patrick.net

indigenous says

But come 2030 the demographics will be in full force though the entitlements.

By 2024-2027 just mandatory payouts will exceed government revenue based on a 3% GDP growth model. That math is one sided that it doesn't matter anymore, we lost this battle a long time ago

Logan Mohtashami says

Heraclitusstudent says

Really? What else did you study?

Senior thesis was on the crusades, Chinese history was my specialty, also studied kinesiology. However, got into finance in 1996. Economics was more of natural fit for me since my family has been in banking since the late 1950's. Studying history teaches you great discipline

I'm an engineer. Contrary to what my handle sometime leads people to think I studied a lot of maths and physics but no philosophy. Well, I did read everything that is known of Heraclitus and I encourage people to do the same, considering it can be done within one hour.
I'm working on AI systems. So for example I understand as well as the next guy that describing past data is not the same as creating a model of how the world works.
Clearly I'm not a finance specialist, but I find your references to climate science and Galileo amusingly condescending.

Heraclitusstudent says

I'm an engineer.

Most people I talk to that are non financial workers are engineers. It's the nature of the beast because of the numbers and charting factor models.
Really if you like data and history, go to my personal facebook page. Because I chart all day and at night put historical photos and events timeline to dates
not just American history but Europe as well.

https://www.facebook.com/Logan.Mohtashami

In essence numbers and numbers, doesn't matter what the discussion is it leads to a final fact. Its the why factor model that creates the separation

Heraclitusstudent says

but I find your references to climate science and Galileo amusingly condescending.

If you think about that statement, who am I am referring too? It's no one on the thread if they really were factual people?
I am glad someone kind of got the joke

I am a 100% Republican.

However, being a non religious middle eastern Republican with a Scottish name creates some interesting conversations over time.

Numbers can't have a political or economic ideological belief when we break them down. That's why I always have to model things out as

- causation
- correlation
- representation

Then take all the variable factors with in each cycle because each cycle is very unique and it can't be measured as 1 to 1 model with previous cycles.

This kind of runs against the headline sensationalism society we are in and most people don't even read much anymore so the best line of facts is to show charts as it gets to the point visually and then the discussion can happen.

Logan Mohtashami says

By 2024-2027 just mandatory payouts will exceed government revenue based on a 3% GDP growth model. That math is one sided that it doesn't matter anymore, we lost this battle a long time ago

So in the next 10 years do you see inflation or deflation or a mixture of both?

indigenous says

So in the next 10 years do you see inflation or deflation or a mixture of both?

With more young American working in the next 10 years I expect inflation to pick up from the trend we have had in the last 10

Logan Mohtashami says

With more young American working in the next 10 years I expect inflation to pick up from the trend we have had in the last 10

Harry Dent says the opposite, which means you are probably right. It seems like the temptation for the Fed to print their way out of the coming problem to be irresistible.

It's not a surprise homeownership rate is down, which is quite bullish for the housing market.

Over the past five year, SFH has been institutionalized like a mofo. companies like Waypoint, Silver Bay, American properties, Starwood are 0 properties to 10K property portfolio trading on wall-street. How may more 2K home portfolios are out there, plenty? How many 30-50 portfolios LLC's out there, huge? This bode ill for first time homebuyers.

In the end, the only thing that can slow prices down is building and completing more new homes than that can be absorbed. That has not happened yet and which is why home prices will go up until completions go way up. The economy runs in cycle but in the end, social science tells you people compete for everything, including homes. If you can't afford it, someone else will. many factors are keeping homes off the market, the inventory number amid three years of rising prices reflect that.

Anything based on median metric is quite useless unless everyone has the same wage and wealth and no outside factors. The median household is nearly a retiree or a single person household.

SFace says

Anything based on median metric is quite useless unless everyone has the same wage and wealth and no outside factors. The median household is nearly a retiree or a single person household.

I ask this with all honesty, do you have a financial lending background? Because what you just said is actually the opposite of how residential working in terms of how
Debt to factor models are based. Now we have doing mortgages for over 30 years so this is what we do.

