U.S. Homeownership Rate Lowest Since 1995
2013 Apr 30, 8:24am 8,897 views 19 comments
by David9 follow (0)
« First « Previous Comments 11 - 19 of 19 Search these comments
Dan8267
2013 Apr 30, 1:25pm
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.
AD
2013 Apr 30, 1:32pm
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.
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.
Dan8267
2013 May 1, 1:36am
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.
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%
Here is the graph from Calculated Risk on home ownership
David9
2013 May 1, 6:04am
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.
« First « Previous Comments 11 - 19 of 19 Search these comments
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-30/u-s-home-vacancies-fell-in-first-quarter-from-prior-year.html
In a nutshell: "The U.S. homeownership rate fell to the lowest in almost 18 years, reflecting rising demand for rentals and investor purchases in the housing market."
The exact percentage: "The share of Americans who own their homes was 65 percent in the first quarter, down from 65.4 percent a year earlier and the lowest level since the third quarter of 1995."
A reason prices are rising: "Investors are buying single-family homes and renting them out to capitalize on demand among families unable to qualify for a mortgage. Their purchases, many made with cash, are helping to support the housing recovery and pushing up prices."
Additionally: “Credit conditions are still tight and investors are taking advantage, in the interim, of favorable yields,” & “They're making hay while the sun shines.”
Don't hate the player hate the game.
#housing