No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022) • Hacker News Board

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#111

Post by HelloMcFly » Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 2:04 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #42

neilv wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also: Nobody in a village should take up 2 houses for themself. But some can, and can even take up 100 houses... so long as the other villagers are fighting amongst themselves, over whether their house should be larger than that of their neighbor. Turns out most of their problems are arguably traceable back to those people with 100+ houses each. Which would be glaringly suspicious to an outside observer. But the vill…

Institutional housing ownership in the US is not a material contributor to housing price inflation [1]. With that said , we are approaching a housing shortage of +4.5M [2] units, and in concert with YieldStar's Backpage revenue maximization engine [3] (which is laundering landlord price fixing), renters are being squeezed (because where are you going to go if you can't afford to buy? you will pay, or you will be home…

> Institutional housing ownership in the US is not a material contributor to housing price inflation

I believe this nationally, but when you see things investors buying 1/3 of Atlanta homes in a given quarter [1] or investors buying 26% of the affordable homes, it becomes hard to believe there is not some level of effect occurring in target population centers. Most of the arguments I see about the small effect of investor purchases seems to focus on national averages (happy to be pointed elsewhere), but I think focusing on national trends will dilute the observed effect where it is occurring.

[1] https://atlantaagentmagazine.com/2022/03/24/investors-purcha...

[2] https://www.redfin.com/news/investor-home-purchases-q4-2023/

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#112

Post by floatrock » Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 2:04 PM UTC

bckr wrote: post #77

jasperry wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, everything is ultimately dependent on physical resources, but the value creation is at a higher level, and you hopefully get more value out of less resource as things advance. I don't consider AI a positive example, it's a hype bubble for sure. But think how much computing power per watt you get compared to 30 years ago.

Consider also the green revolution which enabled more calories to be grown per hectare. I don’t know if it takes less water and nutrients, though.

The Haber–Bosch process that powered the green revolution is merely a way of converting fuel into heat into fertilizer.

Calories per hectare is one way of measuring food systems, and a great way when we assume fuel inputs are infinite, inexhaustible, and cheap. Calories per unit of inputs is another way.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#113

Post by xivzgrev » Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 2:04 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #42

neilv wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also: Nobody in a village should take up 2 houses for themself. But some can, and can even take up 100 houses... so long as the other villagers are fighting amongst themselves, over whether their house should be larger than that of their neighbor. Turns out most of their problems are arguably traceable back to those people with 100+ houses each. Which would be glaringly suspicious to an outside observer. But the vill…

Institutional housing ownership in the US is not a material contributor to housing price inflation [1]. With that said , we are approaching a housing shortage of +4.5M [2] units, and in concert with YieldStar's Backpage revenue maximization engine [3] (which is laundering landlord price fixing), renters are being squeezed (because where are you going to go if you can't afford to buy? you will pay, or you will be home…

Institutional ownership is immaterial? Erm, from the same source, 10% of some metros is a lot, and that’s just moving the meter to 100+ homes. If you did 10+ or 3+ it would be even more.

“This share rises to 3.8 percent of single-family homes for institutional investors owning over 100 homes, and up to 10 percent in certain metro areas such as Atlanta.”

Then if you also consider foreign ownership of home, it would rise even more. Lots of wealthy folks have dollars due to it being primary international currency and they buy up our assets

Unfortunately this is a big side effect of internet we haven’t solved yet. It’s made buying a home anywhere easier, which inflates prices (demand is much higher now for same number of houses), squeezing out middle class locals

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#114

Post by leetrout » Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 2:04 PM UTC

bloopernova wrote: post #83

motohagiography wrote: post #67

simply, when a boy is dependent on his mother's approval for a sense of self it's all the justification he needs, and there is almost no increasingly-terrible situation in which a mother will not love her son. the worse his life, the more he depends on her, the less abandoned she is. it's the definition of a co-dependent cycle. Maybe he replaces her or shares that role with other women, but he ends up in the same cyc…

> and there is almost no increasingly-terrible situation in which a mother will not love her son. Could someone please rephrase this? I'm having trouble understanding it.

Mom will still love her son even as he does worse things.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#115

Post by quacked » Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 2:04 PM UTC

margalabargala wrote: post #102

quacked wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 4.5M unit shortage wouldn't be present if the past several administrations hadn't allowed huge amounts of immigration in the past decade. Reality isn't constrained to "you have to build as fast as possible since your population is going to increase very quickly and there's nothing you can do about that". If every person who came to the US in the past ten years went home, there would be a colossal increase in housin…

I believe you are correct that if every immigrant of the last ten years left the US abruptly, rent prices would be among the things that would crater, yes. Are you suggesting that 10 years of immigrants going home would be a net positive for the US?

