Tax policy has two purposes. One goal is to collect money to operate the government. The other goal is to promote public policy. For example, mortgage deductions are meant to encourage home ownership. Tax incentives are a proven way to change behavior. This makes me wonder if we could have a tax on stupidity and thereby reduce its prevalence over time. Seriously. The nation has a great interest in reducing stupidity.
Arguably, we already tax stupidity. When the government subsidizes student loans and helps fund colleges - that's a transfer of wealth from non-students to students. Okay, it's not exactly a tax on stupidity, but it's certainly a proof of concept.
Yep... I agree... Every time I'm taxed for schools in Jefferson County it's "a transfer of wealth from non-students to students"...And it should stop now... That's socialism, don't ya know....
I've actually been trying to change hubby's mind about the mortgage deductions being a good thing for some time now (think I'm finally getting through!). Having the deduction encourages us for home ownership, yes, but it also encourages one to NOT pay it off ahead of time, thinking that the deductions are worth more than the saved interest in paying it off early. In essence, we've been encouraged to carry large amounts of debt that has directly benefited the banks and indirectly the economy, but is the price worth it? I don't know myself, just asking.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Canada doesn't have a mortgage tax deduction and thier housing market doesn't seem to suffer. I would like for it to go away. I know a couple people who bought 2nd homes they really didn't need saying it was a tax deduction.
The real tax on stupid people? The lottery, the state takes 50% right off the top. Better to go to Central City.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
I love people who decide for others "what they really didn't need"... How did you come by that particular gift? I thought the whole capitalism=God thing was to own as many homes, boats, cars, etc., as you could? So, somehow, because this particular couple might not fall into the uber-rich category, they shouldn't take tax-deductions that you think is perfectly okay for the ultra-rich to take?
SS109 wrote: Canada doesn't have a mortgage tax deduction and thier housing market doesn't seem to suffer. I would like for it to go away. I know a couple people who bought 2nd homes they really didn't need saying it was a tax deduction.
The real tax on stupid people? The lottery, the state takes 50% right off the top. Better to go to Central City.
The tax on stupid people? The people who love taxes are stupid so tax those people = liberals (progressives). Let them put their money where their mouth is.
Tax policy has two purposes. One goal is to collect money to operate the government. The other goal is to promote public policy.
Taxes should be for one purpose, to fund the gov't. as defined in the Constitution. Simple rates and no deductions. And everyone owes a share, not just the top 50%.... Then politics took over and mucked up the tax code with deductions, credits and giveaways. And lots of unfairness and unintended consequences. Like a f*cked up housing market, expensive health care and higher education system.
I think there are plenty of stupidity taxes already. Cigs, liquor, penalties, fines, lotteries, etc.
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.
I'll take the refusal to respond to my question as an admission that deciding whether someone else "needs" or "doesn't need" something is pure unadulterated bullsh*t...
LadyJazzer wrote: I'll take the refusal to respond to my question as an admission that deciding whether someone else "needs" or "doesn't need" something is pure unadulterated bullsh*t...
Thanks.
Do you mean this question? "I I love people who decide for others "what they really didn't need"... How did you come by that particular gift? I thought the whole capitalism=God thing was to own as many homes, boats, cars, etc., as you could? So, somehow, because this particular couple might not fall into the uber-rich category, they shouldn't take tax-deductions that you think is perfectly okay for the ultra-rich to take?"
If you did not exist, conservatives would have to invent you. Kind of like God.