Trump Thread 2.0

[parkerbink]

easy fix raise the rents on your properties in high tax states to cover those new additional cost's.... Every other property manager and land lord will be doing the same, Remember business dont pay taxes the end consumers do, in this case your tenants ...

How do I charge myself rent on houses I own and use?

[mrsleeve]

My apologies, I assumed you would rent them when you were not using them, or they were purchased as investments, or kept as rental property when you moved on to a new place of residence.

Yes losing property tax deductions when you hold multiple properties in high tax areas for your exclusive use can be punitive in this case. Have you considered renting them out as short term / Vacation rentals to recoup some of your costs associated with ownership. Its what many rich people do with their 2ed 3rd 4th homes when they are not using them..... We have a lot of such homes generating such income in my area. You can rent a nice place for 1200 a month from Nov-March but April -Oct its 1200-2000 a week........

[parkerbink]

I wish that were an option. We go several times a year, as do my Parents and Brother.

If this remains the case we will have to look into losing the year-round use/rent them or sell them.

I just keep hearing (paraphrasing Trump) this tax plan hurts me believe me. Sure it does.

[Mediumrarechicken]

I wish that were an option. We go several times a year, as do my Parents and Brother.

If this remains the case we will have to look into losing the year-round use/rent them or sell them.

I just keep hearing (paraphrasing Trump) this tax plan hurts me believe me. Sure it does.

You have houses in nj and .ca? What sucks about NJ is they have the "we are mad you are leaving the state" tax, I think it's 5% and they take that out when you sell the house. Up side is you can sell it for an insane amount and build a dream house on a lake in a state that has lower cost of living, and have money left over for a boat for your pops. It's a shitty situation, but you can spin it to be perfect.

[parkerbink]

It's a COOP in Manhattan which has high taxes. We inherited a house in Paramus which we immediately sold for just the reasons you state.

[mbonder]

Yeah, I own in Northern NJ, the loss of the property/state tax deduction over $10k is going to hurt. Pretty much anyone that lives north of Princeton, NJ is getting slammed with the new tax bill.

[mrsleeve]

[Wschnitz]

Why are people still defending trump tho, its like willful ignorance of how obviously unfit he is.

That and Mcconnel and Ryan cannot stop lying.

[Mediumrarechicken]

Why are people still defending trump tho, its like willful ignorance of how obviously unfit he is.

That and Mcconnel and Ryan cannot stop lying.

He's doing just fine, very immature but just fine.

He's horrible, my stocks and 401k are doing fantastic and companies are able to free up more money to give to employees. Pathetic.

[mbonder]

It's actually a really interesting sociology case happening right in front of our eyes.

The economy is humming along in certain respects, mainly for those people that already have a stake in it (as many have pointed out here, 401k, retirement savings of other kinds, stock investments, real estate, etc).

However, if you didn't already have a stoke in the economy, you are actually not doing any better under Trump. Because you didn't have any money in the stock market you effectively haven't seen any gain in real wealth over the last year since he became president. I'm not blaming Trump for this though, as the same is true since 2008 and the beginning of the Obama Presidency, and probably even further back to the Bush years and his tax cuts. Real wealth for the people in the lower levels of the socio-economic ladder has actually dropped during the last 10 years (possibly 20).

This is the growing gap between the "haves" and the "have-nots". I find it interesting that no one is really willing to talk about it, maybe partially because they don't have a real solution to the problem that doesn't start to sound like a socialist experiment (which of course is bad, bad, bad), but also partially because of what many of you have echoed in this thread, "well I've got mine. I'm making money so I can easily ignore those that aren't because they obviously screwed up somewhere and are responsible for their demise."

So, I'm not saying that increased wealth in 401k accounts and companies willing to give bonuses to employees is a bad thing, however, don't people see it as a little, ahem, pathetic, that our country still has 40 million people that live in poverty? A rate that is much higher than all of the other developed countries of the world? For those 40 million, Trump isn't any better than Obama was, or Bush was, or Clinton. Isn't that Pathetic? That we as a country, with the most wealth by far of any nation on earth, can't even feed ALL of its people, house ALL of its people, provide at least some basic needs for ALL of its people?

