it wouldn't put a dent in the US government budget or undo the ballooning debt load. But it would make the Marxists and Socialists feel better knowing that a capitalist scapegoat has been punished and retribution extracted. That has always been the central focus of their ideology. Like all acts of vengeance, it's meant to play to and incite a mob.