Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (266762)	1/1/2006 8:26:59 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578648

Eight years ago, capital-gains taxes were eliminated for home sellers who had profit of as much as $250,000 (for individuals) or $500,000 (for couples). That has created a vast amount of wealth and helped power a housing boom that has seen prices double or triple in Southern California and other hot markets. And the operative word is helped. There are far more significant factors at play here or you wouldn't be able to buy a 4 bedroom home on half an acre in Danville, Illinois for $68K. realtor.com Nor would Jacksonville, FLA have a housing median price of $164K which is less than half PB's median price of $386K, a city 500 miles down the coast. Why do you think that is, Jim? Its the same state and Jacksonville is certainly attractive enough and its fairly close to the ocean. So, Jim, why is there such a huge difference in the medians between PB and Jacksonville when they are subject to the exact same tax laws? And don't blow this question off like you have all the rest. If you insist on your silly contention, then defend it with real facts, not conjecture or an article that suggests it may be part of the problem. fortune.com BTW....this paragragh below was from the same article: "Bush specifically charged the panel to take account of "the importance of homeownership and charity in American society." That led many to conclude that the homeowner deductions were safe. ... But ... the mood changed over the summer. ... One reason for the shift: the expected demise of the alternative minimum tax. ... At a meeting in July, the nine panel members agreed unanimously to recommend eliminating the alternative minimum tax as an unfair and poorly designed parallel tax system. Because their mandate is to be revenue-neutral, that required them to come up with $1.2 trillion in other receipts over the next decade..." It seems the only reason they are thinking of eliminating the capital gains tax cut is because they have to make up for revenue that was previously cut. In other words, they had to justify reinstating the capital gains and what better way to do that than to suggest that elimination of the tax cut on capital gains "helped power" the housing bubble in S. CA. Leave it to Republicans to twist and spin the facts to suit whatever purpose they have......whether its to make up for lost revenues, or to denigrate a former president who was a Democrat. ;~)