In my eyes, that's the tragedy unfolding in front of everyone as the "haves" and trust me, I recognize that I'm one of them, continue to taught how awesome the stock market is doing or how Apple is bringing billions in tax sheltered money back to the US, while ignoring those that haven't benefitted in the least from such "pathetic" circumstances that have come to exist.

[Mediumrarechicken]

It's actually a really interesting sociology case happening right in front of our eyes.

The economy is humming along in certain respects, mainly for those people that already have a stake in it (as many have pointed out here, 401k, retirement savings of other kinds, stock investments, real estate, etc).

However, if you didn't already have a stoke in the economy, you are actually not doing any better under Trump. Because you didn't have any money in the stock market you effectively haven't seen any gain in real wealth over the last year since he became president. I'm not blaming Trump for this though, as the same is true since 2008 and the beginning of the Obama Presidency, and probably even further back to the Bush years and his tax cuts. Real wealth for the people in the lower levels of the socio-economic ladder has actually dropped during the last 10 years (possibly 20).

This is the growing gap between the "haves" and the "have-nots". I find it interesting that no one is really willing to talk about it, maybe partially because they don't have a real solution to the problem that doesn't start to sound like a socialist experiment (which of course is bad, bad, bad), but also partially because of what many of you have echoed in this thread, "well I've got mine. I'm making money so I can easily ignore those that aren't because they obviously screwed up somewhere and are responsible for their demise."

So, I'm not saying that increased wealth in 401k accounts and companies willing to give bonuses to employees is a bad thing, however, don't people see it as a little, ahem, pathetic, that our country still has 40 million people that live in poverty? A rate that is much higher than all of the other developed countries of the world? For those 40 million, Trump isn't any better than Obama was, or Bush was, or Clinton. Isn't that Pathetic? That we as a country, with the most wealth by far of any nation on earth, can't even feed ALL of its people, house ALL of its people, provide at least some basic needs for ALL of its people?

In my eyes, that's the tragedy unfolding in front of everyone as the "haves" and trust me, I recognize that I'm one of them, continue to taught how awesome the stock market is doing or how Apple is bringing billions in tax sheltered money back to the US, while ignoring those that haven't benefitted in the least from such "pathetic" circumstances that have come to exist.

What do you suggest to fix it? Preferably something that doesn't affect people that just get by.

I always comeback to the same question why does my hard earned money have to go to you because you can't make it. It's not my fault that you didn't take school serious and dropped out in 9th grade and the best job you've had in the last 15 years is arbys, or like a woman on my Facebook that I went to school with that has 4 kids from 4 different dad's from 16 years old to 3 years old. She complains about being poor then posts pix of her $400 tattoo that she just got and the next week she's saying she doesn't know how she's going to get her kids Christmas presents, rinse and repeat...

Call me callous it's ok, I'll tell you I lack empathy. I just get to a point where I say you fucked up your life, or you had shit parents that didn't teach you how to be a responsible adult, you had your chances but didn't change so this is what your life is, society shouldnt have to pull your weight so we are all equal. I'm not where I want to be and I've made bad choices and had bad luck, but I've never been a drag on society. Why are these people always?

[mrsleeve]

^^
Ummmmm Way more people are now participating in the economy and even more coming down the pike. Unemployment numbers are better, lower than they have been in a decade, across ALL demographics, some getting into historic low rates of unemployment.

More people working and participating means more people will be able to partake in the economic trends across the baord..... Just because many people dont own stock dose not mean they are not seeing any wealth from this. They are working providing for themselves and buying things and doing things for them selves thus making them richer. there by climbing the ladder to where they can buy stocks or have a their own IRA, if they are smart enough to think this way


Your not wrong real wage stagnation across the board has been going on since the 90's and the Clinton admin, when stacked up against inflation on day to day living expenses. There are a lot of factors that play into this taxes are a big part of that on the business side of things.

