People highlighting many programs that don’t benefit everyone (and what has been mentioned here only scratches the surface) is a great exercise in the dysfunction of our tax-and-spend government. Carve out slabs from individual incomes, and magnanimously “give” stuff to people. And if you happen to be one who benefits from a program, you get to cheer the generosity of the government.
When we get into arguments about what to cut, inevitably a different program is raised to cut INSTEAD. But the result of that exchange should be to change the word “instead” to ALSO. That’s now we should be doing it.
maybe we dont get a tax benefit, but the community as a whole benefits by people owning their houses. The higher the home ownership rate, the higher the tax basin and the better the community is including schools.
Like everything else,the mortgage deduction is a mixed bag: it’s regressive and mostly benefits higher earners; it increases the likelihood of defaults; it warps housing prices; on its own, it costs the government about $70-$80 billion. Like I said, I appreciate all those lower-income/less-wealthy people helping me with my house(s).
Plus, the second part: re: loans: 1) an educated population benefits everyone, too; 2) the majority of student loan debt is held by those with no wealth; 3) I am mostly agnostic on its macroeconomic effects, but I don’t give a ■■■■ about the deficit here (these loans, which the government owes to itself, are conjured in ink or electrons and can be dispatched similarly; there are many other expenditures to be angry about); also, in a $23 trillion economy, I don’t think $300 billion not paid back over the course of several years would be significantly inflationary. But, hey, we’ll see.
In regard to your reference to “concept”, let me remind you our country was founded upon the concept to protect the right of people to “pursue” their own happiness, which is far different from the concept of using government force to confiscate the property of one citizen to finance the needs of another citizen’s personal needs and enjoyments.
This concept was eloquently stated by one of our forefathers as follows:
“Under a just and equal Government, every individual is entitled to protection in the enjoyment of the whole product of his labor, except such portion of it as is necessary to enable Government to protect the rest; this is given only in consideration of the protection offered. In every bounty, exclusive right, or monopoly, Government violates the stipulation on her part; for, by such a regulation, the product of one man’s labor is transferred to the use and enjoyment of another. The exercise of such a right on the part of Government can be justified on no other principle, than that the whole product of the labor or every individual is the real property of Government, and may be distributed among the several parts of the community by government discretion; such a supposition would directly involve the idea, that every individual in the community is merely a slave and bondsman to Government, who, although he may labor, is not to expect protection in the product of his labor. An authority given to any Government to exercise such a principle, would lead to a complete system of tyranny.”
Why is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez comfortable with filling New York City’s scarce public housing with illegal aliens when America’s needy Citizens, including U.S. Military Veterans, are going homeless?
Getting back to the subject of the thread, AOC’s philosophy is crystal clear: financial breaks for me but not for thee!
Remember this?
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants a government mandated break on her college loans, but no incentive given to Amazon to locate their headquarters in NYC which would have created 25,000 good paying jobs. What a frickin hypocrite!
The question is, will the voters in New York’s District 14 return AOC to Congress after all the misery she has brought to her constituents?
This coming election District 14 voters have a very important decisions to make . . . Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez vs Tina Forte, and the polices between these two are the difference between day and night!
JWK
Why is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez comfortable with filling New York City’s scarce public housing with illegal aliens when America’s needy Citizens, including U.S. Military Veterans, are going homeless?
I agree. We should get away from all deductions and go to a flat tax (say 10%) with a $40-50,000 (or so) personal exemption per adult earner. But there are too many beneficiaries of the various tax exemptions to ever be able to attain that. The home mortgage deduction is essentially scared.
The problem with that idea is it defeats the Founder’s wisdom requiring Representation with a proportional financial obligation whenever Congress lays and collects a direct tax.
JWK
If, by calling a tax indirect when it is essentially direct, the rule of protection [apportionment] could be frittered away, one of the great landmarks defining the boundary between the nation and the states of which it is composed, would have disappeared, and with it one of the bulwarks of private rights and private property. POLLOCK v. FARMERS’ LOAN & TRUST CO., 157 U.S. 429 (1895) JUSTICE FULLER
I’m not following you. My comment was with respect to a flat tax which I assume you mean on income. Our Founder’s requirement to apportion any direct tax would make a flat tax unconstitutional, and violate the principle of Representation with a proportional financial obligation whenever Congress lays and collects a direct tax.
