patrick.net

SkyPirate says

Mish does a good job explaining why hyperinflation fears are nonsense and why the rich and powerful do NOT want hyperinflation:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2011/05/hyperinflation-nonsense-in-multiple.html

Hyperinflation by definition would destroy the currency and thus the banks

Hyperinflation would destroy the wealthy and all their corporate bond holding

Hyperinflation would destroy the Fed

Hyperinflation would destroy the wealthy political class

Sorry that's nonsense. Nothing stops a wealthy person from moving their assets into other currencies or overseas. It would be more correct to say that wealthy people unwilling to live elsewhere but in the United States or for whatever reason heavily invested in US-only assets do not want hyper-inflation.

If you and your family need change in California, you have to vote the democrats out of office. You have to strip them from power, take away their funding, and break their networks down.

bubblesitter says

What's the difference? you rent the same or buy the same? You are still staying in the same place.

Until the owner decides to sell, or gets foreclosed on.

taxee says

We are witnessing the end of property rights for the middle class.

This makes sense to me.

I think in effect, the government has made it so that owning a property is essentially serfdom, unless you become a multi-millionaire.

Goran_K says

Until the owner decides to sell, or gets foreclosed on.

If you want to be in the same place for 20 years then buying makes sense for you,even if costs you way more - financial sacrifice vs flexibility,your choice.

bubblesitter says

If you want to be in the same place for 20 years then buying makes sense for you,even if costs you way more - financial sacrifice vs flexibility,your choice.

There's a big risk there too though: the median ownership of a house is only six years.

The odds that you stay put for 20 years are much lower than you think.

bubblesitter says

If you want to be in the same place for 20 years then buying makes sense for you,even if costs you way more - financial sacrifice vs flexibility,your choice.

There's a big risk there too though: the median ownership of a house is only six years.

The odds that you stay put for 20 years are much lower than you think.

Reminds me of marriage - everybody will be the one easily beating the statistics ;)

bubblesitter says

If you want to be in the same place for 20 years then buying makes sense for you,even if costs you way more - financial sacrifice vs flexibility,your choice.

Look we're all here on Patrick.net.

I'm not going to throw $500,000 cash into a shack and wish for the best.

But taxee has brought up an incredible point. Unless you choose serfdom to a bank, or you are a multi-millionaire, hasn't the government pretty much taken away home ownership from the middle class? The government that is supposed to work for us, not against us?

Goran_K says

But taxee has brought up an incredible point. Unless you choose serfdom to a bank, or you are a multi-millionaire, hasn't the government pretty much taken away home ownership from the middle class? The government that is supposed to work for us, not against us?

The government is working spendidly for us, if by "us" you mean the 0.1% that rules America:

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

Unfortunately, I'm not part of that "us" and you probably aren't either.

It is an old con run by some corrupt people in the money printing business. Jefferson in a letter to John Taylor in 1816 wrote, "And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."

But letting successful gold miners, polluting industrialists, kings, military strongmen, etc., control things doesn't work any better.

Maybe we're all 'Oakies' now.

The government is working spendidly for us, if by "us" you mean the 0.1% that rules America:

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

Unfortunately, I'm not part of that "us" and you probably aren't either.

It's frustrating Patrick. This website, and a few others are seriously my only outlet. It feels like an entire group of people have been victimized.

taxee says

Maybe we're all 'Oakies' now.

Maybe this is the last step before an apocalyptic future. I need to buy more guns and ammo.

Goran_K says

Is it worth it to wait until we are basically senior citizens then say, okay the market has corrected, time to buy.

I don't know if it does.

I have been thinking lately that I may never buy a house. I am not sure how I feel about that. I am 42 now. I make good money. I save a lot of it. I live in a 2 bedroom apartment that I fixed up to my liking. Maybe I will retire to the middle of the country and buy something. I think I might like that, but only if it makes financial sense.

bubblesitter says

What's the difference? you rent the same or buy the same? You are still staying in the same place.

I feel a little transient sometimes. I don't like that. I wonder what it will be like for my son who starts to catch on that most of the kids at school live in houses. We have lived in this apartment for 5 years. I think we easily have another 5 years here. Maybe longer. I worry about the value of the cash I save dropping more quickly than the value of houses. I don't *think* we are there yet, but I do wonder.

I have started to think that maybe later I will retire to one of the Tiny houses. Hope I can still climb into that loft bed :-)

bg says

I wonder what it will be like for my son who starts to catch on that most of the kids at school live in houses.

Why do you hate your kids? Just buy! LOL.

I think it all really comes down to our corrupt political system, where the 0.1% can use money to buy laws, and then those laws are used to transfer more of our money to the 0.1%.

When money = speech, then democracy is dead.

living the dream

Living the dream!!!

I think it all really comes down to our corrupt political system, where the 0.1% can use money to buy laws, and then those laws are used to transfer more of our money to the 0.1%.

When money = speech, then democracy is dead.

when a few can control the printing of money then those who can't are at their service

As someone who did productive work and is older and no longer commercially viable I can attest to the need for a monetary system that can guarantee the preservation of purchasing power accumulated during a persons productive years. The only real way to guarantee this is a system that can print and distribute legal tender. It appears that the rewards of high- jacking such a system are so great that it will always be accomplished eventually by the worst actors in the system.

They had an article about this in the newspaper saying it was $771 cheaper to buy than rent, well, lol, my rent is only $575 including heat/electricity. I can't afford all the extra dough it takes to put up a wife/kids so as to save the $771 by buying over renting. I'm better off living in squalor and gunning for an earlier retirement where I may travel and work in more interesting places than being tied down with a risky investment such as marriage in a feminist cultured society which can really tie a man down in more ways than one.

Yup says

Man what a depressing thread...

Why are you guys so pessimistic? Just have more sex.