Homeowners may be better off than renters now but they are all slated to become renters. "You will own nothing…" is not just an empty slogan. End the Fed and drain the swamp is easier said than done. I’d like to see a discussion about how do we begin to bring about real change. We can safely assume that voting for pre-selected candidates of the two political corporations will never deliver the desired results.
This is great work, the Fed are now trying to destroy the middle classes to make them beg for a new system. They are succeeding as the masses are happy wallowing in their ignorance. Digital currency, digital IDs and social credit scores here we come...
It seems that the US Senate is the arm of an oligarchy, where each senator is funded by an oligarch or foreign government like Egypt. The 16th and 17th amendments broke down the relationship of the federal government to the states which formerly held supremacy over the federal government. The states held control of the purse strings through the Senate which represented the state legislatures which had to write the checks to the federal government which now the citizens have their taxes confiscated bypassing the states and Senate. Only oligarchs can fund the expensive campaigns for senate, instead of election by legislature prior to the 17th. Clinton said it: No controlling legal authority. The states had it, but threw it away. Too much work I guess.
I also think there are a lot of people today, mostly in cities probably, that are saving money renting in their area compared with buying a home.
That becomes much more attractive if you can invest the extra money you are saving.
Buying a home in the neighborhood some folks want to live could cost thousands of dollars more per month, which is likely better spent invested in an index fund, or dare I say something like Bitcoin! Or a mix of course!
DR. Pete enjoyed your reply very much, past my snark I do understand when the inflation leaves assets we may enter a period where assets deflate, and consumables continue to inflate. all the best.
Bullshit. Homeowners are dealing with tripled levels of property taxes, massive increases in home repairs and costs, etc. Many homeowners are having to rent out rooms just to make ends meet and pay their property taxes...aka..renting your own home from the county.
Informative summary of the problem. Nice to see the median used rather than the mean.
Rental and housing affordability is extreme in coastal California where I reside. I keep wondering where this is headed, economically and social stability? Many of the California homeowners will be deceased in a decade or two. Will there be sufficient buyers for these homes to support the present values? Plus, rising home insurance, energy, and mortgage costs are adding to the headwinds of ownership. Present trend suggests there'll be a lot more renters which has some social downsides. Perhaps, much of this will get inflated away in nominal USDs. There are other ways this could go but I'm not sure what they are at the moment.
Is there data on the effect of illegal immigration on inflation? My intuition is that it’s suppressing inflation in the service and manufacturing sectors but I’m be curious what your thoughts are regarding its impact
Very good points about owners versus renters. Economist question: The supply of housing, measured in the number of housing units ( ,000s / ,000 persons) has remained stable since 2000, according federal stats. Yet median rents have almost doubled since then, and median housing prices have well more than doubled. How does an economist answer that? One answer is that demand increased because easy money allowed for real estate speculation, (aka turning other people's housing need into my chance for turning an investment profit)? Besides looking at monetary policy, we should also look at profit-sector v. not for profit sector housing supplies, or limiting the scope of housing as an investment vehicle. See the city of Vienna for a workable solution to bringing down the cost of housing.
Great perspective, Peter. I would start looking at competition. If a company succeeds in a competitive market providing innovative products and services it generates sufficient revenues to pay its people well. Based on that they can use some of their income to save for a down payment and hen ultimately buy a house. Not only does this accomplishment elevate people in status and give them all the benefits you describe, but it also lowers the burden during retirement years when no more mortgage or rent payments are needed. Wouldn't that be a great idea? - Ohh, wait, we had that, and then we got greedy and wanted to eliminate the wages by moving the production to China and services to India. Now that we see that that was a mistake, we don't try to compete again. We just increase the nationalistic and protectionist measures weekly, invent new terms, like overcapacity, something I learned growing up in Germany as an export economy, and creating a cocoon that will help those who already have a home unproportionally. The public bashing of the few successful innovators and their companies is juts fueling the demise. In the long run the G7 will not be able to matter much anymore if they keep going down this path, IMHO.
The government is made up of rich people so it becomes obvious that they want to protect themselves at the expense of others. But how many became rich because the masses were marketed for that reason? Most of these rich people would be paupers if not for millions of consumers going broke buying their crap.
