A Perpetual Seller’s Market Can’t Last Forever
A report from the Washington Post. “For the past few years, sellers have had all the power in the local real estate market. Today’s buyers and sellers are accustomed to a market marked by rapidly increasing prices, low inventory, fast offers and bidding wars. But real estate is cyclical and a perpetual seller’s market can’t last forever. We are sensing a subtle shift. Pickier buyers with less urgency are meeting sellers with unrealistic expectations that we’re still in the hot spring market. This dynamic is reflected in the slower rate of price growth across the region and the notable price decline in Washington. Shifts in the real estate market don’t happen overnight, but buyers may be regaining a bit more of the bargaining power.”
From CNBC on New York. “New York’s 1,000-foot-tall symbol of luxury is becoming a monument to the condo slowdown. Last week, Unit 79 of the condo tower called One57 became the biggest foreclosure sale ever in New York. It went at auction for $36 million — marking a 30 percent decline from its purchase price of $51 million in 2014. An analysis of recent resales at One57 shows that every apartment that has traded since it opened in 2014 or 2015 has declined in value — all by double digits.”
“Unit One 62A was purchased for $31.6 million in April 2014. In October 2016 it sold for $23.5 million, a 26 percent decline. Unit 65A originally sold for $29.3 million in 2014, but was sold in April 2017 for $22.5 million. And some of the declines were even faster. Unit 51C sold for $20.4 million in April 2015. It sold eight months later for $17.7 million.”
“‘It’s clear that 2014 was the peak,’ said Jonathan Miller of Miller Samuel. ‘It was a perfect storm. You had capital pouring into the real estate development market from overseas. And we had just come off the financial crisis and you had this new product coming on, with the feeling that everything was skewing toward the wealthy. Everyone thought this was some sort of new world that would go on forever. But it was not sustainable.’”
The Casper Star Tribune in Wyoming. “A real estate tax proposed by a Jackson lawmaker could allow voters to levy a fee on the sale of expensive property in Teton County. Rep. Andy Schwartz, a Democrat, said the tax has long been discussed and highlights the need for local governments to be able to raise money independently. ‘The state can’t support them,’ Schwartz said. ‘We need, as the Legislature, to take responsibility for giving them opportunities to take new revenue streams.’”
“Wyoming Realtors president Devon Viehman, herself a Jackson real estate agent, said that while she was not familiar with the details of the bill, the Realtors organization opposed taxing property sales regardless of whether the tax applied to all homes or was tiered. ‘You can’t target Teton County just because of the wealthy second-, third-, fourth-, fifth-home owners we have here,’ Viehman said. ‘Anything they do to make it more expensive to buy and sell is going to be detrimental to our locals.’”
The Palm Beach Post in Florida. “A tax bill making its way through the U.S. House of Representatives could slash Florida home values by 13 percent, Realtors said Monday. Realtors harbor ‘grave concerns’ about a Republican proposal to reduce the tax deduction for mortgage interest, end write-offs for property taxes and boost capital-gains taxes on home sales, said Maria Wells, president of Florida Realtors. ‘That would affect the economy in all sorts of ways,’ Wells said. ‘We know that housing is the canary in the coal mine.’”
“Proponents of the bill argue that less generous tax breaks for homeowners would be offset by a near doubling of the standard tax deduction, to $24,400 for married couples in 2018. Realtors and many Democrats aren’t buying that argument. They say less generous tax incentives for homeownership could make homeownership less attractive both to first-time buyers and to second-home buyers. ‘Most likely we are going to see a significant drop in the value of people’s homes,’ said U.S. Rep. Lois Frankel, D-West Palm Beach. ‘Why? Because the demand for housing will go down.’”
From Your Central Valley in California. “On Tuesday, real estate and building industry advocates urged GOP delegates to vote no on the new GOP tax plan. ‘It removes the incentives for home ownership that we’ve enjoyed for 100 years, over 100 years in the tax code. This would be devastating for the California housing market,’ said Steve White, California Association of Realtors.”
“Gary Carter a broker with Movoto Real Estate in Fresno says the plan could change how many people are buying and how long they wait to do so. ‘Some of the individuals who need the incentives. They won’t be able to qualify cause it will be gone. They won’t be able to buy their first home,’ said Carter.”
The Orange County Register in California. “The California Association of Realtors is fighting back against GOP tax reform plans, taking out full-page ads in seven California newspapers calling on state Republicans to oppose provisions curtailing tax benefits of homeownership. Measures seeking to curb mortgage interest deductions, property tax deductions and capital gains exemptions will dampen homebuying while ‘punishing’ millions of other California homeowners, the ads say.”
“Half of all existing California houses sold in September cost $555,410 or more, according to CAR data. Half of all condos or townhomes cost $450,000. In Orange County, almost 63 percent of all homes sold this year so far — houses, townhomes and condos — cost $600,000 or more, and 48 percent cost $700,000 or more, figures from CoreLogic show. California homes selling for more than $1 million also would be affected by the House proposal to limit property tax deductions to $10,000. The Senate version of the tax bill retains the $1 million mortgage interest deduction limit but eliminates all property tax deductions.”
“‘The average California house costs two-and-a-half times the national average,’ the ad states. ‘Only 32 percent of California families are able to purchase a median-priced home. With homeownership already a stretch, or out of reach altogether for so many Californians, now is not the time to make owning a home more difficult.’”
“The GOP tax plans have put Republican members of the California congressional delegation on the spot, with a half-dozen saying they oppose it, are undecided or have yet to express an opinion because they’re facing tough re-election fights, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Tuesday. U.S. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, a Republican from Bakersfield, issued a statement this week defending the tax plan, saying it amounts to a tax cut when all provisions are taken into account. McCarthy blames California Democrats for the state’s tax burden, citing the recent 12 cents per gallon tax increase. Democrats ‘newfound concern for the high tax burden is laughable,’ McCarthy said.”
From the last link:
‘The CAR ads also criticize a Senate proposal to eliminate state income tax and local property tax deductions. The ads appeared Tuesday, Nov. 14 in editions of the Orange County Register, Los Angeles Times, San Diego Union-Tribune, Bakersfield Californian, Sacramento Bee, Fresno Bee and Modesto Bee. Ads also appeared in the Washington edition of the Wall Street Journal and Politico.’
Not the Modesto Bee! Jeebus that must have cost a pretty penny. Calm down guys. Maybe a collective foot stamping would be more practical. After all, you may be looking for a new job soon.
They’re so proud of their criminal approach that they advertise it in newspapers.
Who still reads newspapers? Do they still exist?
Maybe they are targeting bird cage enthusiasts?
‘Only 32 percent of California families are able to purchase a median-priced home.
30% of households usually rent, while ~70% (at most) buy. So 32% of total families is really 50% of the buyer pool. So wouldn’t half the population buying half the houses be rather normal?
F-00ks given about the plight of Californians: zero point zero
“30% of households usually rent, while ~70% (at most) buy. So 32% of total families is really 50% of the buyer pool. So wouldn’t half the population buying half the houses be rather normal?”
Oh you and your math and stuff!! LOL
But you’re absolutely right. The median income/median housr price is meaningless since, as you point out, the pool of buyers is a small fraction of the overall population.
Median household includes college students earning $5000 a year working part time. It includes retirees on SS who have no plans to buy a home ever again. It includes 3rd generation welfare kings and queens who will never get out of their Section 8 apartments.
The only real demographic that is relevant is 25-55 year olds with a full time job. That is the vast majority of home buyers. Sure there are exceptions, but generally that’s the group of people who buy homes. Take the median income of those people and you’ll find that a lot more than 32% can afford to buy a median home, even in California.
“Median household includes college students earning $5000 a year working part time…”
Please consider that the student does not bring the family income down.
“Please consider that the student does not bring the family income down.”
That’s not what I meant. Take a student living in an off campus apartment earning $5K a year from a part time job. That “household” is counted in the median household income.
And I don’t even know why the term family is used since that is such a loaded term as well. Is a single person a “family”? Is it a family when grandma and grandpa live with the husband/wife/kids?
Do they use it as shorthand for household? It sounds like they mean household but given the laziness and lack of knowledge by the MSM, they use the word family.
I suspect the student is counted as part of the parent’s household in most cases.
And I don’t even know why the term family is used since that is such a loaded term as well. Is a single person a “family”? Is it a family when grandma and grandpa live with the husband/wife/kids?
It’s the people peddling fake and distorted statistics who use the term “household income” to hide the truth. What matters is house affordability on a single income.
Students making $5K a year are why they use the median and not the mean. And yes, “household income” is quite the umbrella. I still recall my neighbors from the old townhouse. Their house contained (guessing) one breadwinner father ($$), a mother who babysat kids ($), middle-aged disabled man (SSDI), and two grandparents (2xSS). They must have made the rent by cobbling together all those checks.
You’re leaving out all the specuvestors who buy single family homes and condos and rent them to the those in the non-owner group.
The prices paid by the investors should be determined by the incomes of the renters, but they’re not. As with other real estate, they are being driven by loose lending standards, the Fed’s easy money policies and the madness of the infestors.
