To be honest, if we ever meet face to face I am happy to have an ideological discussion re free markets and government intervention with you, but in here it aint worth it.gangrenous wrote: ↑November 7, 2018, 6:46 amExcept people don’t live in educational expenses or shares!!
Honestly I expect that kind of over-simplistic mindset from papabear, not you greeneyed!
Governments shouldn’t interfere in any markets? What garbage. There are numerous industries/services where replication of infrastructure is not practical and so true free market competition isn’t going to happen.
It’s impressive to hold to free markets providing optimal outcomes as we are starting to see real cracks in that facade and the general populace rebelling against the over application of the ideology.
Ridiculous over-simplification of life.
I presume your argument is that necessities should be taxed differently to non necessities ( the sort of stuff that lead the Democrats to making the GST a mess it is today) and not if you live in it, it should be taxed differently.
Because rent is treated the same whether you are an investor or not, commercial is a tax deduction residential not so much, unless you run a home office.
Going to what I believe is your argument, that necessities should be protected from investors, the two current issues you have to get through is:-
1 - IMO it is a stretch to say that it is a necessity for EVERYONE (say over the age of 18) to own their own home, rent is better for different people in different situations. I say this from personal experience, as I dare say others on here have rented through choice and not force at times.
The govt does assist with public housing and shelters to do their best to try and get a roof over everyones head.
2 - Going back to my original point that making interest non tax deductible in a business enterprise such as an investment property (please note that I do not own an investment property) you are favouring other necessities such as wheat (see link above) and other commodities where you can buy and sell food, if you want to borrow to increase your buy that interest is tax deductable.
Oddly enough, it is generally argued that investors make commodities cheaper buy providing consistent demand. I am not sure that is one hundred percent the case but they do make for a more consistent price, which inevitably is always good for business.
Thus, what you are arguing for is legitimate business expense to be non deductable whilst other similar ones become deductable, so investors might start moving in that direction skewing the economy on the basis of tax treatment as opposed to returns. Which is the exact opposite of good economic policy.
The counter argument to this is people are investing in property for tax reasons, is incorrect, you can go get a business loan and get the tax deduction for anything business related (again from personal experience I have one of these, from a business I was in) If all you want is a tax deduction. People borrow money to put invest into wheat, housing, shares whatever because they believe there return will exceed the cost.
It is the exact same reason people borrowed money to put into shares, housing and shares have historically been good investments.
Now something I carefully considered before responding too, in the days of sticking up against bullies I think its fair to say your first sentence was condescending and belittling, when you are in your own echo chamber you shouldn't need to resort to playing the man to atleast give a good go of your argument but you did and in such a disappointing manner. I am going to leave it at that, but if it keeps going down the path of GEM then sooner or later I will throw some of that right back at you and I dare say it won't make you feel .... happy.