Try the political quiz

45 Replies

 @9NP5YRQ  from Nevada answered…1 day1D

Yes, if it uses the individual or joint tax-payer’s income that would own the property, not the public.

 @9NNNY5J from New York answered…2 days2D

Government should curb real estate speculation, with measures should a allowing tax deductions for a person's primary residence only. Renters should get the tax deductions for the taxes on the properties they rent, as their primary residences.

 @9NMVK6D  from Washington answered…2 days2D

Everyone should be entitled to a home. We should create institutions that allow us to pool our resources and house our entire population.

 @9NKQVGF  from Arizona answered…3 days3D

Not financial assistance, but possibly interest rate reductions or elimination of MIP for those with a good credit rating.

 @9NHCDC7 from California answered…5 days5D

Yes, and bar corporations and private equity from buying homes, which reduces the available stock and increases prices.

 @9NGT8PN from Georgia answered…5 days5D

Subsidies should not be automatic. There should be a structure in place to qualify such as work history, citizenship status.

 @9NF4DKY from Alabama answered…6 days6D

I believe there needs to be more of a focus on making homes affordable to begin with so that the government doesn’t have to provide subsidies to more people who cannot afford it

 @9ND374B from Florida answered…7 days7D

Instead of a subsidy, reduce taxes and fees associated with the home purchase and give a big tax break on that year's federal income tax.

 @9N92GYS from North Carolina answered…1wk1W

Yes, but only for home buyers at or below a certain income threshold to avoid subsidizing the wealthy

 @9N5WBYD from Oregon answered…1wk1W

Yes, but it would be even better if the government built affordable high quality housing for the lower and middle class.

 @9N5299Q from Alabama answered…2wks2W

First time buyers could get a tax exemption but government should not be stealing money from citizens and then dispensing it back to the citizens like dog treats.

 @9N36579Republican from New York answered…2wks2W

 @9N349N3 from North Carolina answered…2wks2W

 @9MYMGYN from Georgia answered…2wks2W

Yes, but on a sliding scale, with the subsidy disappearing with an individual income over $100K

 @9MYFTRJRepublican from Ohio answered…2wks2W

 @9MTZNC4 from North Carolina answered…2wks2W

Yes, provided those homebuyers are active in the workforce and are low-to middle-income

 @9MS62CQLibertarian from Wisconsin answered…2wks2W

No. It's basic supply & demand. Profit will stop being made because nobody can afford prices anymore. But I sure will use any advantage offered when I buy.

 @9MRVLQQ from California answered…2wks2W

 @9MPX6ZBfrom Maine answered…2wks2W

Not direct subsidies, but lower down payment percentage requirements without charging penalties

 @9MPFVFPfrom Guam answered…2wks2W

 @9MMTS58 from Indiana answered…3wks3W

  @JcawolfsonIndependent  from Pennsylvania answered…3wks3W

 @9MM9F75Republican from Arkansas answered…3wks3W

I think a tiny amount just because it is their first time buying a home so it could be helpful to buy furniture or decorations.

 @9MM7VJZ from Texas answered…3wks3W

 @9MM5CPY from Minnesota answered…3wks3W

 @9MM4NFT from Virginia answered…3wks3W

 @9MM4HQS from California answered…3wks3W

This depends on the situation. Specifically who is buying the house for the first time? It depends because hypothetically it could be a couple who should have saved up. Or it could be a single parent attempting to buy a house. It really depends.

 @9MM4F35 from California answered…3wks3W

 @9MM2ZQVIndependent from North Carolina answered…3wks3W

Kind of, i feel it would be helpful but it would also help to check how much they make before just handing out that funding.

 @9MM2GZ4 from New Jersey answered…3wks3W

Yes, but the government should decrease the financial support over time

 @9MM28Y9Republican from Arkansas answered…3wks3W

Shouldn't move the house price down should just allow them to have an alright credit score and let them just pay smaller mortgages

 @9MM288V from New Jersey answered…3wks3W

Through time the subsidies should be lowered especially if they do not have children. If they cannot keep up with the payments then they should then stop receiving the subsidies.

 @9MLZQLY from Washington answered…3wks3W

It would be nice for first time house buyers but the overall population it wouldnt benefit all.

 @Dry550Independent  from Illinois answered…3wks3W

Yes, it’s very expensive buying a house, people should have help the first time, everybody deserves a house

 @9MLW5SH from Kansas answered…3wks3W

No, the government should focus on increasing the supply of housing, not allocating housing

 @9MLVFQR from Virginia answered…3wks3W

Government should regulate the housing market making it easier for everyone to compete.

 @9MLJPS7 from Texas answered…3wks3W

In todays economy, it wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world. If we’re talking 10/20 years ago when home-ownership was viable, then no.

 @9MLHY5W from Minnesota answered…3wks3W

The government should incentivize rather than subsidize first-time home ownership.

 @9MKYNGJ  from California answered…3wks3W

Yes, but the government should focus on incentivizing more housing to be built in the first place. If more housing were available, prices would be cheaper, and subsidies would not be as necessary.

 @6LV5ZML  from Washington answered…3wks3W

I think before handing out subsidies, we should pass other legislation that prioritizes and protects home ownership amongst American citizens, the middle and lower class, and post-boomer generations.

 @9MK75BXIndependent from Washington answered…3wks3W

Not really in the form of subsidies, although first-time homebuyers may benefit off a little bit of financial assistance.

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...3wks3W

Yes

 @9NMM2HS from Utah disagreed…2 days2D

I would imagine that if you support this, it would be because you are aware that the government has been messing with the prices and keeping them artificially high, so a "subsidy" is actually just making a dent in what market forces would ordinarily demand. If they break your legs, they owe you a crutch, at the very least.

However, I think the better option is to stop breaking legs. Propping up subsidies simply institutionalized a part of an industry that needs to be completely overhauled.

 @524STTZAmerican Solidarity disagreed…2 days2D

This would lead to the same conditions that caused the "Housing Bubble" to burst during the Great Recession.

Engagement

The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...