patrick.net

I already walked down to my U.S. representatives office a few weeks ago where gave his office a letter as well as sitting down with the Chief of Staff and told them my feelings on all this bail out nonsense.

After visiting with my US Representative, I walked a couple more blocks to my state Assemblyman's office where I talked to an aide for about an hour regarding giving a large renters' credit to every renter in CA no matter how long they have lived in the property or what their income level is so they have an incentive to report the name and address of their landlord and trigger a red flag in Sacramento to make sure that the landlord is paying taxes on their passive income. I showed her the entire page in the CA tax booklet of who is and who isn't entitled to a measly $60.00 tax credit. She liked the idea and was sending my letter and ideas in an email up to the legislative aide and number crunchers in Sacramento to see the feasability of this idea. With 38 million folks in CA I suspect there are quite a few mom and pop landlords raking in a lot of tax free money. Only time will tell.

How about giving the bailouts after they liquidate all their assets? If it turns out that they really will sink, then bail them out. It feels like all this is just because they don't want to have any losses. PERIOD. This is no different than scamming worker's comp. Pretend you are crippled, and get a few bucks from the government.

rob918 says

I walked a couple more blocks to my state Assemblyman’s office where I talked to an aide for about an hour regarding giving a large renters’ credit to every renter in CA no matter how long they have lived in the property or what their income level is so they have an incentive to report the name and address of their landlord and trigger a red flag in Sacramento to make sure that the landlord is paying taxes on their passive income.

Then I'm pretty sure mom & pop landlords will raise their rent. The taxing will be passed along to the renters. The under the table savings is not only benefiting one side of the deal - rather both sides. I know there are market forces but I feel it's a little different for rent. If they do not rent, are they going to buy? Either they buy or go homeless if they are not as fortunate to have someone be able to provide them some shelter.