It depends on what "net positive for the US" means. There would be immediate product and service shortages and lost intellectual capital, but a huge explosion in available housing, spots at universities, open jobs desperate for labor, etc.

I use the dramatic case of "all immigrants going home" to illustrate that immigration affects the housing crunch and it's ridiculous to talk about it without mentioning the population increase. Personally I think the government should intensely crack down on illegal immigration, destroy business that use illegal labor (even if that's to the detriment of the consumer), and then make legal immigration tuned to attract high-skill immigrants easier.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#116

Post by taylodl » Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 2:05 PM UTC

lenerdenator wrote: post #78

taylodl wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Income isn't the only measure of wealth. Also, there are two major expenses affecting Gen Z: 1. Education 2. Housing Both have been increasing at a rate faster than inflation for some time now. While Gen Z may have a greater income, their major expenses are even greater. When all is said and done, they're poorer as a result. Turns out that simply having money is insufficient to solving all financial problems.

Also, healthcare and childcare.

Great point - the cost of childcare is insane right now! But at least the states using the force of law to make women carry their embryos to term will be paying for it, right? Right?

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#117

Post by notaustinpowers » Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 2:05 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #58

cduzz wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ever wonder about who can afford to make all-cash, above ask offers on houses? Or you can rent that house after the PE firm buys it and rents it out... https://www.propublica.org/article/when-private-equity-becom... https://www.thesling.org/are-hedge-funds-and-private-equity-...

>Or you can rent that house after the PE firm buys it and rents it out... That's fine? It's still contributing to the housing supply, it's not like they're hoarding the houses. Moreover unless you want to ban rentals entirely, you're going by definition need people owning more than one house. Finally, the fact that rents are sky-high as well, suggests that housing is expensive in general, not only home ownership.

Homeownership is one of the main ways that Americans transfer wealth, as it's usually the only asset that adults nowadays have that can be transferred outside of whatever's in their bank accounts.

When homeownership becomes restricted due to PE firms and Investment firms buying up entire communities to turn into rentals, the wealth transfer is hampered. Well-off adults are still having to rent and are now directly competing with younger Americans who are still growing in their careers and pay scale.

This puts older Americans in a tough spot of not being able to generate wealth or equity that can be transferred to their children. And this puts their children and younger Americans in a spot where they cannot afford to live where they work, and cannot afford to save enough to begin the journey to homeownership. And the promise of a wealth windfall when their parents pass is becoming less and less common.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#118

Post by quacked » Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 2:06 PM UTC

beacon294 wrote: post #109

quacked wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 4.5M unit shortage wouldn't be present if the past several administrations hadn't allowed huge amounts of immigration in the past decade. Reality isn't constrained to "you have to build as fast as possible since your population is going to increase very quickly and there's nothing you can do about that". If every person who came to the US in the past ten years went home, there would be a colossal increase in housin…

Immigration has always been big and has gradually picked up speed. The idea of immigrants going home does not make any historical sense, neither does stopping immigration.

What do you mean that it doesn't "make any historical sense"?

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#119

Post by cmsj » Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 2:07 PM UTC

lenerdenator wrote: post #72

gruez wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Or you can rent that house after the PE firm buys it and rents it out... That's fine? It's still contributing to the housing supply, it's not like they're hoarding the houses. Moreover unless you want to ban rentals entirely, you're going by definition need people owning more than one house. Finally, the fact that rents are sky-high as well, suggests that housing is expensive in general, not only home ownership.

It's fine if you're trying to keep people off the streets. It's not fine if you're trying to keep a middle class.

Very well said. The asset class is currently in the middle of strip-mining the middle class for everything they have.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they respond by doing nothing (2022)

#120

Post by Pet_Ant » Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 2:07 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #70

Pet_Ant wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Richest? How? Maybe by total wealth. I think wealth should be measured by how many hours at the median wage do you need to achieve a socially acceptable standard of living. Unfortunately, our standards have gone up and there are things that are now necessities that weren't before.

>Maybe by total wealth. >I think wealth should be measured by how many hours at the median wage do you need to achieve a socially acceptable standard of living. That's a weird definition of "wealth". Wealth is generally understood to mean how much assets you have accumulated, not your free cash flow. What you're describing is properly referred to as discretionary income. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_incom…

> Wealth is generally understood to mean how much assets you have accumulated

...by accountants.

"Wealth" as used by most people is related to quality of life. It even shows up in the phrase "house poor" where maybe someone has great net assets but cannot live comfortable life due to the drain of the house. Wealth is not money.