|
|
|
|
|
|
by tzs
1216 days ago
|
|
|
> I don't think we should care if someone has to sell their current home at a loss due to market conditions But they are only selling at a loss because under the proposal they would be heavily taxed if they wanted to hold on to the house and rent it out while they wait for the market to get better. > taken to its logical conclusion you're saying people shouldn't lose money which to have a functioning economy you have to reject No, they are saying that you should let people decide when they want to sell instead of making them sell when they will take a loss. That doesn't mean they won't lose money when they sell. It just means they can decide based on market conditions when to sell--which is what you want if you want a well functioning economy. |
|
|
Then don't sell, or don't rent it out, or just deal with it? I'm not sure why we should further subsidize homeowners.
> No, they are saying that you should let people decide when they want to sell instead of making them sell when they will take a loss. That doesn't mean they won't lose money when they sell. It just means they can decide based on market conditions when to sell--which is what you want if you want a well functioning economy.
Apply this same reasoning to stocks and let me know if you still agree with it.