However your thesis that median incomes don't matter when would not have this result in years 5,6 and 7 of the economic cycle with rates near 40 year low

I totally understand when people without a financial lending background say this because they have never worked on a loan in their life. So, this makes sense to me. If this is the case then I realize why you say this

Also, this isn't about home prices, home prices as I have said in 2013, 2014 and 2015 are rising because the demand from the Rich are at historical highs and from main street America are at historical lows

Again, if cash buyers just went back to their normal historical % then home sales would be at the worst level in the Great Recession because Main street American doesn't have the
MI2MP
PITI
DTI
LTI models to get a mortgage and this is why we are at 21st century lows in demand metrics

Wait for more 2022-2024 for first time home buyer to pick up

Ages 23, 24, 25 are big but their net incomes compared to area living gives them no chance to buy let a lone have a down payment and closing cost

Let them

Rent
Date
Mate
Marry

Historically 3.5 - 6 years after marriage with dual incomes and assets they buy. However, they simply don't have the financials to buy back to their historical 40% of the mortgage market level. In fact they have been in a down trend for years

Once the dual income factor model comes back it makes the numbers much better

Almost every single housing economics, analyst, and numbers person uses median income. To this date you're the only person I know in America that discount's this methodology

Logan Mohtashami says

Now we have doing mortgages for over 30 years so this is what we do.

Logan Mohtashami says

this isn't about home prices, home prices as I have said in 2013, 2014 and 2015 are rising because the demand from the Rich are at historical highs and from main street America are at historical lows

So basically you're a mortgage banker and you're whining about the facts that some cash rich people and weak wages prevent you from using high these prices to saddle a new generation with huge mortgages.

Heraclitusstudent says

So basically you're a mortgage banker and you're whining about the facts that some cash rich people and weak wages prevent you from using high these prices to saddle a new generation with huge mortgages.

No, actually 2014 was my best year ever and 2015 production in the first 30 days topped 2014 already.

They wrote an article about me last year on this, this is more marketing that drove the business.

http://digital.originationnews.com/originationnews/august_2014?pg=16&pm=2&u1=texterity&linkImageSrc=%2Foriginationnews%2Faugust_2014%2Fdata%2Fimgpages%2Ftn%2F0016_kennxg.gif%2F#pg16

Also, I am in running for the top 40 people under the age of 40 in Housing in America. It's a gimmick I know. However, I really didn't think this social media would take me to a point that I would be speaking to economist, professors , housing analyst about housing economic trends

Just recently at the BNY Mellon Stock and Economic Conference at the Ritz Carilton in Dana Point I was asked to speak about the housing economic reality since my core thesis since the start of my writing about not having enough qualified home buyers in America this cycle

Here is the Bloomberg Interview on it if you have some time.

The model is a bit more sophisticated that what was said but it gave Wall Street an idea. It's similar to what I told economist at the UCLA Anderson Conference back in 2013 and the Chicago Booth Economic Conference as well

http://loganmohtashami.com/2014/12/04/bloomberg-financial-interview-at-the-bny-mellon-conference-housing-reality/

Logan Mohtashami says

Also, I am in running for the top 40 people under the age of 40 in Housing in America. It's a gimmick I know. However, I really didn't think this social media would take me to a point that I would be speaking to economist, professors , housing analyst about housing economic trends

I would say that makes you part of the problem.

Heraclitusstudent says

I would say that makes you part of the problem.

What is the problem then?

I have the cleanest record on file 0.... yes let me repeat 0 of my clients have had their homes foreclosed on because I don't believe in lending to poor people

This is why my main fight over the years has been to prevent easing of lending standards so poor Americans never get debt they can't handle.

There has been countless articles and interviews of me saying this

CNBC clip

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9O_FDLPdgA&t=10m35s

Interview with American Banker on Tight Lending Myth

http://loganmohtashami.com/2014/05/31/interview-with-american-banker-on-tight-lending-myth/

Rebuttal to Mark Zandi

http://loganmohtashami.com/2014/01/27/mark-zandi-its-the-economy-stupid/

Many more, what I am known for is #TightLendingMyth.. which is not common from people in my industry and I have been in disagreement with David Stevens president of the MBA for years on this

Logan Mohtashami says

What is the problem then?

Part of the people who profit from ultra high housing prices, while the new entrant generation is thoroughly screwed.

Heraclitusstudent says

art of the people who profit from ultra high housing prices, while the new entrant generation is thoroughly screwed.

So you agree with my crusade on fighting to prevent easing of lending standards to allow more people into housing that shouldn't be there.

