3 ms·

> the mortgage interest tax deduction, which, at an annual estimated cost of $77 to $100 billion... Oh please. What a puny number that benefits such an enormou

> the mortgage interest tax deduction, which, at an annual estimated cost of $77 to $100 billion... Oh please. What a puny number that benefits such an enormous amount of regular people. The cost of war in Iraq is estimated at $12 billion a month[O]. Eliminating this deduction wouldn't even buy us another senseless and irresponsible war! [0] http://www.businessinsider.com/the-iraq-war-by-numbers-2014-6 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-iraq-war-by-numbers-2014-...

hx87 10y ago
If it's a puny number, and enormous number of people benefit from it, and the benefit is 100% financial (as in this case), then each person isn't benefiting all that much from it.
breischl 10y ago
>>What a puny number that benefits such an enormous amount of regular people. Well, I guess that depends on your definitions of "puny" and "regular". Since 75% of the benefit goes to people making over $100k/year, that must be your definition of "regular people." Which isn't really statistically defensible, but might be your personal experience. I'm not sure $100bn really counts as "puny" even to the Feds, though. Granted 3% of last years' revenues isn't a huge number, but neither is it a rounding error. Personally, I think it's absolutely silly to forego tax dollars to encourage people to go into debt. Not that I'm above taking advantage of it every year, and probably deriving more benefit from it than most. I'm still trying to figure out what any of this has to do with the Iraq war, though.
- sokoloff 10y ago
  > 75% of the benefit goes to people making over $100k/year It's much closer to households making over $100K/yr than people making that.
JauntTrooper 10y ago
$77-$100B is equal to $618 - $800 per US household.
- matt_wulfeck 10y ago
  What do you think our government will do with that money? Give it to the poor? It will go right into bloated defense spending.

hx87 10y ago

If it's a puny number, and enormous number of people benefit from it, and the benefit is 100% financial (as in this case), then each person isn't benefiting all that much from it.

breischl 10y ago

>>What a puny number that benefits such an enormous amount of regular people. Well, I guess that depends on your definitions of "puny" and "regular". Since 75% of the benefit goes to people making over $100k/year, that must be your definition of "regular people." Which isn't really statistically defensible, but might be your personal experience. I'm not sure $100bn really counts as "puny" even to the Feds, though. Granted 3% of last years' revenues isn't a huge number, but neither is it a rounding error. Personally, I think it's absolutely silly to forego tax dollars to encourage people to go into debt. Not that I'm above taking advantage of it every year, and probably deriving more benefit from it than most. I'm still trying to figure out what any of this has to do with the Iraq war, though.

sokoloff 10y ago
> 75% of the benefit goes to people making over $100k/year It's much closer to households making over $100K/yr than people making that.

JauntTrooper 10y ago

$77-$100B is equal to $618 - $800 per US household.

matt_wulfeck 10y ago
What do you think our government will do with that money? Give it to the poor? It will go right into bloated defense spending.