Homeowners may be better off than renters now but they are all slated to become renters. "You will own nothing…" is not just an empty slogan. End the Fed and drain the swamp is easier said than done. I’d like to see a discussion about how do we begin to bring about real change. We can safely assume that voting for pre-selected candidates of the two political corporations will never deliver the desired results.
This is great work, the Fed are now trying to destroy the middle classes to make them beg for a new system. They are succeeding as the masses are happy wallowing in their ignorance. Digital currency, digital IDs and social credit scores here we come...
The rich get a Gold Mine, we get the shaft.
Good article. You've re-phrased the problem of the widening income gap well.
It seems that the US Senate is the arm of an oligarchy, where each senator is funded by an oligarch or foreign government like Egypt. The 16th and 17th amendments broke down the relationship of the federal government to the states which formerly held supremacy over the federal government. The states held control of the purse strings through the Senate which represented the state legislatures which had to write the checks to the federal government which now the citizens have their taxes confiscated bypassing the states and Senate. Only oligarchs can fund the expensive campaigns for senate, instead of election by legislature prior to the 17th. Clinton said it: No controlling legal authority. The states had it, but threw it away. Too much work I guess.
This makes sense to an extent.
I also think there are a lot of people today, mostly in cities probably, that are saving money renting in their area compared with buying a home.
That becomes much more attractive if you can invest the extra money you are saving.
Buying a home in the neighborhood some folks want to live could cost thousands of dollars more per month, which is likely better spent invested in an index fund, or dare I say something like Bitcoin! Or a mix of course!
DR. Pete enjoyed your reply very much, past my snark I do understand when the inflation leaves assets we may enter a period where assets deflate, and consumables continue to inflate. all the best.
Bullshit. Homeowners are dealing with tripled levels of property taxes, massive increases in home repairs and costs, etc. Many homeowners are having to rent out rooms just to make ends meet and pay their property taxes...aka..renting your own home from the county.
Tripled?
Informative summary of the problem. Nice to see the median used rather than the mean.
Rental and housing affordability is extreme in coastal California where I reside. I keep wondering where this is headed, economically and social stability? Many of the California homeowners will be deceased in a decade or two. Will there be sufficient buyers for these homes to support the present values? Plus, rising home insurance, energy, and mortgage costs are adding to the headwinds of ownership. Present trend suggests there'll be a lot more renters which has some social downsides. Perhaps, much of this will get inflated away in nominal USDs. There are other ways this could go but I'm not sure what they are at the moment.
Is there data on the effect of illegal immigration on inflation? My intuition is that it’s suppressing inflation in the service and manufacturing sectors but I’m be curious what your thoughts are regarding its impact
Very good points about owners versus renters. Economist question: The supply of housing, measured in the number of housing units ( ,000s / ,000 persons) has remained stable since 2000, according federal stats. Yet median rents have almost doubled since then, and median housing prices have well more than doubled. How does an economist answer that? One answer is that demand increased because easy money allowed for real estate speculation, (aka turning other people's housing need into my chance for turning an investment profit)? Besides looking at monetary policy, we should also look at profit-sector v. not for profit sector housing supplies, or limiting the scope of housing as an investment vehicle. See the city of Vienna for a workable solution to bringing down the cost of housing.
50 Mill illegals need a place to stay.
Great perspective, Peter. I would start looking at competition. If a company succeeds in a competitive market providing innovative products and services it generates sufficient revenues to pay its people well. Based on that they can use some of their income to save for a down payment and hen ultimately buy a house. Not only does this accomplishment elevate people in status and give them all the benefits you describe, but it also lowers the burden during retirement years when no more mortgage or rent payments are needed. Wouldn't that be a great idea? - Ohh, wait, we had that, and then we got greedy and wanted to eliminate the wages by moving the production to China and services to India. Now that we see that that was a mistake, we don't try to compete again. We just increase the nationalistic and protectionist measures weekly, invent new terms, like overcapacity, something I learned growing up in Germany as an export economy, and creating a cocoon that will help those who already have a home unproportionally. The public bashing of the few successful innovators and their companies is juts fueling the demise. In the long run the G7 will not be able to matter much anymore if they keep going down this path, IMHO.
The government is made up of rich people so it becomes obvious that they want to protect themselves at the expense of others. But how many became rich because the masses were marketed for that reason? Most of these rich people would be paupers if not for millions of consumers going broke buying their crap.