Housing is terribly subsided already

MID
Capital Gain Tax Structure
Low down payment and low Fico loans
All supported by the U.S. government because they love housing for it's
Multiplier impact on the economy
State revenues
Forced saving thesis

Heraclitusstudent says

ultra high housing prices,

:-) See I knew deep inside you agreed with me that home prices are too high ( from an old article)

Home prices are too damn high!

The term “housing recovery” suggests that home prices are now “returning to normal”. In truth however, prices are rising beyond economic reality of most Americans. While home owners and housing pundits alike were glad to see the return of home values to nearly pre-recession levels in some areas, nary a thought was given to how to how this would impact demand. Prices were up 15%-45% in 2 years — the biggest 2 year expansion we have seen outside the bubble years. While we are seeing some price reductions, there really isn’t any meaningful way to get a price correction in the market until inventories increase or there is another a job loss recession. One of the best things that could happen to the housing market would be a major cooling of prices from the crazy pace we have been seeing in the past 2 years. Nevertheless, I expect home prices will continue to show growth for 2014.

http://loganmohtashami.com/2014/05/05/why-the-financial-media-and-housing-pundits-got-it-wrong/

Logan Mohtashami says

See I knew deep inside you agreed with me that home prices are too high ( from an old article)

Yeah, right, 2005...
You obviously don't agree that prices home prices are too high now since you don't believe that more supply is needed.

Heraclitusstudent says

Yeah, right, 2005...

You obviously don't agree that prices home prices are too high now since you don't believe that more supply is needed.

You have to remember with me I remember everything
Here are 2 articles saying Let the zombie homes just die... it would bring in more supply of homes for the market place.
We can do this dance all day long but you will never get the clip over me, because my model is always consistent

Because I can't hide behind a fake name or fake photo, everything I write on the net gets recorded at read

March 2012 ( Distress Supply To The Market)

Zombie Homes Last Stand

http://loganmohtashami.com/2012/03/09/housing-zombies-last-stand/

Nov 2011

Let foreclosure happens

http://www.benzinga.com/personal-finance/11/11/2097197/let-foreclosures-happen

We didn't due to legal constraints and the fact that many homes were under water and not enough equity to sell

But still today 3.6 million homes in distress, most are all from the housing bubble

it would create 10 months supply of homes for the market place

Logan Mohtashami says

Here are 2 articles saying Let the zombie homes just die... it would bring in more supply of homes for the market place.

...And more people in the rental bucket.

Yes, you're a real Robin Hood: lending only to the rich and letting the poor rent.

I guess it doesn't matter to you if families of 4 live in 1 bedroom apts, as long as you are in the top 40 under 40 or whatever.

Heraclitusstudent says

...And more people in the rental bucket.

Yes, you're a real Robin Hood: lending only to the rich and letting the poor rent.

I guess it doesn't matter to you if families of 4 live in 1 bedroom apts, as long as you are in the top 40 under 40 or whatever.

Now you're just speaking for the sake of speaking, this is not behavior of a engineer, this is more emotional talk

I have written in fact that home prices are too high you deny it

I have written in fact that I don't want poor people to get debt that they don't want and you seem to be against that

Poor people should never ever have debt they can't handle, period.

I forecast ed this back in Dec of 2011

Consequences of an unstable market.

"The longer term consequences of an unstable residential real estate market may be more serious than just the destruction of individual wealth. The ideal of middle class home ownership may be at stake. The census bureau reported a 7% decline in national rental vacancy rates in 2010, along with an overall decline 0.7% in home ownership rates compared to a year ago. There were fewer “organic” buyers, more renters and more investment buyers in the market in 2010 and I expect this trend to continue into 2011. Are we at the beginning of a sociological movement away from middle class home ownership and towards a cultural split between the investment property landlords and their renters both of whom may have less personal investment in neighborhood security, local schools and shared public facilities compared to primary homeowners?"

I can't bend the mathematical model for your liking

I am truly sorry for this, this is about economics more than anything. However, there will never be a day that I would advocate lending debt to poor people who can't handle the payment. This is a cardinal economic sin and a awful Malice that would plague these poor Americans in their life.

I can't advocate this ever.

Logan Mohtashami says

I have written in fact that home prices are too high you deny it

You've denied the obvious fact that more supply would lower prices.
And you keep saying things like "this isn't about home prices".
Tell that to the families of 4 living in a 1 bedroom.