“So 32% of total families is really 50% of the buyer pool…”
That really is a logic fail. Suppose that half the perpetual renters could afford to buy. That would mean only 20% of those who “own” a home could actually afford to buy one, a median priced one anyway. Maybe most of the rest can afford to “buy” something below median, who knows.
Anyway, if you have to borrow for decades to buy something, you can’t afford it.
“Anyway, if you have to borrow for decades to buy something, you can’t afford it.”
Then I guess every Fortune 100 company can’t afford to exist, since they all have billions in outstanding debt. And most of that debt is in terms of bonds with decades long maturities.
The difference is those are profitable corporations unlike homeowners who are cashflow negative and use HELOC’s to make it to the next month and year.
One of our more eloquent and wise contributors here stated it like this;
If you have to borrow for 15 or 30 years, you can’t afford it nor is it affordable.
‘they all have billions in outstanding debt. And most of that debt is in terms of bonds with decades long maturities’
I’m not impressed when they use junk bonds to buy back their stock. That’s bordering on ponzi-nomics.
Apple, which has $250B in cash, also has $100B in debt. When it costs close to 0% to borrow money, you’d have to be crazy to NOT borrow.
When you’re operating at a loss like most of the tech companies, you have to borrow to keep the charade going.
Apple is operating at a loss? News to me.
When you’ve gotta borrow just to keep traction, you’re losing money. Alot of money.
Apple is borrowing to pay a dividend while avoiding the cost of repatriating the money (which is largely held overseas).
“Apple is borrowing to pay a dividend”
FY17 EPS was $9.21 and dividend was $2.46. Plenty of profit to pay out a dividend.
Of course. My point is that debt levels CAN be deceiving given the reasons for obtaining the debt.
I do find it ridiculous to compare the cash hoards of substantially unlevered tech companies (Google) to the cash hoard of Apple (that now has $100B of debt).
When it costs close to 0% to borrow money, you’d have to be crazy to NOT borrow.
Isn’t that why Slack is borrowing so much money, because they can?
Then I guess every Fortune 100 company can’t afford to exist, since they all have billions in outstanding debt. And most of that debt is in terms of bonds with decades long maturities.
Just yesterday Ben posted a YouTube link about a business unable to roll over its debts.
“……..Anyway, if you have to borrow for decades to buy something, you can’t afford it….”
Yes, it is much smarter to pay ever increasing rent for 6 decades, than to lock in a lower fixed housing cost and own it free and clear in a few decades!
Buying my house in 2010 was $400/mon cheaper than renting (PITI + HOA, excluding maintenance). Additionally, $600/mon goes to principal reduction. $1,000/mon win-win. The fact the hoyse has increased in value $300,000 is just a bonus.
In CA, the homeownership rate is closer to 55%.
But the number of new homes constructed for sale each year is in the range of ~50-70k, with about 5.5 million renters.
So, each year, to absorb the net increase in owner occupied housing, it ain’t the renter of median income that matters.
Generally speaking, renters earn less than those who own homes…HOWEVER, there are plenty of homeowners in CA who are retired and won’t move due to the protection of prop 13…even if the house is bigger than they need now. My folks and my in-laws are a small sample size, but they are not unique.
So, whatever numbers you see about the median income of owner-occupants in CA is skewed downward by retirees who are protected by prop 13.
My point: Median price of home relative to median income becomes less and less meaningful as an indicator the lower the homeownership rate, and the less supply is being added. Homeownership in CA is a relatively rich person’s game.
So, why is the left trying to protect California’s elites by saving the MID?
“So, why is the left trying to protect California’s elites by saving the MID?”
That’s a Mighty good question for somebody.
The left lies. About everything. Always.
“So, why is the left trying to protect California’s elites by saving the MID?”
because the left is all about special interests, like the MID is.
because the left is all about special interests, like the MID is ??
Because the right is all about special interest, like the farm subsidies are….
There…I fixed it for you…
Are the Kochs on the “right”? Because they want to get rid of all corporate welfare.
plenty of homeowners in CA who are retired and won’t move due to the protection of prop 13 ??
In high housing cost area’s like SV, for many its not about prop #13 its about Federal & State taxes…I have a friend that has a basis of less than $100,000…The house is worth something around 2 mil…You do the math and tell me what his tax consequence is if he sells…
I might add, if he dies, his estate pays “zero” tax…Pretty strong reason to stay in place….
Yup. My relatives in Sunnyvale are doing exactly that, and they have lived there since the 1960s. It will be their toe-tag house, which the kids will inherit (and probably have to then sell to divide the assets between them).
I have a friend that has a basis of less than $100,000…The house is worth something around 2 mil…You do the math and tell me what his tax consequence is if he sells…
The tax consequence is, in round numbers, $500k (without consideration for the SALT deduction).
He’s saving about $20k per year due to prop 13.
In this example, you are correct. I can see the impediment to selling.
However:
Without Prop 13, his home value would be lower. Long ago, when his tax hit was much, much less for selling, his property taxes would have been a multiple of what they are now. Many people in his shoes would have sold and moved to a more inexpensive locale–long ago, regardless of the (much smaller) tax hit.
Sounds like speculation. If the price fell 10% and the owner expected it to fall substantially more, he’d rush to sell it tomorrow, taxes be damned.
Maybe, but with the automatic step-up in basis on death, I suspect it’s simple math.
Either move now and the government gets $500k, or never move (die while owning the home), and your kids get $500k.
The only “speculation” is that the price doesn’t go down by more than 25% before you die.
The primary speculation is that it goes up 500k. Think about the amount here for the back ground speculation. This is a big amount to have parachute in for doing nothing. This tax stuff I hear about stocks too. But if the idea that it could drop a lot appears: dang the taxes Martha, let’s sell it before we lose half. And it could lose that much or more.
“…toe-tag house…”
If I never hear nor see this nauseating term again, I’ll be happier for it.
Agreed.
What’s wrong with that term? It’s a perfect and usually accurate description.
And I’d much rather die at home than in some nursing home that reeks of urine.
I find the term endearing.
Hoof Tag
Vienna, VA Housing Prices Crater 6% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/vienna-va/market-trends/
CA who are retired and won’t move due to the protection of prop 13…even if the house is bigger than they need now. ”
they can move that right ? within county only maybe
Not outside the state, with some limitations within the state, I believe.
And it’s having it’s effect already.
San Jose(Evergreen), CA Housing Prices Crater 9% YOY
https://www.zillow.com/evergreen-san-jose-ca/home-values/
HA! Is that you. You are hilarious! Pick a zip code with 10 houses for sale and call it an analysis!
HA, Ha, ha, ha….
If you think San Jose is cratering, you need to move out of your mom’s rust belt basement and get some sunshine in your life!
DebtDonkey
Oakton, VA Housing Prices Crater 14% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/oakton-va/market-trends/
‘Gary Carter a broker with Movoto Real Estate in Fresno says the plan could change how many people are buying and how long they wait to do so. ‘They won’t be able to buy their first home’
What’s the first timer affordability ratio now Gary? 15%? Lower? Weren’t you cheering every month for the last 60 something months that prices went up, sometimes by double digits? Man you sleazeballs have no shame.
I live in CA and if eliminating the state income tax and property tax deduction would add sanity to this home buyer feeding frenzy I’m all for it.
Interest rates are headed up. That will do it. This tax thing is most instructive because it shows a ho-Lotta-hypocrisy.
hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform; pretense.
synonyms: dissimulation, false virtue, cant, posturing, affectation, speciousness, empty talk, insincerity, falseness, deceit, dishonesty, mendacity, pretense, duplicity;
They Grubered the entire country and now cry about Trump…
I doubt eliminating the SALT deduction will have any measurable effect. Doubling the personal exemption will compensate for it.
The affordability index as measured by CAR is at 28% as of Q3 2017.
Definitely below the long-term average, but not at a low.
From January 1991 to December 2002, the average affordability was 35%.
Then it steadily declined from about 30% at that point to 11% in Q3 2007. That’s peak bubble, crazy-ass low.
The high was 56% in Q1 2011.
It was back down to 32% by Q3 2013.
The average since then was 31%.
I asked what the percentage was for first time buyers, who this UHS was blabbering about. It sure as heck isn’t 30%.
It’s all in the definition.
CAR assumes a 10% down borrower, who takes out an ARM, and the PITI being no more than 40% of the household’s income.
With that definition, their first time affordability measure is 47%, which you and I both know is bullsh*t. However, using that same bullsh*t methodology, the low was 26% in 2007.
In CA, there is a fair split between the coast and inland…coastal RE is full-on batsh*t crazy. Inland hasn’t come close to catching up.
San Bernardino’s “first time” affordability rating is 68%.
Orange County and LA? 40%.
CAR’s happy talk is merely a detraction from the disastrous state of the economy, poverty, crime and the record high levels of housing inventory in conjunction with record low demand. Those symptoms won’t change until these fundamental problems are addressed.
