Bio not provided
First off, good, we already have enough theft from the rich to give to the "poor," i.e. progressive taxation. Retribution of wealth is now the US government's chief responsibility. The founders created the US in a Lockean vision to protect property, not steal it. A total disgrace what this country has become.
Secondly, a lot of this isn't real wealth, since most people don't own their homes outright. Income and wealth aren't the same thing. A lot of these people are house poor with no real liquidity.
Third, the rich got hammered more in the housing collapse, and they can't write off capital losses like you can in stocks. But in stocks you can't write off margin interest. I'd rather be able to write off losses than interest if I had to choose.
Fourth, fine, take away the deduction and watch home prices collapse again. That'll be great for the economy. We'll all be poor, no more income inequality, like Cuba (except for the billionaire Castros of course).
2 months, 2 weeks ago on Conversation @ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119316/new-report-homeowner-tax-programs-massively-favor-rich
@ReneeDailyHillthe concern is that chocolate has a stimulant in it (Theobromine) that can give dogs arrhythmia or even cardiac arrest. Cardiologists even tell elderly heart patients to avoid it. So you probably wouldn't notice until she was paws up from an MI. But the toxic dose is supposedly 1lb of chocolate per 20lbs of dog.
11 months, 3 weeks ago on 10 Thanksgiving Foods Dangerous for Your Dog
Pretty dopey article. Dogs can't digest fats? So wolves just throw away the skin and fat when they eat a sheep?
Oh, and the toxic levels for chocolate is like 1lb per 20lbs of dog. So my 80lbs pitbull would be fine with a little piece (not that I give it to her, but enough of this urban legend). The danger is supposedly that dogs like it so much, they won't stop eating it. But who had 4lbs of pure chocolate lying around for a dog to devour anyway?
I have a friend who did have to take her dog to the vet for giving it a grape or two, so never do that one.
BTW, most dogs are lactose intolerant, so milk and cheese way worse than fats.
@DashiellMenard No, I don't agree. Taxing unrealized gains is a horrendous public policy, one that discourages investment and creating a nesteg, instead of replying on the government to take care of you in your old age. In CA, taxes are largely taking money from the productive and giving it to poor immigrants, illegal and legal.
Enough goddamned redistribution already!
2 years ago on Proposition 30: Yet another way California screws entrepreneurs over
@renderpaz My retired parents couldn't possibly stay in their home without Prop 13. My middle class parents paid off their house, and didn't take out a dime of HELOC money, and did without to put me through private school. Why should they be forced to move out of their home because Jerry Brown would rather pay of public employee unions and give children of illegals welfare and in-state tuition? How is it their fault that they bought a house they could afford for $76K in the late 70's, but bad government policies and speculators drove their home price up?
The idea of taxing unrealized gains is IDIOTIC and a sure way to keep people poor.
Agreed that 30 is horrible, but the idea that California has a revenue problem, instead of a spending problem is ludicrous. The suggestion that a state can't survive on 1.2% property tax and 11% income tax and higher than average sales tax is preposterous. Not once do you mention CA's share of illegals and welfare cases or public employee thieves.
Some states don't even have property taxes and do fine.