Logan Mohtashami says

There were fewer “organic” buyers, more renters and more investment buyers in the market in 2010 and I expect this trend to continue into 2011. Are we at the beginning of a sociological movement away from middle class home ownership and towards a cultural split between the investment property landlords and their renters both of whom may have less personal investment in neighborhood security, local schools and shared public facilities compared to primary homeowners?"

This amounts to a lender whining that there aren't more good customers.

We can continue this all day, but you can't escape the fact that you are on the profiting side of an evil scheme that robs people from their quality of life.

Heraclitusstudent says

You've denied the obvious fact that more supply would lower prices.

You don't read what I am saying and for that you always miss my point. I can't force you to read, so I will let that pass

Heraclitusstudent says

This amounts to a lender whining that there aren't more good customers.

United States Federal Government has set in place standards to allow debt to not be given to those who can't obtain it. This is a positive step for housing.

The system will not be corrupted again because we have numbers in place now that needs to be verified and the bar is still low

VA loans 0% down 620 fico 60% DTI
FHA 3.5% down 560-620 fico score 43% DTI up to 50% in some cases
GSE 3% down 620 Fico score up to 50% DTI

These aren't very strict metrics to own a home. The United States government and CFPB has set into place laws in preventing debt been given to poor people
this is a positive not a negative

Heraclitusstudent says

We can continue this all day, but you can't escape the fact that you are on the profiting side of an evil scheme that robs people from their quality of life.

Have a good day and good weekend sir.

Logan Mohtashami says

You don't read what I am saying and for that you always miss my point. I can't force you to read, so I will let that pass

I read exactly what you wrote. Rich people... cash... blah blah blah... It should occur to you the money you lend has to go somewhere.

If you agree with it, just say it: "more supply would help lower prices". Here you just have to cut and paste.

Otherwise don't pretend you're unhappy prices are high. You're just unhappy people are buying without mortgages and others just renting.

Logan Mohtashami says

These aren't very strict metrics to own a home. The United States government and CFPB has set into place laws in preventing debt been given to poor people

this is a positive not a negative

Yeah, too bad prices are so high. Otherwise people could, you know, like, actually buy.

"There is 5 months of supply NOW"

Heraclitusstudent says

You're just unhappy people are buying without mortgages and others just renting.

You're getting too emotional now, show discipline you're all over the place now.

I am making too much profits and I am unhappy at the same time?

Come on you're a engineer fall back to your discipline. Think about what you're saying now, you know better

You're advocating something that led poor Americans to suffer through the great recession and lose their homes.

Giving non owning capacity debt to the worst debt to income ratio Americans. Why would you advocate such a terrible social policy. Thankfully their are promising democrats that won't allow you get your wish such as Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.

If you have a problem with the United States government for setting new regulations then here is the web site of the consumer financial protection bureau

http://www.consumerfinance.gov/

Add your full name to accept 100% responsibility and file a complaint that poor people aren't getting homes. They are setting the rules if you're oppose to the government regulations then file a complaint

Bellingham Bill says

"There is 5 months of supply NOW"

On a national basis average for an entire year. We did hit 6 months last year at the peak of the housing selling season but it was only for 1 month and for the spring season selling inventory was well over 5 months last year.. so there were homes out there on a national level

Distress homes are still shrinking, even though we do have 3.6 millions in distress and I believe right now 815,000 that are foreclosed and not in market. That market place is shrinking and conventional sales are rising

Logan Mohtashami says

Giving non owning capacity debt to the worst debt to income ratio Americans.

I've advocated no such thing.

Logan Mohtashami says

You're advocating something that led poor Americans to suffer through the great recession and lose their homes.

I'm advocating low prices. Are you claiming that low prices caused people to lose their homes?
You are not making sense.

I do think poor people should rent - and rents would be much lower if there was more units available.

Logan Mohtashami says

You have to stop this BS about inventory being "balanced". The inventory is low.

The months of supply reflects low demand.
Low demand reflects high prices.
High prices reflect lack of availability.

Now say it: "more supply would help lower prices".

Heraclitusstudent says

The months of supply reflects low demand.

Low demand reflects high prices.

High prices reflect lack of availability.

Now say it: "more supply would help lower prices".

A lack of a financial background and a lack of working in the housing industry shows right here, clearly

It's not your fault sir because this isn't what you do for a living and you have no housing work experience in knowing that there there is a glut of homes that have been kept off the market places for years ( distress inventory) and that you're using inventory levels with that (red line)that don't represent spring and summer season which the majority of housing activity happens

Number 1 .... and come on did you really think that was going to work on someone who tracks housing data everyday

Move that red line up to seasonal demands time frame... I mean come on, this isn't kindergarten ;-) You're flattening data line in non seasonal demand months
I can't explain how bad that is what your did right there.

