4 ms·

How much should the federal government subsidize the continued gentrification, inequality and inflation in home prices? On the one hand liberals decry inequalit

by rrggrr 8y ago

How much should the federal government subsidize the continued gentrification, inequality and inflation in home prices? On the one hand liberals decry inequality. On the other hand they rage against tax reform that made it MORE costly for wealthy homeowners to create regions where housing is less available and affordable. If you don't understand this, then you don't understand the recent tax bill.

metalliqaz 8y ago
My post didn't say a whole hell of a lot, yet it seems to have triggered you quite a bit. Ask yourself why that is. In response, I would just say that, yes, I do understand the recent tax bill. At it's core, it's part of a long term plan to reduce government by starving it for money, at the same time it is a giveaway to large campaign donors. These are not speculation, but directly acknowledged by the spineless and craven Speaker of the House Rep. Paul Ryan.
tdb7893 8y ago
I know I don't really understand the most recent tax bill but I've heard that red states will get more of the benefit from the changes in it. Is that not true or is there a good reason for it?
- metalliqaz 8y ago
  It's not so much benefit but less pain. There are many changes, but one of the most significant is the removal of the deduction for state taxes paid. Blue states tend to spend a lot more money on government services, especially education. This makes the taxes higher, but it was evened out somewhat by a reduction in federal tax burden. With that gone, it adds a lot more pressure to tax payers in states with higher property taxes. Those states tend to be blue. When evaluating the wisdom of this change, keep in mind that those states also tend to be net payers into the federal system, while red states tend to be net takers from the federal system. There are exceptions but the trend is clear.
FactolSarin 8y ago
Considering the tax bill is yet more theft from blue states (you know, the states that actually create most of the wealth) and gifts to red states, this is kind of laughable.

by rrggrr 8y ago

metalliqaz 8y ago

My post didn't say a whole hell of a lot, yet it seems to have triggered you quite a bit. Ask yourself why that is. In response, I would just say that, yes, I do understand the recent tax bill. At it's core, it's part of a long term plan to reduce government by starving it for money, at the same time it is a giveaway to large campaign donors. These are not speculation, but directly acknowledged by the spineless and craven Speaker of the House Rep. Paul Ryan.

tdb7893 8y ago

I know I don't really understand the most recent tax bill but I've heard that red states will get more of the benefit from the changes in it. Is that not true or is there a good reason for it?

metalliqaz 8y ago
It's not so much benefit but less pain. There are many changes, but one of the most significant is the removal of the deduction for state taxes paid. Blue states tend to spend a lot more money on government services, especially education. This makes the taxes higher, but it was evened out somewhat by a reduction in federal tax burden. With that gone, it adds a lot more pressure to tax payers in states with higher property taxes. Those states tend to be blue. When evaluating the wisdom of this change, keep in mind that those states also tend to be net payers into the federal system, while red states tend to be net takers from the federal system. There are exceptions but the trend is clear.

FactolSarin 8y ago

Considering the tax bill is yet more theft from blue states (you know, the states that actually create most of the wealth) and gifts to red states, this is kind of laughable.