The Way Forward: End Tax Expenditures

[Winchester]

[Winchester]

[The Dharma Bum]

[The Dharma Bum]

[Winchester]

[Revenant]

[Revenant]

[Mathurin]

The main benefit of home ownership is not ended at single family dwellings. If a person owns the apartment they are getting pretty much the same possible advantages and disadvantages of owning a home, all with a reduced environmental cost overall.

Apartments do not have to be tiny cells.
Also, tiny cells are not inherently bad if the occupant has other options and chooses the tiny one for whatever reason they wish. (for instance, to save money for the future or to send to relatives elsewhere)


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/n ... 491365.stm
These men are living in tiny dungeon cells, not because they dont have the money for anything else, but because they are saving for a future.

[Hyperion]

Gotta love the obtrusive desire to reduce the American standard of living that pervades many of these threads. Mathurin, I am really floored that you provided such an article as that to justify your explanations. Why would you even link to something that tells of desperation resulting from the one-child policy? These men are living in closets so that they can possibly purchase a house 10 years down the road and thus find a wife and start a family. Is that really admirable to you?

Social policy is meant to lift standards, not reduce them. It's not machismo or respectable for a population to save up penance after 70 hours of a work a week. It's downright disgraceful.

The environmental argument is also inaccurate. Apartment ownership is covered by the mortgage reduction. Urban dwellers aren't buying their apartments outright. For most Americans, a house (or apartment) is the largest, safest, and smartest investment they can make; the value of property appreciates over time, allowing for an additional level of security once you retire. Yes, home/apartment ownership should be encouraged. Unless you're poor or don't like handling financial nuances, renting provides no net benefits besides putting a roof over your head. People don't live in the cities because property values are extraordinarily high due to lack of space and the higher rates of crime, not because of the tax credit. Suburban sprawl started to occur even prior to the implementation of the income tax.

Encouraging even more reliance on rentals when the future of retirement for this generation is close to becoming a pipe dream is just.. retarded, to put it nicely. Young adults, the odd family, and new migrants should be living in apartments, not the majority of Americans. Driving up costs is a secondary, remote consideration.

[Kane]

But I don't think the current model is sustainable. Mobility will require people to leave their homes more than American's have had to in the past. Buying a home as a 30 year investment is only a good investment if you can somehow guarantee that you'll be there for all of it. Sprawl will continue to be an issue as gas prices and energy prices continue to rise. Commuting will become less and less attractive.

Variables are increasing at a rate that makes home ownership a riskier investment for the average american.