The realtors comments in the various stories on the new tax plan are hilarious…instead of even more Californians being shut out of the market just MAYBE prices will drop instead and that in turn might pop the bubble. I’d be happy to see that and might consider buying again, tried to buy in 2011/2012 but was shut out by all cash flippers and speculators and since then prices in the wine country have roughly doubled. It remains to be seen how the recent fires affect the local economy and RE market. Was not affected personally but like just about everyone local I know many people who lost everything 5 weeks ago.
“Was not affected personally but like just about everyone local I know many people who lost everything 5 weeks ago.”
The people who perished “lost everything.”
‘You can’t target Teton County just because of the wealthy second-, third-, fourth-, fifth-home owners we have here’
I have to say Devon, it is a compelling argument you make. Now if they owned 10 houses, yes, but we can’t stand in the way of owning 5 shacks.
The next line is even funnier: “Anything they do to make it more expensive to buy and sell is going to be detrimental to our locals.’”
So it’s okay for the out-of-state wealthy to make it more expensive to buy via bidding up second-, third-, fourth-, fifth- homes. But a tax? Oh no, that would be detrimental for the locals.
I was hiking near Vail this summer and made a remark about second-home owners. Someone nearby corrected me and said “try third or fourth home.”
Another interesting fact–I asked a local what country sends the most tourists to Vail, guessing aloud that it would be a European nation with a ski tradition, like Italy or Austria. Wrong! The correct answer is Mexico.
‘With homeownership already a stretch, or out of reach altogether for so many Californians, now is not the time to make owning a home more difficult.’
But if prices go down due to lowering the MID, I can afford a house without anyone incentivizing debt. Why don’t these Senior Real Estate Analysts and Experts understand this?
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
- - Upton Sinclair
Also, if I were a broker, wouldn’t I want more transactions? Don’t these people make their vig on a per transaction basis? You’d think volitility would be their friend, as they can make up their commissions in volume. Instead of flatline sales with only one Expert selling a widget at $600,000 you could sell multiple widgets at $300,000?
“Also, if I were a broker, wouldn’t I want more transactions?”
I used to thunk that too.
But after watching Realtors recoil from falling house prices between 2007 and 2010 like a Vampire from a crucifix I figured it must be a greed thing.
Don’t sales collapse when prices fall? Wouldn’t that mean fewer closings and thus fewer commissions?
Most of the UHS sales people I’ve known are competitive to the point where they think the other guy’s going to get knocked out in a downturn. They all prefer fewer large checks over many small checks because they can’t see past a single transaction.
This is the type of personality that you’ll see coming out of a closed door client meeting with their lipstick smeared all over their face from all the “negotiating” that they just performed.
Arlington, MA Housing Prices Crater 6% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/arlington-ma/market-trends/
HA! Is that you again? Prices in Arlington are up 8% YoY, based on the link you provided. You should change your name to Senior Moment!
DebtDonkey
La Jolla, CA Housing Prices Crater 7% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/la-jolla-ca/market-trends/
Just more proof HA’s nom de plume should be Senior Moment. La Jolla is not cratering. It may someday, but your own link shows it is solid. You show smaller houses sell for less and call it a crater? HA!
You are giving me the idea to someday somewhere use the name Señor Momento.
Debt Donkey
Austin, TX Housing Prices Crater 7% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/austin-tx/market-trends/
I know it’s not housing, but the article that Ben posted yesterday about the Saudi arrests is an eye-opener. Some excerpts:
——————–
…deep ties to both Obama and Clinton….
…2015 tweet from then-candidate Donald Trump that foreshadowed his arrest: ‘Dopey Prince @Alwaleed_Talal wants to control our U.S. politicians with daddy’s money. Can’t do it when I get elected. #Trump2016
8:53 PM - Dec 11, 2015′
…“Investigations into Obama-Clinton impropriety by special counsel Robert Mueller encompass Obama and Clinton’s financial ties and dubious political alliances with both Saudi Arabia and Russia alike.
…“In August 2016, Medea Benjamin sounded the alarm as to the perils of Clinton and the Podestas’ crooked Saudi dealings…
… So while one brother runs the campaign, the other brother funds it with earnings that come, in part, from the Saudis.’”
————-
That’s a lot to unpack and some of it is hard to believe. Donald Trump knew about this in early 2015. Mueller is going after everybody. This Saudi dude invests in a bank and get selectively bailed out by the taxpayer. And Medea Benjamin… is the head of Code Pink, those folks who show up at hearings and such in distracting pink t-shirts. She’s about as lefty as an activist as you can get and even she’s digging this up?
Dufuq is going on?
“is going on?”
The Clinton Foundation and pay to play should give us a clue.
Did their Cloak of Blamelessness get taken away?
Did their Cloak of Blamelessness get taken away?
I keep dreaming it will happen. I want to see the reactions from all those people in the 2016 election night videos when they realize their candidate was even worse. Dreaming, I know…
They are all waiting for “Mueller time.” They might be careful what they wish for. It was pretty well-known that Manafort and Flynn were shady, but to be honest I wasn’t keeping up. I didn’t expect the Podestas and Clintons to be investigated too.
But my prediction is that the Dems won’t care. To them, it’s still all about the identity politics.
That Mueller seems to be an equal opportunity investigator bolsters his credibility in my eyes.
She’s about as lefty as an activist as you can get and even she’s digging this up?
Dufuq is going on?
They are starting to eat their own.
Saudi Princess’ tell-all includes Bangladeshi children traded as sex slaves
Published November 11, 2017
‘Saudi Princess Amira Bint Aidan Bin Nayef went on a rampage against the ruling Saudi regime in her exclusive statements to the French newspaper Le Monde, saying slavery in Saudi Arabia has different forms, but it is done in secrecy and permitted only among the primary beneficiaries of the princes of the House of Saud.’
‘She mentioned one of the most repulsive things: buying and renting the children, especially the orphans, from countries like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, Djibouti, Somalia, Nigeria, Romania and Bulgaria.’
‘According to Aidan, the ex-wife of the Saudi Prince Al Waleed bin Talal, who was recently arrested in scope of the anti-corruption purges in the country, those who accuse others of corruption and money laundering, are in fact highly corrupted themselves.’
http://www.dhakatribune.com/world/middle-east/2017/11/11/saudi-princess-unveils-kingdoms-dark-side/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-is-all-bill-clintons-fault/2017/11/03/ee16c574-c0df-11e7-97d9-bdab5a0ab381_story.html?utm_term=.f26f0217613a
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/11/reckoning-with-bill-clintons-sex-crimes/545729/
It is all the Clinton’s faults. But I had hoped somebody had taken the next step past talking about sexual harassment. Unfortunately not yet. It’s much bigger than just that.
Bill Clinton’s refusal to step down when impeached and clearly caught directly lying to the electorate caused Gore to lose. Whether that’s a good or bad thing is debatable, but I’m confident it’s the truth. Which means that every decision GWB made differently than Gore would have is a side effect of that.
It then meant that Hillary lost to both Obama and Trump. The deplorables and part of the middle already had plenty of reason to dislike her going all the way back to the early 90s. But their frustration with Bill not taking his medicine meant that they would never consider voting for her, period, no matter who she was up against. So every decision made by Obama and Trump since then that are different than she would have made is also a side effect of Bill’s refusal to do the honorable thing and step down.
Expect this to continue until they stop trying to force anybody ever named Clinton on the electorate. Bill made the bed, time for all of them to shut up and go to sleep in it.
“George Soros’ investment fund dumped its stock holdings in Apple and Snap in the last quarter while reducing stakes in other major tech giants including Facebook and Twitter, regulatory filings show.”
“The Snap holding is significant. The 1.55 million shares were worth $19.48 million at Tuesday’s close. There is a lot of bearishness around Snap, which has continued to miss earnings expectations and failed to grow its user base significantly. Snap shares are down over 48 percent since it went public in March.”
“Soros Fund Management also reduced its stake in Twitter by 5,700 shares. It still holds 18,400 shares of the social media site. Facebook also fell out of favor with Soros. The investor dumped 367,262 shares of the social networking giant in the last quarter. Soros Fund Management still owns 109,451 Facebook shares.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/15/george-soros-dumps-apple-and-snap-stock-boosts-stake-in-amazon-microsoft.html
Watch what the smart money does . . . as much as I despise the man, he is one to watch when it comes to this stuff.
I know of two ladies at work who were (are) successfully hypergamous, and I work at a medium sized office in a small town. No guilt or shame either.
Karen, you speak the Word. Thank you for the insight. Best to you and yours!
Hey thanks! Best to you as well, Jane.
If the GOP can get this one thing done…it will make up for a lot for wasted time.
Democrats and major health insurance / hospital insurance lobbies are fighting this…that should tell you something.
+++++
Senate GOP to add repeal of Obamacare insurance mandate into tax bill
Mike Debonis and Damian Paletta - The Washington Post - November 14, 2017
Senate Republican leaders said Tuesday that they would seek a repeal of the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate through their tax bill, a major change of strategy as they try to accomplish two of their top domestic priorities in a single piece of legislation.
