- This topic has 195 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 2 months ago by CA renter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 18, 2011 at 7:51 PM #722300August 18, 2011 at 8:12 PM #721091(former)FormerSanDieganParticipant
Briansd1, I Love the string of cliches, but we WOULD have pride of (multiple property) ownership … and pride of tax sheltership. Also, we have the same curtains, wall colors, lights, appliances, etc as when we moved into out house. The only thing we added was nails to the wall for pictures (even then we reused 80% of existing ones) and light bulbs when they went out. Oh yeah, we also added a CO detector and some 9 volt batteries for the smoke detectors. The homeowner premium will be obvious in about 20 years when the existing tenants are payIng for our retirement.
People who take this approach if MID were eliminated would also have the freedom to move into new rentals as their needs or jobs change,which, as you know is a huge advantage to renting. People could rent in best school district for a few more years, then move into the condo with a view. The approach I outlined might be the optimal solution for many folks with upper middle class incomes and decent-sized mortgages. Now that i’ve thought about it more I am kinda motivated to run the numbers and see where it gets me. Maybe we can move into a trailer park rental, rent out our McMansion and retire now.
And the government would have to find another loophole to close to collect the rest of the $100 billion.August 18, 2011 at 8:12 PM #721183(former)FormerSanDieganParticipantBriansd1, I Love the string of cliches, but we WOULD have pride of (multiple property) ownership … and pride of tax sheltership. Also, we have the same curtains, wall colors, lights, appliances, etc as when we moved into out house. The only thing we added was nails to the wall for pictures (even then we reused 80% of existing ones) and light bulbs when they went out. Oh yeah, we also added a CO detector and some 9 volt batteries for the smoke detectors. The homeowner premium will be obvious in about 20 years when the existing tenants are payIng for our retirement.
People who take this approach if MID were eliminated would also have the freedom to move into new rentals as their needs or jobs change,which, as you know is a huge advantage to renting. People could rent in best school district for a few more years, then move into the condo with a view. The approach I outlined might be the optimal solution for many folks with upper middle class incomes and decent-sized mortgages. Now that i’ve thought about it more I am kinda motivated to run the numbers and see where it gets me. Maybe we can move into a trailer park rental, rent out our McMansion and retire now.
And the government would have to find another loophole to close to collect the rest of the $100 billion.August 18, 2011 at 8:12 PM #721783(former)FormerSanDieganParticipantBriansd1, I Love the string of cliches, but we WOULD have pride of (multiple property) ownership … and pride of tax sheltership. Also, we have the same curtains, wall colors, lights, appliances, etc as when we moved into out house. The only thing we added was nails to the wall for pictures (even then we reused 80% of existing ones) and light bulbs when they went out. Oh yeah, we also added a CO detector and some 9 volt batteries for the smoke detectors. The homeowner premium will be obvious in about 20 years when the existing tenants are payIng for our retirement.
People who take this approach if MID were eliminated would also have the freedom to move into new rentals as their needs or jobs change,which, as you know is a huge advantage to renting. People could rent in best school district for a few more years, then move into the condo with a view. The approach I outlined might be the optimal solution for many folks with upper middle class incomes and decent-sized mortgages. Now that i’ve thought about it more I am kinda motivated to run the numbers and see where it gets me. Maybe we can move into a trailer park rental, rent out our McMansion and retire now.
And the government would have to find another loophole to close to collect the rest of the $100 billion.August 18, 2011 at 8:12 PM #721939(former)FormerSanDieganParticipantBriansd1, I Love the string of cliches, but we WOULD have pride of (multiple property) ownership … and pride of tax sheltership. Also, we have the same curtains, wall colors, lights, appliances, etc as when we moved into out house. The only thing we added was nails to the wall for pictures (even then we reused 80% of existing ones) and light bulbs when they went out. Oh yeah, we also added a CO detector and some 9 volt batteries for the smoke detectors. The homeowner premium will be obvious in about 20 years when the existing tenants are payIng for our retirement.
People who take this approach if MID were eliminated would also have the freedom to move into new rentals as their needs or jobs change,which, as you know is a huge advantage to renting. People could rent in best school district for a few more years, then move into the condo with a view. The approach I outlined might be the optimal solution for many folks with upper middle class incomes and decent-sized mortgages. Now that i’ve thought about it more I am kinda motivated to run the numbers and see where it gets me. Maybe we can move into a trailer park rental, rent out our McMansion and retire now.
And the government would have to find another loophole to close to collect the rest of the $100 billion.August 18, 2011 at 8:12 PM #722305(former)FormerSanDieganParticipantBriansd1, I Love the string of cliches, but we WOULD have pride of (multiple property) ownership … and pride of tax sheltership. Also, we have the same curtains, wall colors, lights, appliances, etc as when we moved into out house. The only thing we added was nails to the wall for pictures (even then we reused 80% of existing ones) and light bulbs when they went out. Oh yeah, we also added a CO detector and some 9 volt batteries for the smoke detectors. The homeowner premium will be obvious in about 20 years when the existing tenants are payIng for our retirement.
People who take this approach if MID were eliminated would also have the freedom to move into new rentals as their needs or jobs change,which, as you know is a huge advantage to renting. People could rent in best school district for a few more years, then move into the condo with a view. The approach I outlined might be the optimal solution for many folks with upper middle class incomes and decent-sized mortgages. Now that i’ve thought about it more I am kinda motivated to run the numbers and see where it gets me. Maybe we can move into a trailer park rental, rent out our McMansion and retire now.
And the government would have to find another loophole to close to collect the rest of the $100 billion.August 18, 2011 at 10:20 PM #721110scaredyclassicParticipantwhat’s the case for increasing the subsidy?
August 18, 2011 at 10:20 PM #721203scaredyclassicParticipantwhat’s the case for increasing the subsidy?
August 18, 2011 at 10:20 PM #721803scaredyclassicParticipantwhat’s the case for increasing the subsidy?
August 18, 2011 at 10:20 PM #721959scaredyclassicParticipantwhat’s the case for increasing the subsidy?
August 18, 2011 at 10:20 PM #722325scaredyclassicParticipantwhat’s the case for increasing the subsidy?
August 18, 2011 at 10:27 PM #721115SK in CVParticipant[quote=walterwhite]what’s the case for increasing the subsidy?[/quote]
Sounds good to me. Easiest way is to increase marginal rates on top tier income. Value of the deduction (and the subsidy for the interest) goes up. 1st step done!
August 18, 2011 at 10:27 PM #721208SK in CVParticipant[quote=walterwhite]what’s the case for increasing the subsidy?[/quote]
Sounds good to me. Easiest way is to increase marginal rates on top tier income. Value of the deduction (and the subsidy for the interest) goes up. 1st step done!
August 18, 2011 at 10:27 PM #721808SK in CVParticipant[quote=walterwhite]what’s the case for increasing the subsidy?[/quote]
Sounds good to me. Easiest way is to increase marginal rates on top tier income. Value of the deduction (and the subsidy for the interest) goes up. 1st step done!
August 18, 2011 at 10:27 PM #721964SK in CVParticipant[quote=walterwhite]what’s the case for increasing the subsidy?[/quote]
Sounds good to me. Easiest way is to increase marginal rates on top tier income. Value of the deduction (and the subsidy for the interest) goes up. 1st step done!
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.