Yes there is a portion of the population that is plain and simple unemployable and this is true of all populations. We have plenty of safety and social nets to help those people get on their feet and handle their shit, and other programs for those that cant be functional, I dont disagree that 40m is a lot, but think about the fact that on a global scale those 40m people are likely still in the top 10% of wealth/income across the globe. Think about this those people that are having issues can now get a entry level job with Apple and one of the 20k+ jobs they are going to create or a job vacated by someone else taking one of the those apple jobs. Or get a entry level manufacturing job with Toyota/Mazda in AL with one of the new 4000 jobs they are creating with a new plant, or back in Detroit where Fiat is adding 2500 jobs at 1 plant and Ford and GM are adding production to the area, Toyota is building a huge new R&D facility in Ann Arbor, lots of investment happening and job creation in the US right now. Those are just ones I can think of off the top of my head, lots and thousands of small business will be adding 1 here 2 there 6 here, as time goes on, that will add up over time...

[mbonder]

Not disagreeing with you guys on any of the points you've made. I'm in no way advocating that money has to be redistributed from the people that have it to the people that don't. I'm just talking about creating opportunity for those people that want to move from not having anything into the category of having some.

For instance, why does the cost of living in certain areas of the country have to be so astronomically high? Specifically because the people that already have money have decided that they need to be able to make the most money possible, beyond what would have been seen as reasonable profit by past generations. Entire markets have been driven upward by the reality that landlords have decided that making decent profit wasn't good enough, tremendous profit would be better.

The same goes for Pharma companies, or insurance companies. Making $500m wasn't good enough, they need $5b. Or the banks. Some of them nearly sank the entire system in 2008, by 2010 they were making billions in profit on the backs of the bailouts that the regular joe (who got fucked in the whole crisis) paid for. But yet corporate profits are seen as important while real wages aren't.

I just don't know why people can't be satisfied with making millions instead of billions, with the idea that the money their not making could go to support jobs for thousands of other people. i guess it seems to me that the collective good has been scuttled in favor of the good of the minority.

(Once again, I'm not speaking because I don't have anything and I want a handout, I'm on the other side of this argument, my family is comfortable, we have retirement savings far beyond most people my age and money in the bank, I don't want people to get the wrong view here that I'm living on food stamps and made poor choices so that's why I'm railing against inequity)

[Mediumrarechicken]

Not disagreeing with you guys on any of the points you've made. I'm in no way advocating that money has to be redistributed from the people that have it to the people that don't. I'm just talking about creating opportunity for those people that want to move from not having anything into the category of having some.

For instance, why does the cost of living in certain areas of the country have to be so astronomically high? Specifically because the people that already have money have decided that they need to be able to make the most money possible, beyond what would have been seen as reasonable profit by past generations. Entire markets have been driven upward by the reality that landlords have decided that making decent profit wasn't good enough, tremendous profit would be better.

The same goes for Pharma companies, or insurance companies. Making $500m wasn't good enough, they need $5b. Or the banks. Some of them nearly sank the entire system in 2008, by 2010 they were making billions in profit on the backs of the bailouts that the regular joe (who got fucked in the whole crisis) paid for. But yet corporate profits are seen as important while real wages aren't.

I just don't know why people can't be satisfied with making millions instead of billions, with the idea that the money their not making could go to support jobs for thousands of other people. i guess it seems to me that the collective good has been scuttled in favor of the good of the minority.

(Once again, I'm not speaking because I don't have anything and I want a handout, I'm on the other side of this argument, my family is comfortable, we have retirement savings far beyond most people my age and money in the bank, I don't want people to get the wrong view here that I'm living on food stamps and made poor choices so that's why I'm railing against inequity)

Supply and demand is what drives up rent. Seattle has tons of tech people coming in and landlords know that, if you want to pay less you have to commute. Thing is you can live 40 miles away andnthe commute time is the same but the housing is half the price and you get more. Our society has money as a status symbol, the more you have the "cooler" your "friends" are.
If I had more money than I know what to do with i would help families out, I'd buyvthem a decent house, a reliable car and help them with classes to better themselves and get into a good career. Maybe one day I'll be able to provide a family with that. I'd feel good knowing I really helped 0eople vs donating to a charity that takes most of the money.

[mbonder]

See, I wish there were more people that felt that way, but it just seems as though those people that have the most have no interest in helping people in a direct way like that. Donating to a charity clears their conscience and that's the end of it.