tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post3577939427075450218..comments2024-03-14T11:09:32.759-05:00Comments on Falkenblog: The Pervasive Problem with Housing AdvocatesEric Falkensteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-51536533781526083362009-01-15T17:03:00.000-06:002009-01-15T17:03:00.000-06:00Two good related reads. HUD and HUD-Affliate Agenc...Two good related reads. HUD and HUD-Affliate Agencies like ACORN, and most others need to be REGULATED or cut-off from all US Taxpayer money though HUD, and held accountable for their crimes.<BR/><BR/>The Inside Story of ACORN<BR/><BR/>http://theeprovocateur.blogspot.com/2009/01/inside-story-of-acorn.html<BR/><BR/>ACORN-style pressure tactics against lenders. As Professor Liebowitz said in testimony before Congress this past summer, the government’s entire housing policy was based “on a false claim, or lie” that mortgage lenders were discriminating against minorities.<BR/><BR/>http://bsimmons.wordpress.com/2008/12/20/it%E2%80%99s-time-to-uproot-the-real-cause-of-the-mortgage-crisis/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-10004353781568116512008-12-10T00:05:00.000-06:002008-12-10T00:05:00.000-06:00Its a very good website.The content of the site is...Its a very good website.<BR/>The content of the site is informative.<BR/>We can share our views.<BR/>==================<BR/>Harry<BR/><A HREF="http://mls.fastrealestate.net" REL="nofollow">MLS</A>harryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09760760973992568104noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-83205621162159720652008-10-20T14:11:00.000-05:002008-10-20T14:11:00.000-05:00interesting point on the benefits of buying a hous...interesting point on the benefits of buying a house. You might add the fact that $500k in capital gains for housing is ignored as well. But I think when you have high marginal tax rates, any tax subsidies directed at activities (investing in homes, buying a Prius, etc.), then necessarily are the mirror image of the marginal tax rate. The only way you could get around this, is to means-test the targeted tax break, but this becomes an administrative nightmare, and also creates sharp disparities in the effective marginal tax rates of individuals. I mean, look at this <A HREF="http://www.american.com/archive/2008/august-08-08/the-folly-of-obama2019s-tax-plan" REL="nofollow">graph</A> to see the effective marginal tax rates, which bounce all around. <BR/><BR/>The problem is, everyone wants taxes to be progressive--higher on the rich--but this becomes impossible at each step, because if you have bothe tax rates and subsidies implemented progessively, it just makes taxes progressive^2, and there is a limit to how much you can tax a marginal dollar (60%? 70%?). <BR/><BR/>When you consider that only the rich can afford professional tax service, this is just another way for the system to simultaneously benefit the current elite, while seeming to tax them. Those at the bottom are unaffected. Those in the middle are screwed, and those at top make sure the little benefits are kept under the pretext of helping the middle class. <BR/><BR/>So, I think the system tends to favor the rich over time, and becomes insanely ineffective. But like widely diverse pricing on airfares, if you replace with flat pricing, your most price sensitive customers will complain, and they fly a lot. <BR/><BR/>If I were czar, I would implement a flat tax. But I would never be elected with such a proposal.Eric Falkensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-89030191524179314292008-10-20T13:50:00.000-05:002008-10-20T13:50:00.000-05:00The hilarious thing about Acorn is that they were ...The hilarious thing about Acorn is that they were sued by some ex-employees who were fired when they tried to start a union of activists. Really. <BR/>http://www.nlrb.gov/shared_files/Board%20Decisions/338/338-129.pdfAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-42897667121820898722008-10-20T13:38:00.000-05:002008-10-20T13:38:00.000-05:00Eric, We are looking for our first home. When try...Eric, We are looking for our first home. When trying to help us figure out what the home would "really" cost us, our realtor asked our income to determine our marginal tax rate. This led to this related hypothetical (following). <BR/>Please comment on these two extreme scenarios:<BR/>a) Family A has Gross Income of $40,000 a year. They buy a $111,000 house and borrow $100,000. They pay $8,000 a year in interest and property taxes. This reduces their tax bill by $1,200 a year (15% marginal rate). <BR/>b) Family B has Gross Income of $400,000 a year. They buy a $1,110,000 house and borrow $1,000,000. They pay $80,000 a year in interest and property taxes. Since they are in the 35% bracket, their tax bill is reduced by $28,000 ... 23.333 times as much as Family A.<BR/>As an economist/social scientist, can you explain these incentives? Is it designed this way to maximize economic growth? Is this the result of lobbying by the bankers? <BR/>It's difficult for those of us who have not studied economics, or the history of this deduction, to understand the policy intuition here.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com