Government usually is the problem

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,571
54,467
136
I'm not an accountant but those websites I linked have a bunch of corresponding links and documents where individuals of all stripes can minimize their taxes wrt buying a home. This isn't my purview but all it took was one search to come out with 3 federal sites on how to make it easy to buy a home. It shouldn't be this way. The government should not be a cheerleader for home purchases. And bankers should not be the fall guy for doing what they're legally entitled to...making an honest buck.

Seriously, governments only make things worse. And these useless politicians are so venal that they put themselves above and beyond the health of the nation and financial system. Make stupid promises to stupid voters on how they can attain the "American Dream" of a huge house in the suburbs on a McDonald's salary. That should be illegal. We need more self-respecting politicians who won't whore themselves out by leveraging the nation to the hilt on the promise of more mortgage tax breaks. Ridiculous.

You haven't put forth very compelling evidence for your point so far. While I personally agree it is a needless distortion, you haven't provided anything that shows the kind of problems you are alleging. As we covered before, low ownership rates don't appear to be correlated with increased growth, and most of the other things you argued haven't been well supported.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
You haven't put forth very compelling evidence for your point so far. While I personally agree it is a needless distortion, you haven't provided anything that shows the kind of problems you are alleging. As we covered before, low ownership rates don't appear to be correlated with increased growth, and most of the other things you argued haven't been well supported.

I know, wrt to mortgages. That would require looking through the tax code. I know they're there but I have better things to do than stare into that abyss. pro-mortgage-related laws got a jumstart again after Obama came to office.

However, with other aspects, especially one that was in the OP, I've given ample evidence of how government distortion wrt taxi services is hurting the economy and individuals. Medallions bought by taxi firms are trading below their sale prices. Governments, under pressure to justify this artificial barrier, are making life difficult for these upstarts.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
I know, wrt to mortgages. That would require looking through the tax code. I know they're there but I have better things to do than stare into that abyss. pro-mortgage-related laws got a jumstart again after Obama came to office.

However, with other aspects, especially one that was in the OP, I've given ample evidence of how government distortion wrt taxi services is hurting the economy and individuals. Medallions bought by taxi firms are trading below their sale prices. Governments, under pressure to justify this artificial barrier, are making life difficult for these upstarts.

So from one or two anecdotal examples you've constructed an indictment of "government" in general? Taxi regulations can be changed, and so can housing laws including tax subsidies. What you're better off focusing your efforts on is the tendency of the left to look at the results of transparent and evenly applied marketplace rules, and decide they don't like the winners/losers and change the rules or results post-facto to achieve a more "fair" outcome.
 

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,967
140
106
Please post link to relevant legislation and where it required banks to issue no money down loans to people with no income and no job.


your hero Barney Frank admitted this after he retired.

http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/...cheme-caused-the-economic-and-housing-crisis/


Thanks to liberal interference, banks were forced to give loans to risky borrowers and their inability to pay off these mortgages caused the economic and housing crisis. Obama, as a Chicago lawyer, sued banks to force them to give these exact type of loans. Not to mention that Clinton’s Attorney General, Janet Reno, threatened banks with investigations, and liberal screams of “racism,” if they didn’t ease credit for minorities. Politicians, particularly liberals, caused the financial and housing crisis, not the banks.


Remember Barney Frank (D-Mass) and Democrats, claiming there was “NO CRISIS” and NO HOUSING BUBBLE with the two GSEs? Remember how Democrats covered for Freddie and Fannie by blocking regulations? Bush warned the Democrats, yet Democrats fought regulation.
 

Mai72

Lifer
Sep 12, 2012
11,562
1,741
126
My parents got approved for their home 6 years ago. My dad told me that they should have never been approved for the loan. Their banker kept telling them to take out money so they can do the repairs needed on the house. When my mom died 3 years ago my dad just walked away from the home. The bank is in process of taking the house back over.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
your hero Barney Frank admitted this after he retired.

http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/...cheme-caused-the-economic-and-housing-crisis/


Thanks to liberal interference, banks were forced to give loans to risky borrowers and their inability to pay off these mortgages caused the economic and housing crisis. Obama, as a Chicago lawyer, sued banks to force them to give these exact type of loans. Not to mention that Clinton’s Attorney General, Janet Reno, threatened banks with investigations, and liberal screams of “racism,” if they didn’t ease credit for minorities. Politicians, particularly liberals, caused the financial and housing crisis, not the banks.


