/edit: Also, nobody cares about your Communist/Green views except other Communists and Greens, and there aren't a lot of them in this world.
Then you don't need to worry about them.
The point was that this was a hijack. He could have just as easily made his own thread about property=theft and I would've visited it, thought that his point was more or less stupid (though I do agree that conservation needs a big kick and people need to stop being stupid about it) and left it at that.
But yes, btownmeggy, I agree, let's get this thread back on track.
The inflation rate in Zimbabwe just hit 4 million percent. Some people say it is only 165,000, but they are just being stupid. -Scott Adams, artist and writer of Dilbert
Hologram wrote: I do agree that conservation needs a big kick and people need to stop being stupid about it
Do you think conservation has any value at all? If so, what? How can we apply values of conservation (or anti-conservation), as you see them, in our everyday lives?
Hologram wrote: I do agree that conservation needs a big kick and people need to stop being stupid about it
Do you think conservation has any value at all? If so, what? How can we apply values of conservation (or anti-conservation), as you see them, in our everyday lives?
If you chop down a tree (for example), you plant one in it's stead. Or, like I mentioned earlier, chop down a few trees if they are infested with say, a wood beetle, in order to save countless more.
gdeangel wrote:
Now I'm the first guy who doesn't care for taxes, but then I'm thinking there's a simple way to fix this. Homes are not commodities. Homes are not capital investments any more than a car is (actually they are both depreciating non-performing assets... you just sink enough money into the house to constantly extend it's usable life semi-indefinitely). Right now, if you hold a house long enough, you get capital gains rates on the sale. Otherwise its ordinary income. Seems to me the missing piece of this puzzle is a tax on short term sales - short term being long enough to keep flippers from waiting it out, of course. Say you don't live in a house, and you sell within two years, I think ordinary income + penalty of 30% on the net profit (after costs I guess). 2-6 years... tax as ordinary income. 6+ years, capital gains. If you actually live in the house as primary residence, then current regime would still apply.
Just to get back to the original post. Not sure what the tax law is like in your neck of the woods, but in SA just because its a house being sold doesn't make it capital in nature, you actually have to see what the intention of the person is (whether he is in a profit making enterprise or whether he is just realizing an asset to its best value). So the guy who bought it to fix it and sell it would be paying ordinary income tax rather than capital gains tax, which is considerably heftier.
gdeangel wrote:
Now I'm the first guy who doesn't care for taxes, but then I'm thinking there's a simple way to fix this. Homes are not commodities. Homes are not capital investments any more than a car is (actually they are both depreciating non-performing assets... you just sink enough money into the house to constantly extend it's usable life semi-indefinitely). Right now, if you hold a house long enough, you get capital gains rates on the sale. Otherwise its ordinary income. Seems to me the missing piece of this puzzle is a tax on short term sales - short term being long enough to keep flippers from waiting it out, of course. Say you don't live in a house, and you sell within two years, I think ordinary income + penalty of 30% on the net profit (after costs I guess). 2-6 years... tax as ordinary income. 6+ years, capital gains. If you actually live in the house as primary residence, then current regime would still apply.
Just to get back to the original post. Not sure what the tax law is like in your neck of the woods, but in SA just because its a house being sold doesn't make it capital in nature, you actually have to see what the intention of the person is (whether he is in a profit making enterprise or whether he is just realizing an asset to its best value). So the guy who bought it to fix it and sell it would be paying ordinary income tax rather than capital gains tax, which is considerably heftier.
Whatever happened to buying a house as somewhere to live? We are obssessed with homeownership over here, but the UK housing market is in freefall, apparently, or is about to start, and a lot of the blame has to fall at the feet of investors. Too many people buying properties to let, as investments, soaking up the supply and pushing prices up even higher. A house should be a home, not an asset to be milked dry. At least the crash will allow more first-time buyers to afford their own place.
gdeangel wrote:
Now I'm the first guy who doesn't care for taxes, but then I'm thinking there's a simple way to fix this. Homes are not commodities. Homes are not capital investments any more than a car is (actually they are both depreciating non-performing assets... you just sink enough money into the house to constantly extend it's usable life semi-indefinitely). Right now, if you hold a house long enough, you get capital gains rates on the sale. Otherwise its ordinary income. Seems to me the missing piece of this puzzle is a tax on short term sales - short term being long enough to keep flippers from waiting it out, of course. Say you don't live in a house, and you sell within two years, I think ordinary income + penalty of 30% on the net profit (after costs I guess). 2-6 years... tax as ordinary income. 6+ years, capital gains. If you actually live in the house as primary residence, then current regime would still apply.
Just to get back to the original post. Not sure what the tax law is like in your neck of the woods, but in SA just because its a house being sold doesn't make it capital in nature, you actually have to see what the intention of the person is (whether he is in a profit making enterprise or whether he is just realizing an asset to its best value). So the guy who bought it to fix it and sell it would be paying ordinary income tax rather than capital gains tax, which is considerably heftier.
Whatever happened to buying a house as somewhere to live? We are obssessed with homeownership over here, but the UK housing market is in freefall, apparently, or is about to start, and a lot of the blame has to fall at the feet of investors. Too many people buying properties to let, as investments, soaking up the supply and pushing prices up even higher. A house should be a home, not an asset to be milked dry. At least the crash will allow more first-time buyers to afford their own place.
Part of the US problem is that homes have been built in the expectation of the two-or-more home trend continuing to expand, and the presence of these new and now often unwanted homes on the market, (which the builders are cutting prices on, desperate to get some return), is depressing the market generally.
Excuse me if this has been asked already but, what do you live in?
Not to be cliche, but blame the system, not the perhaps unwilling participant. Once our predecessors built white picket fences around everything worth having and gave it all a price, not much we can do besides bitch and moan.
heavycola wrote:haha my heart bleeds for all those poor people who will now only be able to afford one home. Really it does.
I know what you mean - but those people are only inconvenienced - but it's a bugger if you want to sell your (only) house, because you need to move (job, etc) and the housing market if glutted. (Not speaking from personal experience - I like my house and don't want to do the whole moving thing again for the foreseeable future. But I do know people who are going through this.)
When we moved here two years ago, most houses were selling within days of coming on the market, often at above the asking price. Now they can be on the market for months, with the asking price gradually dropping. Ironically an ideal time for those who still DO have lots of spare cash to buy a second home cheap.
heavycola wrote:Whatever happened to buying a house as somewhere to live? We are obssessed with homeownership over here, but the UK housing market is in freefall, apparently, or is about to start, and a lot of the blame has to fall at the feet of investors. Too many people buying properties to let, as investments, soaking up the supply and pushing prices up even higher. A house should be a home, not an asset to be milked dry. At least the crash will allow more first-time buyers to afford their own place.
I've said it before, though maybe not on these forums yet - property developers are the scum of the earth.
I'm moving to a new city next month, and I just turned in the rental application for an AWWWWESOME place built in 1785(!!!--though, according to my sister-in-law who helped me scout it out, "it looks it"... bizarrely, she meant that disparagingly), on the 1st floor, two bedrooms for the price I'm paying for one right now, and about a 2 minute walk from my new department.
AND THEN, yesterday afternoon I walked down to my garage and next to the garbage dumpster was an incredible antique, wing-backed couch with super-gauche pinky orange upholstery (only very mildy smelly and tattered). I lugged it upstairs and stuffed into into my already crammed living room because I simply cannot complete my forthcoming Regency Psychedelica decor scheme without it. I will move it across-country with me, and I will be so happy.
