Real estate investor and entrepreneur Grant Cardone sparked discussion online last week when he said he’d rather have the government print money than tax him.
“I would rather the government print money than tax me,” Cardone wrote on X.
“What would you rather – Printing or taxes? Why?”
Some users agreed with the idea of keeping more of what they earn. Others called it short-sighted, warning about the dangers of inflation.
“Firstly, the government doesn’t exist without taxes,” one person replied.
“Printing more USD devalues everyone’s net worth.”
Another wrote: “If the gov can print money, why do they need taxes at all? Why not just print the amount of the expenses and let everyone keep what they earned?”
Others, like crypto enthusiasts, dismissed fiat currency altogether. One said the dollar is already worthless.
“The choices you offer are irrational,” one posted. “The economy is not a zero-sum game.”
Cardone Promotes 50-Year Mortgages
The debate also tied into a second post from Cardone yesterday, where he compared monthly payments on 30-year vs. 50-year mortgages.
For a $500,000 loan at 6.15%, he claimed a 50-year mortgage would save about $321 per month.
“50 year mortgages are coming & so are lower interest rates,” he wrote.
He got slammed for it, with one person asking, “What’s the interest payment Mr. Cardon—you can’t possibly condone this.”
Another person mocked the long timeline, writing, “The US dollar may not exist in 50 years.” Others accused him of hiding the true cost of such loans.
“Very slick of you to not include the total amount paid to the lender after the 50 year period. This is ONLY good for the lenders and businessmen like you,” one person wrote.
Another warned, “This is an absolute joke. Those who do not learn from the Japanese mistakes are doomed to repeat it. What’s next? The 100 year mortgage???”
The backlash intensified after President Donald Trump formally proposed the 50-year mortgage as part of his housing agenda.
Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte confirmed the plan, calling it a “complete game changer.”
Mixed Reactions From Politicians and Industry Experts
Critics said longer mortgages just bury homeowners in more debt.
Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene posted: “It will ultimately reward the banks, mortgage lenders, and homebuilders while people pay far more in interest over time and die before they ever pay off their home. In debt forever, in debt for life!”
Real estate investor Graham Stephan also weighed in. “A 50-year mortgage would allow you to buy approximately 10 percent more house (or save about 10 percent) at the expense of nearly DOUBLING your payment schedule,” he wrote.
“Homeowners will have very little, if any, equity by the time they sell.”
Even those sympathetic to the goal of increasing affordability had doubts.
HousingWire lead analyst Logan Mohtashami said, “To add another subsidization to the market just prevents that healing process from occurring, which also prevents less equity build out as well.”
Supporters Highlight Flexibility
However, not all voices were critical. Investor John Pompliano wrote, “The 30-year mortgage is one of the best financial products available to Americans. 50 years is even better.”
Crypto analyst Wendy O said the longer term would give people more flexibility: “You can pay a mortgage off early. Not sure how else to lower home costs in 2025.”
Public Skepticism Remains Strong
Still, much of the public remains skeptical.
As one person put it plainly, “So a house that was $220K four-5 years ago is now $460K… and the solution… is just to be a slave to a mortgage an extra 20 years.”
The administration has not said when the policy might take effect. Until then, the public debate over taxes, printing money and mortgage terms is showing no signs of slowing down.