The DMV is so insidious. They are allowed to tax used property sales.

I understand that as well, another way of saying this is to say that in
effect you
are allowed to pay your mortgage with pre-tax dollars. But as you say you
still must prepay it. And as I pointed out already, the deduction is just
funny money anyway, as the government takes all it wants by adjusting the
percentages on the tax tables.

Also, half the tax burden is social security, and you cannot affect your
social security rate with any deduction.

But there are several other things about owning a home that are to great
advantage. The first is that if you pre-pay on your mortgage, you can build
equity quite rapidly. In fact if you drop $100 prepayment into your
mortgage
you will save more money in interest than if you put it into a passbook
account.
The second is that with most mortgages, the monthly payment is fixed. This
is quite unlike rentals, which seem to raise prices every time the lease is
up.

Ted

 

But the biggest advantage of all is that your mortgage has a limited term.
Eventually, you will own your home free and clear; your monthly payments will
end. Renters will keep paying rent until the day they die (or buy a home).

 

Sure. Because he moved to Southern California, where the price
of a _fully paid for_ Maryland townhouse isn't enough for a down payment
on a decent place.

 

Yeah, but if he was willing to do without the new car, the big screen
TV and assorted other luxuries that so many consider to be essential
that down payment wouldn't be out of reach for long.
--
Brandon Sommerville (remove ".gov" to e-mail)

Her name was Valerie Plame, and she was a NOC. She was keeping weapons of mass
destruction out of the hands of terrorists. What was the Bush administration doing?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/022404A.shtml

 

Yes, we're talking about professional deadbeats. However, there are quite a few
women out there who get jobs, max out their credit cards, and, once they find
"Prince Charming," they quit their jobs to start popping out kids, and guess
who's on the hook to pay off all their credit card debt? What do you suppose
happens to these chicks when Prince Charming doesn't show up in time?

No argument there.

Maybe they have had everything handed to them on silver platters, and have never
had to actually EARN anything before.

Nobody said they were.

In other words, they lived paycheck-to-paycheck. If someone who has been living
a hand-to-mouth existence for years suddenly loses their job, and, because they
have no personal savings, they declare bankruptcy, I have no sympathy. The days
of guaranteed lifelong employment are long gone; it's just plain irresponsible
not to have a 6-12 month safety cushion to see you through the inevitable gaps
in your employment. Yet how many people are willing to live far enough below
their means to build up this safety cushion?

The fact is, it's now the norm to have maxed out credit cards, multiple car
loans, and to be one paycheck away from financial disaster. People who pay off
their credit cards in full every month, who pay cash for their cars, and who can
survive a 6-month period of unemployment unscathed are rare.

 

So how do you suppose that I, who owned NO real estate at all prior to moving to
SoCal, was able to purchase a house, whereas my friend, who had the advantage of
already having some equity built up, was not?

It's all a matter of priorities. This is why you see people driving around SoCal
in $50,000 luxury automobiles, but still living in an apartment.

 

I'd guess you probably sold your soul to a mass transit advocate to
come up with the down payment. Or you got out at the right time in a
dot-com boom. Either way, when houses which would cost $200,000 in MD
would cost $1,000,000 in SoCal, the equity you have in the MD house
(unless you nearly own it outright) isn't an overriding factor. To
me, this is a good reason to stay out of SoCal.

 

I agree that home ownership has advantages, but I don't think that
saving on taxes is a very compelling advantage.


Matt

 

You go right ahead and stay out - it's crowded enough here as it is.

 

Ted, you forgot to say "to go" when you bought the burger

 

Used sales tax is common in many states. Some states will charge the
tax based on the *fair market value* or *age* rather than the selling
price. In these cases, the selling price is irrelevant.

Government entities are always looking for new sources of revenue.

-Kirk Matheson

 

It always amazes me that people continue to vote for the
politician that promises them the most freebies, then they will
bitch and moan when it comes to pay for those 'freebies.' Do they
think the government actually did something to produce an
income? They want clean air, but bitch when the price of gas
goes up to proved that cleaner gasoline. They complain when they
have to pay for an inspection to be sure all that 'free'
pollution equipment on their $25,000 car, that only cost $3,500
before they passed the pollution laws, is working properly. They
want good roads and low cost public transpiration, that they can
ride for a price that is ten percent of what it costs the
government to provide, but bitch when the have to pay taxes to
get those things. The Demo's love Kerry's because he's bitchin
about a deficit, yet he is promising everybody at $4,000 tax
credit to go to college and free medical coverage. Al that in
time of war, probably the greatest threat Americans have ever
faced since the revolution. He wants to give all the rich old
folks free drugs. He wants to raise the taxes on everybody that
has children and those that make over $50,000 a year, he calls
them rich. He complains because he had to go to Vietnam and Bush
didn't, but when he came back he protested the war with Jane
Fonda. He said he will fight the terrorist differently. With
what words? He voted against nearly every weapon we have in our
arsenal today to fight the terrorist of the world since he became
a Senator. like President Reagan use to say, 'The next time
someone from the government offers to 'Give' you something, hold
on too your wallet."