Then again, this isn't what you do for a living

Number 2

For the 17th time ( National average of inventory of Months)

Again this doesn't work on me, you're not dealing with a novice

You have to do better than that!

Seasonal strong months on inventory levels has always matter the most since housing data has been created. You can't just delete Spring and Summer for your own good

Logan Mohtashami says

Move that red line up to seasonal demands time frame... I mean come on, this isn't kindergarten ;-)

As you wish...

Oh NO... the inventory is still low...

And your other chart showing a minor variation over a decade low doesn't exactly help either.

Logan Mohtashami says

Then again, this isn't what you do for a living

You're right. I'm not in the business of BSing for a living.

Heraclitusstudent says

You're right. I'm not in the business of BSing for a living.

I can't believe this, you just did it again. This is my fault I am doing a good job here of teaching you this

You see that red line... move it up to the peak as strong seasonal data for demand and inventory matter. Right now you're the first person ever that I know that isn't not accounting for peak seasonal demand and inventory. This is a new one

Also, please tell me how many homes are in distress or not in inventory today due to state and federal regulation. I am sure you have the exact breakdown like I have right here.

Please let me know, sir

Let me help you not because I track this data monthly

Number of properties that are 30 or more, and less than 90 days past due, but not in foreclosure: 1,701,000

Number of properties that are 90 or more days delinquent, but not in foreclosure: 1,112,000

Number of properties in foreclosure pre-sale inventory: 815,000

Total of 3,628,000

Now legally nothing can be done on the 30-90 days due to legal contract regulation even if they were loan mod re default which I am sure you're well aware of

But the last 2 total of 1,927,000

Whoaaa... not there is some supply of homes right there

However, robo signing act , Homeowners Bill of Rights Act, State judicial laws prevents these homes from going on the market in a timely fashion. Yes, I realize that many people benefited from living in there home cost free for years.

However, there is your supply. Now years ago this number was well north of 7 million homes so things are getting better in terms of these homes coming to market.

However, that is a lot supply.

Now my 2011 and 2012 article if in case you read them calls for a better process to get more supply to the market place because that is what is needed because as I always have stated home prices are rising in a disconnection to main street. Which I will add here just in case if you didn't read it above

Home prices are too damn high!

The term “housing recovery” suggests that home prices are now “returning to normal”. In truth however, prices are rising beyond economic reality of most Americans. While home owners and housing pundits alike were glad to see the return of home values to nearly pre-recession levels in some areas, nary a thought was given to how to how this would impact demand. Prices were up 15%-45% in 2 years — the biggest 2 year expansion we have seen outside the bubble years. While we are seeing some price reductions, there really isn’t any meaningful way to get a price correction in the market until inventories increase or there is another a job loss recession. One of the best things that could happen to the housing market would be a major cooling of prices from the crazy pace we have been seeing in the past 2 years. Nevertheless, I expect home prices will continue to show growth for 2014.

http://loganmohtashami.com/2014/05/05/why-the-financial-media-and-housing-pundits-got-it-wrong/

March 2012 ( Distress Supply To The Market)

Zombie Homes Last Stand

http://loganmohtashami.com/2012/03/09/housing-zombies-last-stand/

Nov 2011

Let foreclosure happens

http://www.benzinga.com/personal-finance/11/11/2097197/let-foreclosures-happen

We didn't due to legal constraints and the fact that many homes were under water and not enough equity to sell

But still today 3.6 million homes in distress, most are all from the housing bubble

it would create 10 months supply of homes for the market place

Logan Mohtashami says

move it up to the peak as strong seasonal data for demand and inventory matter.

Yeah, we all see that there is a peak that is low compared to other seasonal peaks in the past decade.
And we all see that there are lows that are also low for the past decade.
In spite of 25 extra millions people in this country.
On what planet does it translate into "balanced" inventory? I don't know.

Give us a break. This is not Bloomberg TV.

Logan Mohtashami says

But still today 3.6 million homes in distress, most are all from the housing bubble

it would create 10 months supply of homes for the market place

there is your supply.

You have to stop this BS argument that amounts to saying that dragging millions of people into the streets would create available housing supply for the rest of the population.

