[Alberta's Child]

This statement alone shows that you believe that all money rightly belongs to the government and any money that the government does not, by threat of violence, remove from a taxpayer's pocket is a "subsidy."

Baloney.

The example I cited earlier on this thread illustrates my point perfectly. If the tax code permitted me to deduct my monthly payments and insurance costs on a Ford car, but didn't extend this deduction to you because you own a Chevrolet, I am quite sure that you would rightly describe this as a "subsidy" for owners of Ford vehicles.

All tax breaks are not equal, despite the vehement objections of people here on this thread who derive a substantial benefit from the mortgage interest deduction. The fact that the government should allow people to keep as much of their money as possible does not make it right when it extends tax breaks to specific types of people at the expense of others.

By your logic, any tax break would be a good one because it does, after all, allow someone to "keep more of their own money." If that's the case, then I'd suggest that you would be perfectly comfortable to income tax breaks for African-Americans, for left-handed people, for gasoline costs for lime-green Toyotas, etc.

Did you know homeowners are taxpayers? Did you know they pay boo-coo property taxes, which are the primary source of funds for the socialist public education system? You seem pretty ignorant, so I just wanted to make sure.

You seem pretty ignorant, too. So I'll let you in on a little secret -- people who rent their homes are also taxpayers, and are also a source of funds for the socialist public school system, etc. If I own a home and rent it to a tenant, you can be damn sure that I'm including the property taxes in the tenant's rent. If my taxes are $4,500 per year on the home, then the rent I charge will include consideration for $375 per month in property taxes. If my property taxes go up to $6,000 per year, then the rent I charge is going to go up by $125 per month to account for the higher taxes.

So basically this is what it comes down to . . . You live in a house and pay $6,000 in property taxes directly, so you get an income tax deduction. My tenant lives in an identical house and pays $6,000 in property taxes indirectly through his rent, so he gets no deduction. How ridiculous is that -- you get a $6,000 deduction just because your municipality sent you a tax bill?

[E. Pluribus Unum]

By your logic, any tax break would be a good one because it does, after all, allow someone to "keep more of their own money."

Actually, I do believe that.

The fact that you don't means that you are a statist who believes that the government knows better than the individuals who earned it how to spend their money.