mike hunt

 

Think this is a little off topic for thise newsgroup, but just to give
you a little venting time, here is a site I found:
http://www.johnkerrytruth.com/

hth,

tom


***************** Our Sites *****************
http://www.CarFleaMarket.com
http://www.FindMeShelter.com
http://www.FreelancingProjects.com
http://www.VirtualLotteryPool.com
http://www.VoyeurJunction.com - Adults Only!
***************************************************

 

That goes double when what they want to give you is a tax cut. How
much did you get from the last one? Will it cover the cuts in your
Social Security benefits that Alan Greenspan now says will be
necessary to keep the national debt from ruining the country? Will it
pay for your health insurance when you lose your job? Will it pay for
your surgery when you lose your health insurance?

The wife and I saved about $4K with the Bush tax cuts. I'll be done
paying my Social Security tax in July this year. Am I going to spend
that extra money? Hardly. I have enough money that I just buy
anything I really want/need. That money goes into the retirement fund
so I can quit the rat race ASAP.

So keep working suckers - at least until they send your job to one of
those other countries where they don't have nationalized health
insurance. And keep voting Republican. Remember, you're not doing it
for yourself. You sure aren't doing it for your kids. You are doing
it for me.

 

'The next time

that's exactly what that mutt in the whitehouse is doing ain't it?
isn't a tax cut the same thing?

vote for anybody but bush.

 

For the record, the picture with Kerry and Fonda was a hoax. It was a
combination of two pictures which is funny when done as a joke, but
pretty crass when made up to look like an actual newspaper article.
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2004/02/18_light.shtml

Ahem. Who's going to pay for Bush's budget deficit (which
conveniently (like last year's) doesn't include Iraq and Afghanistan
funding in it)?
Here's a clue:
http://www.bushin30seconds.org/view/01_small.shtml
--
Brandon Sommerville (remove ".gov" to e-mail)

Her name was Valerie Plame, and she was a NOC. She was keeping weapons of mass
destruction out of the hands of terrorists. What was the Bush administration doing?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/022404A.shtml

 

oh please..........

 

Tax cuts are not an attempt to 'give' you anything. When the
government cuts the tax rates, as it has under Kennedy, Reagan
and Bush they are merely taking less of your money not giving you
money it's your money. Contrary to what many would have you
believe, historically tax RATE cuts always produce more money for
the US treasury over time. In a capitalistic society every time
money changes hands it is taxed. The more in circulation, the
more it changes hands, the more tax money generated. Many
politician want you to think otherwise so they can can continue
to take your money to GIVE you some back to buy your votes.
Don't be so naive', wise up.


mike hunt

 

If that is the only thing you read in that post about which to
comment I must have made my point. Who said they protested
together, not me? The picture aside both Kerry and Fonda
protested the war to the disadvantage of our troops in time of
war. In W.W.II the federal deficit was 125% of GNP for four
years. The deficit in this war is only about 5% of GNP. Doesn't
anyone find it strange how the party that ran the county for over
forty years, with a deficit most every year, is now concerned
about a deficit but they still want to spend more to get your
vote?


mike hunt

 

Whether you consider it giving money back to taxpayers or not is
irrelevant. The net result is the same -- the government receives less
money. Why does the government take in money? To pay for a well-equipped
military, to pay for law enforcement and emergency services (fire, police,
border patrol...), to pay for roads and other components of
transportation. Why do they do it? Because people on their own
wouldn't/couldn't do it as individuals or small groups. The government
isn't stealing your money -- as was pointed out earlier, we have taxation
and we have representation in bodies that tax us. We do it to ourselves.
In absolute dollars, the rich pay the most taxes and they get the
biggest tax cuts under Bush. That's fine, but it doesn't do much for the
economy. Rich people don't need more money -- that's why we call them
rich. Extra money given out to the people who already have adequate funds
doesn't significantly increase spending. In my opinion, if the tens of
billions dedicated to tax cuts had instead been spent on hiring companies
to improve our roads, schools, whatever, that you would have had increases
in income taxes from those companies, increased income taxes from the
employees, increased sales and income taxes from the places where they all
spent their wages . . . I think we had an incredible opportunity 2001-2,
and the government blew it. Instead, we're having to borrow tons of
money, which down the road will just mean the government needs to take
even more of our money.