Remember Barney Frank (D-Mass) and Democrats, claiming there was “NO CRISIS” and NO HOUSING BUBBLE with the two GSEs? Remember how Democrats covered for Freddie and Fannie by blocking regulations? Bush warned the Democrats, yet Democrats fought regulation.

lol
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
Cigarette taxes and politicians were part of the problem that led to Garner's death

According to a coroner's report, Eric Garner died due to "compression of neck (chokehold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint" as he was wrestled to the ground by Daniel Pantaleo and fellow New York City police officers.

On Wednesday a grand jury, presented with the report and a video of the entire incident, declined to indict Mr Pantaleo on charges related to Garner's death. The move, coming on the heels of a similar grand jury decision in a police shooting in Ferguson, Missouri, has prompted two nights of massive protests in New York and widespread outrage in the media over alleged police brutality.

For some, however, another party bears some responsibility in Garner's death - an out-of-control nanny-state government attempting to enforce a prohibition on the sale of untaxed cigarettes.

"For someone to die over breaking that law, there really is no excuse for it," Kentucky Senator Paul said on MSNBC Wednesday night. "But I do blame the politicians. We put our police in a difficult situation with bad laws."

Reason magazine's A Barton Hinkle explains how New York's high state and city cigarette taxes - totalling $5.95 a pack - have created a thriving black market on the city's streets.

"A pack of smokes in New York City costs $14 or more," he writes. "That creates a powerful incentive to smuggle smokes in from states such as Virginia, where you can buy a pack for a third of that price. Fill a Ford Econoline van with a few hundred cartons, and you can make a nice five-figure profit in a weekend. Some people do."

It was participation in this underground economy that brought Garner to police attention and, according to Mr Paul's logic, ultimately led to his death.

Politicians passed the taxes, he said, and politicians told police: "Hey, we want you arresting people for selling loose cigarettes."

Mr Paul isn't alone in these views, either.

"We have a poor guy who died because of a tax collection issue," conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh said on his radio show.

Governments condemn cigarette use on one hand while relying on cigarette taxes to fund their operations, Mr Limbaugh and others contend.

"Garner died because he dared interfere with government reach and government muscle that didn't want to lose tax revenue to independent operators," Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass writes.

"You want an all-encompassing state with the power to stop you from smoking? Well, don't complain about the Eric Garner case," writes the Hayride's Scott McKay. "This is what big government looks like."

The Daily Caller's W James Antle says that while public outrage is focusing on the level of force employed by the New York police, "let's not let the people who write the laws off the hook".

"A man who is killed by government overreach, fueled by anti-tobacco fanaticism, is just as dead as one who smokes a carton of unfiltered Pall Malls every week for 30 years," he writes.

"You want an all-encompassing state with the power to stop you from smoking?" writes the Hayride's Scott McKay. "Well, don't complain about the Eric Garner case. This is what big government looks like."

It's Mr Paul's comments, however, that have attracted the lion's share of reaction - and condemnation - thanks to his position in the upper tier of Republican 2016 presidential prospects.

"Well I guess now we know what it takes to get a senator from Kentucky to admit cigarettes can kill," comedian Jon Stewart said on the Daily Show. "I appreciate the purity of your anti-tax dogma, but the cigarette tax is truly the least salient aspect of this case."

"Eric Garner could've been out there with mix tapes or a squeegee or a snow cone, and the same kind of s--t could have happened," he continued.

Salon's Joan Walsh says Mr Paul's comments are "a huge part of why he will never be president".

"What kind of callousness is required to say the 'bigger' issue in Garner's death isn't excessive police use of force, or police practice toward African-Americans generally, but … taxes?" she asks.