Repealing the mandate, which compels most Americans to buy health insurance or pay a fine, would free up more than $300 billion in government funding over the next decade…
“We’re optimistic that inserting the individual mandate repeal would be helpful,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Tuesday after meeting with party members during a closed-door lunch.
Health experts say eliminating the mandate would destabilize the individual insurance markets set up by the Affordable Care Act, as they would be full of people with high health-care costs but have far fewer of the healthy people insurance companies depend on to stay profitable. In response, insurance companies would probably massively raise premiums or pull out of the marketplaces entirely.
A powerful group of stakeholders, including the major health insurance and hospital insurance lobbies and two influential doctors’ groups, wrote a letter to leaders of both parties arguing that they should retain the individual mandate.
I’m somewhat mixed about this. My main problem with repealing the mandate is that it will accelerate the failure of the ACA (which is already failing).
Then the left will definitely blame the GOP for taking an active role in the ACAs demise.
As it is, they can only blame the GOP for not fixing their mess…which is failing on its own.
Forcing citizens to purchase a product or service, from private industry, for the sole act of just being an alive citizen and under penalty of jail/fine is unconstitutional.
And if you say “well, that is a tax” - then the ENTIRE bill is unconstitutional as it originated in the Senate and passed as in reconciliation.
Don’t know what happened to the SCOTUS on this. Maybe one day we will find out the massive corruption there too.
“Don’t know what happened to the SCOTUS on this. Maybe one day we will find out the massive corruption there too.”
If they releases information on that it will probably look something like this…
Maybe one redacted we will redacted redacted the redacted redacted there too.
Heh heh heh! Have you been reading the just-released JFK data dump by any chance?
Forcing citizens to purchase a product or service ??
Forcing them to pay for a service that they receive does not seem odd to me at all…Your quick on the attack but offer “Nothing” as a solution…
Incorrect. Forcing people to buy an insurance policy full of holes at a grossly inflated price is the problem. It’s a defective product.
The solution?
Remove the price supports and defective insurance products and allow prices to fall to their market level. Let the market work.
Nothing accelerates the economy, creates jobs and raises the standard of living like falling prices to dramatically lower and more affordable levels. Nothing.
It’s a tax. Not a tax on income. Not a tax on property. Not a tax on services rendered. It’s a tax on your humanity.
Can’t think of any other like it.
It’s a tax on your humanity ??
Well then you step up and pay for the uninsured that receive free health care…Put your money where your mouth is…
Not sure what your point is Davey. I’ve been helping to pay for the care uninsured get like everyone else, haven’t I?
Can you think of any other tax based only on you being here?
Everyone has to buy insurance or the insurance death cycle kicks in due to adverse selection. If there is no mandate, then only the already sick or chronically sick would purchase, making premiums skyrocket and further pricing out people who need affordable coverage. Imagine if you could purchase car insurance after you got in an accident and needed it. The entire thing would collapse.
The ACA did not bend the cost curve, but repealing the individual mandate will not do the US any favors in terms of access, affordability, or quality.
Didn’t the original pre-condition exclusions solve that problem?
Regardless, I lean liberal on this issue. Catastrophic high-ish deductible insurance should be a public utility paid by taxes. The deductible could be scaled to income. Everything else is cash or whatever can be negotiated with the provider by the individual. Insurance companies can compete to work for the government doing the minimal paperwork if they want. Private insurance isn’t illegal, but becomes unnecessary and is no longer purchased or provided with pre-tax income.
I like HSAs but if they go away and I have to pay with after tax money so be it.
Getting rid of pre-existing conditions solves the problem of preventing insurance companies from denying coverage, but it doesn’t prevent them from making it prohibitively expensive. It takes a large pool of healthy people to pay for people under going hip and knee replacements, mitral valve replacement, open heart surgery, and aggressive cancer treatment. Our state-of-the-art medical system isn’t cheap!
You have some good ideas about basic, universal coverage. Singapore basically has incorporated some elements of universal coverage with a market approach. Germany has some interesting elements.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/09/18/upshot/best-health-care-system-country-bracket.html
Getting rid of pre-existing conditions solves the problem of preventing insurance companies from denying coverage, but it doesn’t prevent them from making it prohibitively expensive.
They are in business to sell insurance and make money. If they aren’t willing to price it to sell in a competitive market then it means there is no money to be made. I don’t expect them to operate a charity.
If the medical industry wants to invent things that almost nobody can afford, then I think they should deal with those market issues. As a country we can’t afford to buy it for everyone if almost nobody can afford to buy it for themselves.
You ought to look at Elizabeth Rosenthal’s very well researched book on the state of healthcare in the US:
Why An Open Market Won’t Repair American Health Care
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/04/books/review/an-american-sickness-elisabeth-rosenthal.html?mtrref=www.google.com
SCDave,
Have you heard of these new medical co-ops that a few progressive doctors are starting? You pay $35/month for membership, and then pay your doctor directly for their time, be it in person, via text, email, or skype. You can email them a picture of a rash and they can give you their medical opinion on it, for example (so no appointment needed).
No insurance companies involved.
There are plenty of out-of-the-box solutions that Big Insurance and Big Pharma don’t want us to use.
Carl, I’m with you on this. Whatever health care costs are not paid by everybody, are paid in pain by the sick. To me that’s pretty unacceptable. Nor do I think sickness should be a profit center.
I believe that single payer could work, IF every other health insurance entity was dismantled — all the private and public health insurance companies alike. It would lead to massive job loss of redundant paper-pushers, but that money could be used for actual care — med techs and equipment — to avoid rationing of at least basic care.
At the very least there should be some incentive to maintain a a proper body mass index, e.g., cheaper premiums.
At the very least there should be some incentive to maintain a a proper body mass index, e.g., cheaper premiums.
There are already huge social incentives to maintain BMI. I doubt you can create much more using money. People already know that not only is obesity ruining their social/mating prospects but that it’s also going to kill them.
At the very least there should be some incentive to maintain a a proper body mass index, e.g., cheaper premiums.
It’s called a soda tax, and multinational food conglomerates are out to get those who raise public awareness of what it is doing to our population. These guys are the new mafia.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/13/health/colombia-soda-tax-obesity.html?_r=0
I’m currently living where obesity is the norm… the absenteeism from work is incredible. In the SF Bay Area they couldn’t maintain steady employment.
Something has definitely changed.
QE unwind?
No more FED put?
Draining of the swamp?
+++++
Credit Crashes, VIX Tops 14 As Stocks Open Lower For 7th Straight Day
Zerohedge - Nov 15, 2017
Something changed…
Equity markets are down at the open for the 7th straight day… Trannies (blue) and Small Caps (dark red) are the worst performers but Nasdaq (green) is plunging today…
It seems like the Saudi debacle broke something…
I think it’s anticipation of higher rates, which leads to less risky alternatives than the stock market for return…people want to get ahead of this.
I think it’s anticipation of higher rates ??
Yep….Look at Chinese Bonds;
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiUhp79n8HXAhVRz2MKHXz5D4gQqUMISTAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fchina-bond-yields-jump-as-u-s-selloff-spooks-investors-1510568330&usg=AOvVaw3DUT3Rr25yxzEh8DNAmUKF
‘The Federal Reserve should take a more aggressive stance toward boosting inflation and stop talking so much about using interest rates to ensure financial stability, Chicago Fed President Charles Evans said. Evans expressed concerns Wednesday that the public was losing faith in policy makers’ commitment to bring inflation back up to their 2 percent target.’
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/evans-says-fed-must-convince-080000282.html
You know, just yesterday I was huddled with some public and everybody was saying, “I’m worried prices aren’t going up enough!”
It really is so “in your face” how out of touch the obama Fed appointees are.
To the point - that they themselves can’t believe what they are saying.
But they really had only a SINGLE mandate.
Keep the fraud, smoke and mirrors going to get Hillary elected.
Overheard this morning in the office:
Q: So when are you going to retire?
A: When my son gets a job!
Yup. That’s why the baby boomers are hanging on and holding back the careers of Gen X.
It is a convenient excuse but it covers up the REAL reason.
They can’t retire.
They have saved nothing.
In fact, they are probably deeply in debt never expecting this day to come…
Precisely.
Every boomer out there signed up for a big fat mortgage on a rapidly depreciating asset with no way out, not a buyer in sight.
Remember….. I can ask $50k for my run down 10 year old Chevy pickup but where is the buyer at that price?
So it is with all depreciating assets like houses.
signed up for a big fat mortgage on a rapidly depreciating asset with no way out, not a buyer in sight.
Many of the gov boomers bought homes in the early 1980s. They would have had those homes paid off… except that many of them *did* sign up for a mortgage. They cashed-out to send the kids to expensive colleges (no trade schools for these precious angels). And those Millenial kids were in college in 2003-2004, so parents thought they could extract a lot.
In the DC area at least, housing has not recovered to boom levels.
Correct. However keep in mind this one important thing.
A “housing recovery” is falling prices to dramatically lower and more affordable levels by definition.
So you’re correct on the DC area too. Housing has not recovered.
Wrong. They have a huge house, a nice muscle car and a few toys like a Harley, boat and RV. Push comes to shove they’ll just sell one, like the 1968 GTO. Millennial shoppers love 1968 GTOs.
$75,000 Firm. Serious inquiries only. I’m not giving it away!!!!
I was just thinking about this. In years past you could watch the pristine Model T/Model A cars get more expensive as the hobbyists who cared about them reached peak cash years, and then they went down in price as those people retired/died and the younger generation didn’t find those cars nearly as interesting.
Then came the 60s muscle cars. Everybody wanted one back in the day so lots of people spent a lot to get one later. I think there was an assumption that this category would be different because it was a high water mark for performance. In the 80s and 90s if you wanted to be really fast it still made sense to start with a 60s car. So we thought the value would stay high forever, it really was different this time.
But in the last few years performance cars have totally eclipsed the performance of the best of the 60s. It’s been truly amazing to watch. I honestly never thought it would happen. But as a result I predict (if it hasn’t already started) that now the 60s cars will go the same route as the really old stuff. Quaint and interesting in parades…but not what you want for going fast. Which means that soon the people who always lusted for them will be finished lusting after them due to death, retirement, or simply looking at the numbers generated by new muscle.
For me it’s not about performance rather than a work of art. You can have something with stickers trying to beat out every other car at the track, I’ll take the beauty of an old ragtop Continental or Impala ice cream car any day.
Great. But history suggests that eventually folks like you age out of contention for them and nobody else will want them unless they are the fastest/coolest thing ever made.
The 60s cars had a fastest/coolest exemption for a while but now that has changed. Now they are just another museum piece. Prices may not reflect that yet but I expect they will soon.
I understand what you’re saying, but the difference between me and a Boomer is I know it’s a niche car and don’t expect too many buyers or to make a ton of money off of it when I sell. These older folks really think it’s an investment strategy. It is not.
These older folks really think it’s an investment strategy. It is not.
Yes. My point is that for a while there I can see why they believed it. I’m glad the world has finally progressed to where I would rather have a new Audi RS3 than a pristine 60s Chevy. That’s the way it should be. The malaise of the 70s really did a number on us for a long time.
Her co workers r feds,they get a sweet retirement guaranteed
W hc too boot
feds have a TSP now which is the government version of the 401K.
The days of pensions are over, essentially - the amount you will get from the pension portion of your retirement benefits is not even worth talking about.
Retire while you still can!
The type of retirement you get depends on when you started working for the Feds, not when you retire. If you joined before the mid-80’s you get the good insurance. If you joined after, you get a small pension, 5% company match, and the rest is on you.
*Example of small pension: 25 years x $100K salary = $25K. Pension starts at age 62 no matter when you retire, (unless they offer early outs for a select few).
That’s why the baby boomers are hanging on and holding back the careers of Gen X.
Maybe if you have a fire proof job with .gov, but if you’re in the private sector you don’t get to “hang on to your job.”
Unless you are exceptional, you will get laid off in your middle age (as early as your forties) and will be replaced by younger workers. And you have no say in the matter, it’s not “your job”.
This is what has been behind the swell in applications to SSDI: people get laid and can’t find anything beyond low wage, menial work, so they apply for SSDI and hustle, doing under the table work to supplement it.
I think this could have the side effect of making prices in Silicon Valley even higher. The “aging out” you describe as being a 40s thing is real. But I’ve noticed that it’s different in San Jose. Just like Silicon Valley can be the best place to get your foot in the door as a new grad, it also seems like the best place to stay employed later. You are simply more needed here than out in flyover where it’s dog eat dog fighting over the tech economy scraps to try to stay professionally employed in a low cost of living area where the masters of the universe owners don’t want to live.
So maybe that translates to new grads, H1Bs AND 50 somethings all living in crappy little apartments in San Jose to get/stay in the game. Otherwise yeah…you end up trying to get on the SSDI train in Oil City when everything else goes away.
You make a good point about Silly Valley. When my employer decided to kill Solaris and Sparc, most of those riffed from the Santa Clara campus found new jobs very quickly, whereas in Broomfield I know “older people” (age 40+) who got canned on Sept 1st and who still haven’t found work. And a few young pups had to settle for low paying/no benefits contract gigs. Anecdotes include feeling like they hit the ball out of the park in interviews but got told “we’re not forward with you”
Yeah. Basically in spite of all the negatives about California, my conclusion is that if you want to work in tech you should go there anyway until you’re ready for your last job before retirement and then get a job and move to where you wouldn’t mind retiring. I went through a really rough job hunt in Colorado one time and this is such a huge improvement over that. At least for now. If I can’t get hired in CA then it’s definitely time to go somewhere cheaper for the SSDI/Oil City plan. Hopefully I can avoid that :-).
In Colorado - in fairness, a job hunt from September 1st till mid-November is pretty mild (2.5 months) if I read your dates correctly.
In the auld sod (CT), there were colleagues who had gotten the ol’ heave-ho in 1994, declared bankruptcy in 1995, and did not find another job until 1996 or later.
Some would not dislodge from the area and never, ever worked in a professional capacity again. I met a former manager stocking shelves at Home Depot while preparing to dump the shack before evacuating for greener pastures.
Geographic arbitrage is good when you exercise it.
In the auld sod (CT), there were colleagues who had gotten the ol’ heave-ho in 1994, declared bankruptcy in 1995, and did not find another job until 1996 or later.
That was exactly when my horror show of a new grad job hunt occurred in Colorado. Things finally started perking up at the end of 1995. In hindsight I was stupid not to go to California in early 1995 and just take whatever I could get. But I was doing the redneck kid thing and trying to stay as close to Wyoming as possible.
and will be replaced by younger workers.’
h1b younger and cheaper and as they say at my job ” Americans can’t be trained”
Trained to do what ? Bow to the managers like in the old country ?
I think trump is causing problems with H1B though ?
+1
In the late 90s, that was ALL I saw — Americans training as fast and as hard as they could. College degrees and certificates galore. So maybe now they DO want the foreigners to bow and kow and tow, and work for half?
Give Americans a realistic shot at a real middle class income with some security and they will come from all directions to try to get it. But they are pretty suspicious of bait and switch these days.
“I think trump is causing problems with H1B though ?”
Gawd, I hope so. Probably too late, though. The state of tech gets worse by the day. Glitches, outages, security breaches, failed search algorithms, degraded e-commerce sites. Try to do an image search on Google and what you get is a bunch of worthless crap from Pinterest that has nothing to do with what you’re searching for. Up to two years ago it used to be pretty decent.
The problem is you’ve got a bunch of Bain and McKinsey graduates in corporate management who haven’t a clue about tech, listening to H1Bs who blow a lot of smoke up their posteriors.
The state of tech gets worse by the day. Glitches, outages, security breaches, failed search algorithms, degraded e-commerce sites.
Hire monkeys & pay them peanuts.
This. I’m an Xer and in my observations the closer you are to the pig trough in DC, the fatter you are. .gov employees are golden, companies that have lots of business with .gov are golden and everyone else has to run like a hamster on PCP to keep up. One exception which is not really an exception is if your biz/industry benefits from the .gov hyperinflation over the last 40 years that has caused education, health care, and asset/housing prices to melt up. Then you might be living large as well, but still have to hustle more than a .gov trough resident.
I hear ya. And if you dare mention taking away their free slop, the Gov workers will turn vicious as snakes. They came out in droves to make sure their Sugar Daddy won the Governorship in VA.
So I see the hot new communist/MSM talking point is the 1% own 50% of the wealth. And that is literally worse than Hitler.
So I have a question: would the world have been better off if for example, Bezos and Gates had never created their evil awful no good (probably racist) wealth? Would the world be better off if Microsoft and Amazon didn’t exist? Would the hundreds of thousands of people who work at or have in the past worked at Amazon/Microsoft have been better off? Would the thousands of MSFT/AMZN millionaires be better off? Say what you will about MSFT products, but millions of people purchased those products over the past 4 decades. Would those people be better off had those products not existed?
What’s better? Gates and Bezos create $300B of wealth and keep $150B of it for themselves? Or Gates/Bezos create nothing.
The answer is obvious of course. But leftists being leftists will never understand that making rich people poor will never make poor people rich.
Would the world be better if Jon Corzine was freed from jail?
What’s better? Gates and Bezos create $300B of wealth and keep $150B of it for themselves? Or Gates/Bezos create nothing.
I think that most people don’t have a problem with tycoons keeping a big chunk of the wealth they help create, I think many people have a problem with the percentage they get to keep, as well as how poorly some of them treat their employees.
That said, I agree that demonizing billionaires isn’t helpful or a good idea. We do need innovators and captains of industry.
Funny you mention Bezos, as almost every municipality in the US are tripping over themselves to hand out tax breaks and incentives to get the new Amazon HQ.
Should they be rich? Sure. Should they be subsidized? No.
But that’s how the game is rigged for the 1% globalists. They wrote the rules to their favor. In this global race to the bottom . . . at least for our country.
Really? Bezos forced 250 (or whatever the number is) cities to beg for their new HQ?
Two options:
1. Bezos’ wealth quadrupled tomorrow but every American also gets $100 richer
2. Bezos goes bankrupt tomorrow, every American loses $100.
What do you choose?
How is my direct wealth tied towards Amazon or Bezos? You act like if he succeeds then we ALL succeed, and he MUST succeed!!! I’m all for folks growing their companies and wealth, but not at the expense of taxpayers. Same with things like NFL stadiums - don’t have the tax payers pay for that crap.
And the bigger issue with Bezos/Amazon (and e-commerce in general) is how it is killing brick and mortar businesses, whom local governments coast-to-coast rely upon for a significant portion of their tax revenues.
The Great Unwinding that this will cause will make much more of America look like Rust Belt cities. I was just doing a Google Streetview virtual tour of East St. Louis at lunch today . . . depressing, seeing what were solidly middle-class neighborhoods for the adjacent manufacturing jobs.
I was just doing a Google Streetview virtual tour of East St. Louis at lunch today . . . depressing, seeing what were solidly middle-class neighborhoods for the adjacent manufacturing jobs.
Must have been a long time ago. Every kid I met in the army in the 80s from East Saint Louis made it sound like a mess at that time. But the funny thing was the “accent”. Now I understand why Mike Tyson sounds so weird…even independent of the speech impediment he seems to have.
My money is on Hotlanta. It isn’t the cheapest place, tax wise, but it is on the east coast, and is cheaper than other east coast candidates. Plus I’m sure there will be some nice corporate welfare for Amazon.
Even the Denver media has written off Denver as a candidate, because of the high cost of living. Many are glad about that, as an Amazon HQ (as opposed to a shipping warehouse, which there already is one in Denver) would possibly drive housing prices up to Seattle levels. That said, Amazon is building an R&D office in Boulder. Of course that will only employ a few hundred.
Too bad, I still had my fingers crossed that they could actually be talked into the old STK site across the road :-). It’s still a little painful for me to read the names on those streets and remember all the people who used to be there.
A campus that could handle 50K workers would be something else, it would dwarf the old Sun Campus on Eldorado Blvd, which at its peak had about 8000, I believe.
The old StorageTek site, could possibly be big enough. I think all that is left of STK fits comfortably in building 5 on Eldorado Blvd, which is now Oracle property.
I think all that is left of STK fits comfortably in building 5 on Eldorado Blvd
Yeah, I’ve still got old friends/coworkers there.
You present this as a binary choice. It would be better if there were less income inequality, a strong social safety net, and still have a thriving market economy. The Nordic states, and others, show this is possible.
Then get your wallet out Lola.
“It would be better if there were less income inequality”
why? should doctors get paid like waitresses?
should those who work harder get paid the same as those who don’t?
fundamentally, your striving for income equality is not only economically destructive, it is also immoral.
or maybe your idea of income equality is different than mine, sorta like with subsidies?
I am not striving for income equality, rather a less extreme distribution of wealth. In the state of nature, it is natural for disparities of performance, but not by such extreme magnitudes as we see in our current society. This is not natural. I’ll give you an example. I’m a runner, and I will be running in the Boston marathon. That puts me in the top 1%. But even at this elite level, I am no more than 3x or 4x faster than the slowest marathon participant. If someone is making $25k a year, I see no problem for a skilled profession to make 3x, 4x, 5x, or even 6x that amount. But where I start to see the absurdity is creating a system where someone is making 100x, 1000x, or 10,000x. Clearly the system has broken down when this is happening.
What made America great was the fact that we had a middle class. Unfortunately, that is in the process of disappearing and we’re looking more and more like a south American nations with extreme wealth polarization where only the elite and well-heeled have any chance and upward mobility. Immorality is creating a system where the elite, moneyed class can afford to have 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th homes before a waitress can afford to have any.
Give it time.. There is an excess of houses and prices are falling.
Englewood, CO Housing Prices Crater 6% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/englewood-co/market-trends/
Exactly. Once-upon-a-time in this country, the plant owner likely worked his way up from the loading dock, so had some empathy for his workers as he had spent some time in their shoes. He lived in his community and generously supported the local civic development. And his pay was a few multiples of the plant workers.
Today, the owner likely never turned a wrench in his life (coughMuskcough), and makes insane amounts of money while squeezing his workers for every last drop of their professional effort (coughBezoscough). And likely doesn’t support any local charitable efforts (see previous cough).
Today’s corporate titans make those eeeevil robber barons of a century ago (Rockerfeller, Carnegie, JP Morgan, etc.) seem like Mother Theresa in comparison!
“I am not striving for income equality, rather a less extreme distribution of wealth.”
it might not seem like it to you, but you really are. you know you’ll never get to equality, but that’s where your beliefs will always steer you.
you’re against the ‘extremes’, but there will always be extremes, no matter how much you reduce them.
the deeper question is ‘what business is it of yours?’. if someone legitimately earns money, shouldn’t it be theirs to do with as they see fit?
if someone could afford to pay you a million dollars an hour, and you were willing and capable of doing the work, would you refuse it? would you say “morally, i can only take a hundred an hour?” i doubt it.
the inequality you see may seem wrong to you, but that feeling is misplaced. i fight the same thing when i see the salaries of sports players. i know they are overpaid, but i also know i shouldn’t try to interfere in the market. and i also know that they are worth more than most people think they are because they bring in the advertising dollars.
in any case, i stand on principle that what someone is willing to pay them is none of my business (if i want to live in a capitalist world). i have no right to demand that their income be reduced.
and finally, the unseen benefit is that their high pay has a slight pulling effect on many other’s pay. many people will get slightly higher pay because of them. income inequality is a natural function of rising prosperity. if you want more income equality, look at any communist nation. the only high incomes there are for the people in power. the incomes for the people in the rest of the country are very close.
the base emotion for what you feel is really envy, but the mind doesn’t want to see that so it quickly changes what you see to something you believe is more noble… ‘fairness’. you aren’t being envious, you’re being ‘fair’. but in truth, you’re being immoral. you’re reaching into something you don’t have a right to.
envy isn’t really a bad emotion if you can turn it into ambition, rather than the need to control or take from someone else to be ‘fair’.
We are moving toward a feudal system. My angst is that the system in place is creating a caste based US system where people are not rewarded based on the value they add, but they are basically stuck in place.
There are a couple of myths that you subscribe to. One is that the if the market is willing to pay it, then that must mean the wage is justified. I was making a very high 6-figure salary for a long time and it wasn’t because what I was doing was any more valuable than the CNAs who work under me now. When you look at how boards and compensation committees for CEOs and boards discover that people who are making obscenely inflated salaries aren’t doing it because they are actually adding value, they are taking advantage of a niche system that entrenches them in place. I recommend reading Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century for a good explanation of how this occurs.
But not obvious to see how the system is setup to favor capital. You speak as though this were a meritocracy, but sadly it is not. Income inequality is a function of rent seeking and the unequal return of capital vs labor income.
they are taking advantage of a niche system that entrenches them in place…. You speak as though this were a meritocracy, but sadly it is not.
It’s all about the rent seeking.
We are moving toward a feudal system.
Where the serfs are heavily armed. It will be interesting to see how that works out. Simply making a few of them knights does not disarm the rest at home. So it can’t work exactly the same as in the good old days…unless you can somehow disarm them.
“We are moving toward a feudal system.”
we are moving towards communism.
“There are a couple of myths that you subscribe to. One is that the if the market is willing to pay it, then that must mean the wage is justified.”
and you and your fairness god know better, is that it? you or some other comrade will decide what’s a just wage, not the people actually hiring or doing the work. you’re further left than i suspected.
“I was making a very high 6-figure salary for a long time and it wasn’t because what I was doing was any more valuable than the CNAs who work under me now.”
how humble of you, you economic genius. once again you’re smarter than the market you work in. i wish your employer would listen to you. i hope you go explain things to him/her so they can get the pay right.
“When you look at how boards and compensation committees for CEOs and boards discover that people who are making obscenely inflated salaries aren’t doing it because they are actually adding value, they are taking advantage of a niche system that entrenches them in place.”
of course they’re not adding value. CEOs just love to overpay. i’m surprised you can write this stuff with a straight keyboard.
“I recommend reading Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century for a good explanation of how this occurs.”
ah yes, tommy piketty… mr. fairness himself. if we’re recommending authors, why not try walter williams, sowell, friedman, kates or many other austrian economists. none of the guys you mention are ever classical economists. they’re all keynesian types.
“Income inequality is a function of rent seeking”
how does that work?
and the unequal return of capital vs labor income.”
more double speak? what the hell are you even talking about?
It’s the difference between working for money and having your money (capital) work for you. When growth on capital exceeds growth on labor, capital becomes increasingly stratified and concentrated.
Start here:
https://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/macroeconomics/gdp-topic/piketty-capital/v/piketty-spreadsheet-1
I’ve read all of those authors you cite. I’ve spent plenty of time on Mises.org and have read Hayek, Mises et al.
it appears we need to go over one thing at a time again. so….
how does rent seeking cause income inequality?
Carrollton, TX Housing Prices Crater 9% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/carrollton-tx/market-trends/
‘An analysis of recent resales at One57 shows that every apartment that has traded since it opened in 2014 or 2015 has declined in value — all by double digits.’
‘Unit One 62A was purchased for $31.6 million in April 2014. In October 2016 it sold for $23.5 million, a 26 percent decline. Unit 65A originally sold for $29.3 million in 2014, but was sold in April 2017 for $22.5 million. And some of the declines were even faster. Unit 51C sold for $20.4 million in April 2015. It sold eight months later for $17.7 million.’
‘It’s clear that 2014 was the peak,’ said Jonathan Miller of Miller Samuel. ‘It was a perfect storm. You had capital pouring into the real estate development market from overseas. And we had just come off the financial crisis and you had this new product coming on, with the feeling that everything was skewing toward the wealthy. Everyone thought this was some sort of new world that would go on forever. But it was not sustainable.’
None dare call it a bubble…
‘Everyone thought this was some sort of new world that would go on forever’
And “perfect storms” can go the other way too…
It is amazing what graft and corruption can buy nowadays…
Funny how the obamas don’t want to go back to their hometown of Chicago.
Isn’t there more community organizing to be done there?
Let me do some math. The obama’s made about $175k per year. Times eight years. Minus closing costs…
+++++
Atlanta will be Amazon’s new home
Sperling’s Best Places | November 15, 2017
The Obamas have reportedly bought the 9-bedroom, 8.5-bathroom mansion they had been renting in Washington, D.C., for over a year.
The house is on a quarter-acre lot near the Naval Observatory, the vice president’s official residence, in the wealthy Kalorama neighborhood near Embassy Row.
The mansion was built in the 1920s and last sold in 2013 for about $5.3 million.
In 2011, the house was remodeled to include a total of 8 and a half bathrooms and three fireplaces across 8,200 square feet, according to real estate data.
Title should be:
Take a Look Inside Obama Family’s Washington, DC, Home
PS - Lots of photos.
FWIW, Amazon has not made an official decision on their HQ. But Atlanta is on the short list.
Do they know how heavily populated the area is with Trayvons and other Dindus?
They probably don’t care
Here’s a little more from the Sperling article that *predicts* Atlanta to get the Amazon HQ:
“In its Request for Proposal, Amazon identified key factors such as a metro population greater than one million, a major airport nearby, a stable business climate, robust mass transit, a highly-educated labor pool, diverse population, low cost of living, and a high quality of life.”
So they like diversity. The tough one IMO is going to be the low cost of living. Any city with those other attributes is not going to have a low cost of living. An educated labor pool will pay a LOT to live in a stable business climate. (Atlanta seems to have a lot of sub-$200K areas. Are they all bad ‘hoods?)
It’s Austin.
Austin is just like Seattle politically.
TX has no income tax (like WA)
Bezos is the largest private land owner in Texas. Yeah really. He’s also from Texas, grew up there.
Whole Foods HQ is in Austin, Amazon just bought WF.
Austin has 6K Apple employees in Austin. Also Dell is HQed there and IBM and Samsung have a huge presence. It’s a very tech heavy town and lots of talent to poach for Amazon.
UT - Austin is a great feeder college, which is one of Amazon’s criteria.
It can’t be anything other than Austin.
Yes. Anything under $200K in Atlanta….you don’t want to live there.
And Austin while a little more expensive than ATL, is still relatively cheap compared to Seattle. There will be a lot of Seattle employees jumping at the change to move to HQ2 in Austin.
It’s Austin.
Hmmm. You make a good case. I didn’t know he was from there.
So they like diversity.
Sure they do, as long as you’re Asian. Those “dindus” won’t be getting hired. The overwhelming majority of Hispanics I see working at large high tech campuses scrub toilets.
SFMF - ding! ding! ding! - you make a persuasive case for Austin. Sheesh, though - I feel bad for the relos. They’re going to get socked on the instant hike in housing list prices. Let’s all see how quickly, and by how much, they are hiked.
You make some excellent points for Austin - as already discussed above.
One comment I read here in Seattle on an article I think has a lot of truth to it: it said that the real reason that Amazon is looking for a new HQ is that they have already burned through most of the local tech talent in our area, and they need fresh meat to keep operating.
For those of you not aware of this, you have to work there a full two years in order to get your full bonus. And a lot of people bail at that point because of the brutal work/life balance the job entails. So they need a continual stream of newbies in order to keep the machine running.
they need fresh meat to keep operating.
And that would also explain why Colorado is pointless. There is some talent there, but not nearly enough to feed a meat grinder of that size. The best Colorado strategy is to make it a really nice place to work and just pay poorly. People will stay at your company anyway just to avoid having to move back to the west coast and start from zero on the property ladder again.
MSM:
Trump has a really expensive apartment in NYC: My God, he is worse than Hitler. While poor women and minorities starve just a few blocks away, Trump lives a life of luxury.
Obama has a really expensive house in DC: Our collective hearts are melting….
“Obama has a really expensive house in DC…”
Maybe he saved up for it out of his salary?
And Trump bought his apartment using what, stolen money? LOL
You’re missing the point as usual. The MMS criticized Trump for living large. But when Obama lives large it’s hugs and kisses.
“You’re missing the point as usual.”
Well aren’t you the buttercup.
You’ll just have to explain things real simple to us slow folk. As you’ve been posting here a few weeks now, we expect you to really inspire.
FWIW, this is probably the liberal logic: Obama already put in his time as middle class, therefore it’s okay for he’s earned the right to party it up now. But Trump started off rich, so he needs to put in some poor time so he can “get in touch” with his voters.
The real irony is that the Kennedys and FDR never gave up their fancy inherited lifestyle. So I don’t see why Trump should either.
A day in the life of a liberal Democrat
10:00: TAX THE RICH!!! KILL THE RICH!!! DESTROY THE RICH!! Power to the people!!
10:01: Whoa, whoa whoa!! You want to eliminate SLAT and MID? Don’t you realize this will hurt lawyers, Hollywood types and Wall St managers in CA and NY earning $500K+ a year? How dare you propose such a thing.
10:02: KILL THE RICH!! THE RICH MUST DIE!!!
Bellingham, WA Housing Prices Crater 5% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/bellingham-wa/market-trends/
Realtors are liars.
“‘The average California house costs two-and-a-half times the national average,’ the ad states. ‘Only 32 percent of California families are able to purchase a median-priced home.
will it go to 10% ? last 2 peaks went to 10% 1990 and 2006
fraction reserve banking has done wonders
Calabasas, CA Housing Prices Crater 13% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/calabasas-ca/market-trends/
Another likely move in our future. We’ve been without a lease since June 30. Just got a call from the prop mgr warning us that there is going to be a “substantial” increase in the rent, so he wanted to give us the full 45 days to look for another place if we don’t agree. Sounds like it will be $200-300. I pressed him, but he wouldn’t say. He wants us to take four or five days to think about it. When I started to bitch, he said you don’t sound happy with the place. I asked him if he wanted us to leave.
He says rents here (Las Vegas) have been rising rapidly in the last few months; he says I should look around to confirm. We are paying under market for this neighborhood, but the house is not in the best condition. In response, he said you don’t sound happy again and again I said do you want us to leave? He said no. We’ve never complained about anything. Probably wants to sell but won’t say it.
I’m so sick of this. We’ll probably end up buying after waiting all this time. I feel like I’ve been fighting for years only to be killed on the last day of the war.
The o is a peaker
taxpayer, o?
This place sat empty for a few months before we rented it - I don’t think it will be any different this time. I can’t believe she (the LL) hasn’t considered that.
It could be worse. You could be Donk Craterton.
IDK, Oxide sounds pretty happy, and she bought at the right time which is something I had a chance to do, but didn’t. And she knows where she’ll be living in two months.
Paying double for a depreciating asset and then financing for 30 years doesn’t exactly sound like good timing.
Sorry to hear about this situation. One of my aides had something similar happen to her a few months ago. The owner was pressing them to leave by raising the rent, only to put it on the market. They eventually found a nicer place to live, but they ended up paying quite a bit more. But I guess the new place has some amenities and common area for their kids, so it worked out okay. Keep us posted and let us know what happens. My best friend is out in Henderson and works for the district attorney’s office downtown. I’m often in Vegas visiting.
Unfortunately, this seems to be the way things are these days:
The Housing Crisis Can Be Good News, If You’re A Landlord:
http://beta.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-lopez-landlords-20171115-story.html
Sorry to hear about this situation.
Thanks. Just for once I’d like to know what the truth is; intense cheerleading going on here.
If I buy, I guess I’ll be a thousandaire for a few months/years:
Las Vegas expected to have fastest rising home values in US, November 9, 2017
Existing Las Vegas home prices up 13.4 percent from 2016, November 8, 2017
You have to hang in till 2019
Offer $100 a month and remind them one month empty is the difference between the two options
So that was quick. Got the notice this AM - 12% increase, one year extension starting January 1 so we get to move out the week between Christmas and New Year’s at the end of 2018 (yay.)
Not happy, but I guess it could be worse. IDK what happened, but it’s less than what he implied it would be on the phone. He did say he would speak to the LL about my complaints about the condition of the property; maybe that did it. I want to try and get it down a bit more, but my husband wants me to leave it alone.
During the phone call, he said the rents in Las Vegas have skyrocketed in the past few months; the PM told me to check it out. There were some outrages, but in general I don’t think it’s true.
“We are paying under market for this neighborhood,”
My last DBLL used to spew that line. Unfortunately he was putting an over market chunk of change in his pocket every month, that’s what is left over after you collect $1,700.00 rent and don’t bother paying principal, interest, taxes or insurance on the house you have a delinquent mortgage on and are renting it out anyway.
“I’m so sick of this.”
You have a right to be, you and your family have been though it with this housing bubble bust rinse and repeat.
Hey, Jeff. There’s more to the story than this, I’m sure. Doesn’t help me though. To pay or not to pay, that is the question…She’s a real sweetheart wanting us to move the week between Christmas and New Year’s.
You have my sympathies, Tarara. Very similar to what we went through. See if you can at least get an extension of a month or two, to get past the first of the year. Be sure to run the numbers, too, weighing what you would have to spend in searching for another rental, plus moving expenses, plus other hassles and expenses. We didn’t have the option of staying, because “Owner says SELL!”
The market has peaked, I really believe that. But during the last bubble, the market actually peaked at the end of 2005/beginning of 2006, but we really didn’t see the downturn until 2008. All the signs point to a standoff at the moment, at least that’s what I’m seeing in my former market. Heck, even up here, we’re seeing a flurry of sellers putting homes up for sale at stupid prices, hoping to get in on the last hurrah.
Thanks, Palmetto. I know we get two months to move on a month to month under Nevada law at our ages and in addition, we have a daughter with mild Aspergers.
These people have no morals whatsoever. Hey, I get it that it’s her house and she can do what she wants with it - but back in June when I asked the PM if I should feel comfortable buying certain (costly) things for the place since they had not yet renewed the lease, I was told sure, go ahead, no problem. I didn’t.
When I got the voice mail today, the PM’s phony, upbeat tone freaked me out right away - I knew it was bad news. Further, I think that’s not the end game.
“She’s a real sweetheart wanting us to move the week between Christmas and New Year’s.”
IRCC this is your second landlord in a row with an unreasonable timeline for you to find a new place to live, a new school for your kid and move.
Hi Jeff,
Yeah, they’re real pieces of work out here (and New Yorkers have the bad reputation.) Thank goodness we don’t have to worry about school anymore; as she grows and gains confidence she’ll go back to college. She’s in orientation now for a job on the Strip which should start soon. We’ll see if that makes her more regular and a bit better at rolling with the punches.
Back to my nervous breakdown.
T💋
Hug her every chance you get.
“…I’ve been fighting for years only to be killed on the last day of the war.”
I hope you find your way through this without committing suicide.
I hope you find your way through this without committing suicide.
What?
Rent it for half the monthly cost. Buy later after prices crater for 75% less.
Well, you felt you were going to get killed on the last day of the war. I merely hoped for you that you didn’t feel compelled to pull the trigger yourself, as in finally paying ridiculous bubble prices because you had run out of hope or sense.
In a financial mania like we’ve been suffering, there are few wonderful options. I wish for you the least worst outcome. It doesn’t sound fun having such a greedy and untrustworthy landlord as you do.
Well, thanks for the clarification. I thought you were just being a dick.
Saw the first We Buy Houses sign in ten years, here in Missoula by Walmart. Is the end of the bubble near?
Do flippers actually put out signs like that, or is it some scam?
People all over Chicago and N.C put those signs up.
real estate investor seeks apprentice LMFAO
I’ve seen those signs, even billboards, for years in my neck of the woods. I think they are looking for fixer uppers that someone needs to sell fast.
Yes, because my rambler is the crappiest-looking house in a $1M+ neighborhood, realtors and builders drive by and then send me letters every few months telling me how badly they want to buy my house.
They never do answer the question of where I could live in the same area for what they would pay me though.
So I stay, and savor the fact that my house will be completely mortgage-free in less than a year.
They never do answer the question of where I could live in the same area for what they would pay me though.
Why is it so important to you to live in the same area? Why not take the money and run?
I present the 2020 Dem Prez candidate, already making the rounds to shore up support in those deep blue states:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/15/dangerous-hawaii-psychiatric-patient-flew-to-california.ht.html
Inmates literally running the asylum (and apparently having sex with the staff) and, and! the psycho cruised past TSA without a care in the world.
Makes you feel good - and safe - that your tax dollars are going to these idiots doesnt it?
That guy had significant help (probably from his brother). Nobody breaks out of a psycho ward and then charters a plane! Where did he get the money?
Glad they caught the guy in CA, as I read earlier today on the news.
Las Vegas, NV 89134 Rental Rates Crater 6% YOY
https://www.zillow.com/las-vegas-nv-89134/home-values/
make it look like the market is gonna freefall to reel in some short sellers, them kick them in the sack with a nice little rally. classic
I was at the grocery store the other day and heard something I hadn’t heard in quite some time - they were saying they had lots of positions open and were inviting people to apply. Wow. Ten years after the Fed started its novel redistribution policy, it seems to have finally worked. I’m sure they’ll be loudly taking credit for it. Because clearly, 10 years later, they are the cause of the positive effect. Bravo.
Really? I ask because the local grocers in my neck of the woods always seem to be hiring.
walmart is always hiring because no one can stay there long. Very high turnover. The only people making any money are in management and maybe truck drivers.
Regarding the tax proposal: ‘Most likely we are going to see a significant drop in the value of people’s homes,’ said U.S. Rep. Lois Frankel, D-West Palm Beach. ‘Why? Because the demand for housing will go down.’”
This is utter BS. I have never ever had a buyer in front of me in closing transactions via our escrow biz tell me they are buying because of the benefit of the MID tax deduction; 15 yrs and have never heard it. It is just a side perk. However, numerous have mentioned that they are buying to build equity and build wealth.
I cannot believe the NAR and CAR are concerned about housing affordability today and risk of a drop in prices/demand as the industry insiders have had the pom pom’s out since the last bust. Pardon me, but Realtors….please look at the data. Prices are softening in many markets WITH the current MID intact.
this tax proposal is a big @ss farce and hype filled sh@t show
No kidding. Already we’ve got one Senator with a no vote, Ron Johnson. Soon to follow: The fake tumor senator, liddle Bob Corker, Jeff da Flake, etc.
Got junk for sale?
FINANCIAL TIMES
High Yield Bonds
Contagion worries rise after junk bond sell-off
High-yield debt is heading towards its worst month since January 2016
November’s drop in the junk bond market is propelled by a handful shocks, such as the abandoning of merger talks between Sprint and T-Mobile © AP
yesterday
Eric Platt in New York
A sell-off in the $1.3tn high-yield bond sector is a worrying omen for the wider market, frequently signalling greater losses and broader contagion to come.
This market for highly indebted companies, which has found little trouble raising money during the credit boom of recent years, is getting hit hard following a stirring run of gains.
Junk-rated debt has already lost 1.1 per cent in value so far during November, on pace for its worst month since January 2016, according to ICE BofAML indices. The selling pressure, which is so far restricted to a few companies and sectors, is testing the resolve of investors who over the past 20 months have only experienced three down months, each with losses of less than 0.4 per cent.
…
If my recollection is correct, then a massive junk bond crash played out from roughly January through October 1987 before the Black Monday stock market crash occurred.
evERything IS AWesomE go shopping for imports today
“The House bill would allow home buyers taking out new mortgages to deduct interest on only $500,000 of debt, and only on one home.”
“Little Pink Houses” -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOfkpu6749w
Wyoming and Alaska are the Republican fantasyland. They have more government spending than anyone, and it isn’t close, and the highest tax burden overall. But most of that burden is on mineral extraction.
What would happen if the actually had to pay for it?
The problem in Wyoming and Alaska is the money that the feds force them to spend. If they were their own country they would simply spend much much less money on things like fed-spec highways and fed-spec school programs and medical coverage. Maybe nobody else would want to live there…but they’ve never had a problem with that. They would get by just fine living a different lifestyle and selling their oil and coal and timber to you (or the Chinese).
I didn’t know they had fed-spec highways in Alaska.
But the trucks do roll through the interstates in Wyoming.
I think the feds control much more than just the interstates when it comes to highway funding. And they like to play games with things like speed limits and DUI limits and drinking ages and seatbelt laws…where they take the money in taxes on the oil and coal and then won’t give it back in highway funds unless you do everything their way. I’m pretty sure both Wyoming and Alaska would be happy to be free of that.
“And they like to play games with things like speed limits and DUI limits and drinking ages and seatbelt laws…where they take the money in taxes on the oil and coal and then won’t give it back in highway funds unless you do everything their way.”
+1 This is Ronald “Mommy?!” Reagan’s version of State’s Rights.