patrick.net

Dude, I'm always sooo honored when Mr. APOCALYPSEFUCK graces one of my threads !

If the government wants high ownership levels, it should raise the interest rates so that the prices of houses go back to 1995 levels. Better yet, tax non-primary-residency houses and condos at ten times primary-residency houses. This will free up the resources from parasitic rent-seekers.

Letting foreign speculators bid up housing prices to unaffordable levels does nothing for our economy or well-being. Speculate on diamonds, fashion, the roulette table, and other things that aren't necessities, not shelter.

Dan8267 says

raise the interest rates

Couple points you hit on, the first above is that in my opinion they cannot raise interest rates until the debt is lower or we cannot afford the payments. Yes, had I seen that earlier I might have saw the higher prices coming.

Dan8267 says

parasitic rent-seekers

At least here in the San Fernando Valley, I was looking for a new apartment and signed up for a popular listing service here and am in my 3rd month. There are still the same condo units for rent from when I first joined ! I emailed one and got a response in less than two minutes. (No, I didn't rent it.) For the tax part I don't think I should go there right now, but it would be revenue wouldn't it ?

Dan8267 says

Letting foreign speculators bid up housing prices to unaffordable levels

Speculators are certainly driving up prices, I'm just not sure they are all foreign.

Dan8267 says

Speculate on diamonds, fashion, the roulette table, and other things that aren't
necessities, not shelter.

Bingo. That is what changed around the year 2000. The non separation of investment and consumer banking allowing all these 'financial vehicles' to be born, like Satan's spawn such as credit default swaps and the bundling of mortgages to be sold, as a 'speculative' investment to investors.

David9 says

they cannot raise interest rates until the debt is lower or we cannot afford the payments

They can't make the payments now. Cut the military.

Yeah, we had to spend a lot to counter the threat of the Soviet Union. The problem was that we didn't cut back after the Soviet Union fell. Instead, we let the greedy warfare industry protect its revenue streams by inventing new bad guys and making the world a more dangerous place.

David9 says

I'm just not sure they are all foreign.

Obviously, not all are foreign. I can say very confidently that in south Florida, the vast majority are. A weak dollar makes such speculation even better. I suppose I'm lucky that the Euro is having such a hard time now.

Tim Aurora says

Investors pretty much saved the US economy from going into depression. They should be worshipped as HEROs.

I would argue that the people you call "investors" are really speculators and that they caused the Second Great Depression. We should have had a moderate recession back in 2001-2003 instead. That would have been better.

Here is the graph from Calculated Risk on home ownership

Dan8267 says

They can't make the payments now. Cut the military.

Problem is that if you cut the entire defense budget, you still have a deficit of at least $330 billion.

Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_United_States_federal_budget

It seems that Wall Street pools of money and small investors owning multiple properties are making up more and more of the ownership pie. Our correspondent in Arizona, R. Arribas is an apostle of this philosophy. I don't blame him or other small-timers for trying to get rich in real estate, but it signals a downward spiral in the general equity, or common equality, in that home ownership is becoming ever more remote.

I was looking at the below graph on Calculated Risk particularly the Composite 20 cities data (all the way to the right on the graph). The current nominal price is 49% of the year 2000's price. That means the price appreciated roughly 3% annually from 2000 to present day. From what I remember going back about 10 years listening to Market Watch on NPR, that home prices typically appreciate about 3 to 6 percent annually depending on the location.

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich says

ASSHOLE INDEX

LOL Seriously. I can't wait to see this parade of 'Hero Investors' on Thanksgiving Day !

adarmiento says

Problem is that if you cut the entire defense budget, you still have a deficit of at least $330 billion.

Cut 95% and then cut $400 billion from other areas, say by not providing Social Security benefits to Boomers above the poverty line. Just use SS as an insurance policy, not a retirement plan, for that generation.

Dan8267 says

Just use SS as an insurance policy, not a retirement plan, for that generation.

I agree with you Dan. You mean a means test, or going back to how FDR originally proposed it as social insurance. I think he needed enough Republican votes to pass it, so he compromised and made it a pension system more than an insurance plan.

Social security is not causing the deficit.

David9 says

U.S. Homeownership Rate Lowest Since 1995

or maybe back to normality... as was the case before. Of course talk of prices

going back up would only open the pandora box why the recent bank regulations

failed ... once again.

lostand confused says

Social security is not causing the deficit.

Don't confuse people with facts.

adarmiento says

I think he needed enough Republican votes to pass it, so he compromised and made it a pension system more than an insurance plan.

Separation of Concerns is the single most important concept in the development of software or government policy. You cannot serve two masters. It would be better if there were two completely difference systems, one for insurance and one for retirement planning, than to combine the two. However, I don't agree with the forced retirement planning given how inefficient it is, and I opened my first IRA at age 20.

lostand confused says

Social security is not causing the deficit.

True, I spoke out of context. My proposal would allow SS to remain solvent for future generations, but would not impact the deficit because SS is funded separately than the general fund.

We have to do Medicare reform as well to balance the budget. And that means cleaning up that clusterfuck of a health care system we have.

Yep... we are back to normal numbers 64-65%

adarmiento says

Here is the graph from Calculated Risk on home ownership

thomaswong.1986 says

Yep... we are back to normal numbers 64-65%

Right on with the article if I may say.

How can the sales of real estate rise as the same time, the rate of home ownership is falling? It can only mean that the rich is buying up the house to rent to middle class to squeeze more money from the middle class. Another example of rich squeezing more milk from the rest of the population. It is time to tax them at the equal rate as the middle class.

Oh, and Wong, let's limit the number of properties that the foreigners can purchase.