"I'm not sure I can think of a case of a cop shooting anyone over selling something without charging/paying taxes, ever, in my lifetime," she continues. "On the other hand, there is a very real issue of police using excessive force against African-Americans."

There's an "element of truth" in the conservative statements about the cigarette tax, writes Danny Vinik in the New Republic. "More laws inherently create more potentially violent confrontations between police and civilians."

The solution isn't to do away with cigarette taxes - or, by the same logic, any and all taxes.

"You can't have a society with no taxes unless you want a society with no government services - including the most basic public duties, such as police, that even conservatives support," he says.

Liberals act shocked and surprised by the cigarette tax argument, although it was being advanced months before this week's grand jury decision gave it extra prominence and bite.

When you view government as incompetent at best and evil at worst, any expansion of it will inevitably lead to bad results. As Ronald Reagan famously said: "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are 'I'm from the government, and I'm here to help'."

The difference now, however, seems to be a growing view on the right that the police, rather than protectors of civil society, are the jackbooted heel of an oppressive government.

That's something Ronald Reagan never would have said.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,571
54,467
136

No they weren't.

I have heard few stupider or more craven arguments than those like the one Rand Paul tried to make. As if the tax rates were lower he wouldn't have been selling them anyway.

This has nothing to do with if you agree or disagree with the law in question, this is entirely about the method of enforcing the law. Rand Paul just lacks the moral courage to admit what is obvious because he wants to run for president and he can't make the crazies mad by admitting the police were wrong.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
We're not Communist China. The banks are not required to issue loans. However, when you have multiple federal agencies dedicated to making home ownership easy, no bank will refuse easy money. Even after the financial crisis, government still has not learned its lesson:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/3529

Point is, government made it extremely easy for people to take out loans and then turned around and blamed banks when they exploited the government's underwriting facilities.



How is it self-serving? My point is that academia and the real world are very different. Those in their ivory towers see things from a theoretical POV. In the real world, it's a lot messier.

So government made it extremely easy for private sector banks to give loans to private citizens? And government is the problem.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
No they weren't.

I have heard few stupider or more craven arguments than those like the one Rand Paul tried to make. As if the tax rates were lower he wouldn't have been selling them anyway.

This has nothing to do with if you agree or disagree with the law in question, this is entirely about the method of enforcing the law. Rand Paul just lacks the moral courage to admit what is obvious because he wants to run for president and he can't make the crazies mad by admitting the police were wrong.

Others disagree with you...
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,571
54,467
136

Who gives a shit? The problem is obviously the way in which the law is enforced. Even if you don't agree with the law in question, enforcement strategies remain the same for other laws.

The only reason Rand Paul is trying to blame cigarette taxes is because he either doesn't understand how taxes work (very possible, as he adheres to Austrian exonomics) or he is so craven that he is unwilling to say what he knows to be true in order to pander to the republican base.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
BoFa checked out Countrywide but wanted to back out of the deal. Political pressure and some maneuvering resulted in the deal going through.

At the time, folks had been familiar with CW's garbage for years. Ken Lewis thought the long term value outweighed the initial shock of cleaning up Countrywide's obligations. Plus the "goodwill" pays off when you send lobbyists to Washington.

Not political pressure, but their economic desire to be on the good side of government and Fed in case they need a bail out later on. They could have backed out of the deal if they wanted to go it alone all private sector like.
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,041
136
Who gives a shit? The problem is obviously the way in which the law is enforced. Even if you don't agree with the law in question, enforcement strategies remain the same for other laws.

The only reason Rand Paul is trying to blame cigarette taxes is because he either doesn't understand how taxes work (very possible, as he adheres to Austrian exonomics) or he is so craven that he is unwilling to say what he knows to be true in order to pander to the republican base.

Ann Coulter also agrees with Randy, so you know it's nothing but pandering to the base.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
Not political pressure, but their economic desire to be on the good side of government and Fed in case they need a bail out later on. They could have backed out of the deal if they wanted to go it alone all private sector like.

I can see you've never dealt with the government at this level...
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |