11–20 of 84 posts
Any way you look at it, the government has to kick existing owners in the teeth to fix this crisis. Housing prices need to return to a reasonable multiple of wages, and that can only be done with supply. Everyone is going to have to get over the idea that they are "building wealth" and "getting ahead" by merely owning a box.
Any way you look at it, the government has to kick existing owners in the teeth to fix this crisis. Housing prices need to return to a reasonable multiple of wages, and that can only be done with supply. Everyone is going to have to get over the idea that they are "building wealth" and "getting ahead" by merely owning a box.
The majority of voters are homeowners so that’s probably why it isn’t going to happen so dramatically.
The 2017 tax act had an obfuscated impact on corporate ownership of houses. Capping the personal SALT deduction while simultaneously lowering the corporate tax rate made local tax policies to increase local ownership ineffective.
Any way you look at it, the government has to kick existing owners in the teeth to fix this crisis. Housing prices need to return to a reasonable multiple of wages, and that can only be done with supply. Everyone is going to have to get over the idea that they are "building wealth" and "getting ahead" by merely owning a box.
Great. Housing should not be an investment and chasing ever-increasing property values as a society is obviously unsustainable. If you own a house as your primary residence, then its market value shouldn't really matter, because the value has no impact on your quality of life.
That's not really surprising, considering that's exactly how interest rate increases are supposed to work. They crowd out a bit of business investment and a lot of housing investment [1]. This in turn cools the economy by curtailing construction. Unfortunately, housing in most areas was screwed to begin with. This was not nearly the case with prior inflation bouts that required rate increases. The Fed was left with t…
Any way you look at it, the government has to kick existing owners in the teeth to fix this crisis. Housing prices need to return to a reasonable multiple of wages, and that can only be done with supply. Everyone is going to have to get over the idea that they are "building wealth" and "getting ahead" by merely owning a box.
Increasing supply in population centers also raises demand. Think about why it's in demand in the first place: it's because there is high density (and more opportunities).
(Or, we could in most cities. A few, like New York and San Francisco, are very limited in terms of available land.)
Any way you look at it, the government has to kick existing owners in the teeth to fix this crisis. Housing prices need to return to a reasonable multiple of wages, and that can only be done with supply. Everyone is going to have to get over the idea that they are "building wealth" and "getting ahead" by merely owning a box.
The majority of voters are homeowners so that’s probably why it isn’t going to happen so dramatically.
That's not really surprising, considering that's exactly how interest rate increases are supposed to work. They crowd out a bit of business investment and a lot of housing investment [1]. This in turn cools the economy by curtailing construction. Unfortunately, housing in most areas was screwed to begin with. This was not nearly the case with prior inflation bouts that required rate increases. The Fed was left with t…