Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Peace
Participantah shucks, you’re right esmith. I guess I better go back and try to figure out the cost effectiveness of how much stock to dump before the end of the year.
You’d think that government would want to encouage people to cash out investments to stay afloat (you know squeeze every last penny out of people) but at the same time I guess the economy doesn’t need a big sell-off in the stock market either.
Participantah shucks, you’re right esmith. I guess I better go back and try to figure out the cost effectiveness of how much stock to dump before the end of the year.
You’d think that government would want to encouage people to cash out investments to stay afloat (you know squeeze every last penny out of people) but at the same time I guess the economy doesn’t need a big sell-off in the stock market either.
ParticipantI think the final bill was a bi-partisan compromise and the legislators know that there are going to be a LOT of pissed off constituents if something isn’t done.
We were first hit with the AMT in 1987 – it was so unheard of that our accountant wasn’t even aware of it (got a bill + penalty later). I think I saw that it would affect 21 million people this year.
ParticipantI think the final bill was a bi-partisan compromise and the legislators know that there are going to be a LOT of pissed off constituents if something isn’t done.
We were first hit with the AMT in 1987 – it was so unheard of that our accountant wasn’t even aware of it (got a bill + penalty later). I think I saw that it would affect 21 million people this year.
ParticipantI think the final bill was a bi-partisan compromise and the legislators know that there are going to be a LOT of pissed off constituents if something isn’t done.
We were first hit with the AMT in 1987 – it was so unheard of that our accountant wasn’t even aware of it (got a bill + penalty later). I think I saw that it would affect 21 million people this year.
ParticipantI think the final bill was a bi-partisan compromise and the legislators know that there are going to be a LOT of pissed off constituents if something isn’t done.
We were first hit with the AMT in 1987 – it was so unheard of that our accountant wasn’t even aware of it (got a bill + penalty later). I think I saw that it would affect 21 million people this year.
ParticipantWhen we were looking at real estate in the east we were well informed of the “flood” areas and assured it was no problem because the mandatory federally backed insurance was cheap – and that was true. Of course it encouraged people to go ahead and buy in flood zones (usually a little less expensive than non-flood areas).
So why doesn’t the federal gov subsidize earthquake insurance? It certainly is a less predictable natural disaster than floods are. Some of the flood areas in the east flood regularly.
In San Francisco the only people I knew who had earthquake insurance owned condominiums because it is required in multi-dwellings. That is why HOA fees are so expensive in San Francisco.ParticipantWhen we were looking at real estate in the east we were well informed of the “flood” areas and assured it was no problem because the mandatory federally backed insurance was cheap – and that was true. Of course it encouraged people to go ahead and buy in flood zones (usually a little less expensive than non-flood areas).
So why doesn’t the federal gov subsidize earthquake insurance? It certainly is a less predictable natural disaster than floods are. Some of the flood areas in the east flood regularly.
In San Francisco the only people I knew who had earthquake insurance owned condominiums because it is required in multi-dwellings. That is why HOA fees are so expensive in San Francisco.ParticipantBy the way, you can not just fill in a pool when you tire of it.
A friend, whose kids were grown, got tired of maintaining a pool no one used anymore found out that there are regulations for getting rid of a pool; she had to have everything removed and then fill in the hole. It was so expensive that she opted to keep the damn pool.ParticipantBy the way, you can not just fill in a pool when you tire of it.
A friend, whose kids were grown, got tired of maintaining a pool no one used anymore found out that there are regulations for getting rid of a pool; she had to have everything removed and then fill in the hole. It was so expensive that she opted to keep the damn pool.ParticipantH. R. 3648
Someone out there who would like to decifer this Bill.
Section 5 appears to be where there will be defining limits on the capital gains savings when selling a primary residence. I can’t figure it out but what I heard made it sound like it would affect those who have a second home and after selling the first (primary residence) and taking the capital gains savings, then move into the second for two years to establish primary residency wolud not get the entire capital gains break.
ParticipantFormerSanDiegan
I was watching the debate on C-Span (very bi-partisan by the way), and once in awhile C-Span breaks away from the live viewing and gives a synopsis of what is going down – it was during the summary that I heard that to pay for the debt forgiveness they were countering with the limit of second home capital gains savings. Maybe this has to do with Pay-Go.
I don’t have a problem with IRS not taxing discharged debt on first mortgages. But I have a huge problem with not taxing discharged debt on re-fi’s and HELOCs, etc. that were used to support a standard of living beyond income (as someone else mentioned); I didn’t hear those specifics (whether it was just for first mortgages or all debt)
ParticipantLooks like this will pass “Mortgage Debt Tax Relief”
It will be paid by changing the tax benefits of selling a second house – now if you sell your primary residence and take the capital gains benefit, then you live in your second home for two years and sell you can only take the capital gains tax benefit for that portion of time you lived in the second house.
Participantsdrealtor –
I agree that the lack of employment centers is a problem but the first obstacle is the lack of demand. If more people wanted a subway than 8 more lanes on I-5, then we would get the subway. I still say that not enough people have experienced great public transit so don’t know what they’re missing.
The lack of employment centers is workable. Even in the best public transit cities people combine two or three modes to get where they are going (plus walking a block or more).
Riders need a system they can depend on at all hours of the day, a system that is reliable, flexable, and safe.
I think it also has to be good enough that people can get rid of the extra cars. The best incentive for that would be to make it free. Make the public an offer it can’t refuse.
-
AuthorPosts