That would certainly not help house the population we have. I really don't know why you keep repeating such crap.

Heraclitusstudent says

You have to stop this BS argument that amounts to saying that dragging millions of people into the streets would create available housing supply for the rest of the population.

That would certainly not help house the population we have. I really don't know why you keep repeating such crap.

That right there is as perfect statement coming from an engineer! God bless your soul, you a good heart, you mean well. It's just your lack of experience in housing shows.

Have a good weekend I will leave you with this because only you would know what it means on this thread

"To be even minded
is the greatest virtue.
Wisdom is to speak
the truth and act
in keeping with its nature.”

Logan Mohtashami says

Heraclitusstudent says

You have to stop this BS argument that amounts to saying that dragging millions of people into the streets would create available housing supply for the rest of the population.

That would certainly not help house the population we have. I really don't know why you keep repeating such crap.

That right there is as perfect statement coming from an engineer!

I guess dragging millions of people into the streets to create available housing supply for the rest of the population does indeed look good for a mortgage banker.
More mortgages - that people actually pay!

Heraclitusstudent says

more supply would help lower prices

I guess admitting that would actually violate the omerta of that mafia you're a part of. Better to kick distressed people on the street, than actually build enough houses for the population we have.

Sir,

When during the 1999-2001 timeframe saw housing prices going up 20-40% for several years in succession, it become obvious that this was not sustainable. Housing prices were going up, and the combination of flat salaries creates a much high loan to salary level.

Now that for years the interest rate was kept low, do you see a bubble like 2007, and do you see a need for housing prices to be restored to a multiplier level compared to salaries, as it was before the inflationary period preceding 2007?

Heraclitusstudent says

I guess admitting that would actually violate the omerta of that mafia you're a part of. Better to kick distressed people on the street, than actually build enough houses for the population we have.

Your emotional spite for me I totally understand, I don't blame you one bit. I mean you hide behind a photo of an owl and have a fake name, it gives you free right to say whatever you like without naming yourself. So, please if it makes you feel any better please go ahead and say whatever else you like. I do understand where it comes from

My term for the group you're talking about and how I would label them is them

EWOMD

Economic weapons of mass destruction

Lending debt to poor people, which I have showed in all my work that I am fighting to prevent. This was created

by

Home grown domestic economic terrorist. That is how I label them and that is why I always taken a stand to never allow debt to be given to poor people who can't handle the payments

Like I said you have good heart and you mean well, but this area isn't where your expertise stand. Have a good weekend sir

Logan Mohtashami says

Giving non owning capacity debt to the worst debt to income ratio Americans. Why would you advocate such a terrible social policy. Thankfully their are promising democrats that won't allow you get your wish such as Elizabeth Warren

Wow you must have a different definition of promising than me.

Remember you are in Orange County that kind of talk will not help your cause.

The one thing I will agree with you on is that the overarching problem is demographics. Actually to be more exact it is the leverage applied to economics that have caused the inbalances that need to be adjusted. Which you cover in a perfunctory way by indicating "debt is the problem".

Technology is not a problem and creates more jobs than it gets rid of.

Math is a good way to look at this, however it is not enough to say it explains the whole picture.

indigenous says

Technology

Helps the higher end income bracket but does a number on manual lower level skill workers

Logan Mohtashami says

Helps the higher end income bracket but does a number on manual lower level skill workers

The trend of technology raising the standard of living has been around since the discovery of fire.

100 or so years ago 90 or so % of the workers were farmers today it is less than 5%, if your assertion were true there would have been massive unemployment ever since.

The division of labor, comparative advantage, and the law of association creates more jobs not less. As evidence I give you the modern economy, I, pencil indicates that not one person on the planet knows how to make a pencil yet they are plentiful and cheap because of comparative advantage without a single bit of government oversight, people from all around the world working in their own self interest yet without any conflict create this product in abundance. And this applies to every single product there is in the world.

No the technology is not the problem.

indigenous says

No the technology is not the problem.

We are going to have to disagree on this, because wages have been weak for a portion of the American workforce because manual labor jobs have taken a hit due to technology

I always fall back to big 4 for a more macro prespective

Globalization
Technology
Debt
Demographics

They have to be taken in it's entirety

Logan Mohtashami says

because wages have been weak for a portion of the American workforce because manual labor jobs have taken a hit due to technology

How do you determine that the cause is technology?