patrick.net

FHA loans require insurance, and as the biggest single lender, set the pace.

Get the FHA out of the insurance business. They can insure their loan value... which would have a beneficial effect. Imagine being an insurance company asked to insure a tranche of certain... risky profiles.

Or get the gov out of home loans entirely, which would also have many beneficial effects.

Don’t forget that Biden was paying over a million mortgages.

In USA, median household income is around $80,000 and the median home price is around $400,000

Likely there is no way they can qualify for a mortgage unless it is less than 5% :-(

AD says

In USA, median household income is around $80,000 and the median home price is around $400,000

Likely there is no way they can qualify for a mortgage unless it is less than 5% :-(

Whole system is based on permanent inflation, because it makes people who run the system money. If health insurance went away, cost of healthcare would drop like a rock. If government stopped subsidizing borrowing, costs would drop. It's a shit system really, because it is ran for the benefit of the few. And it's in every damn industry, everything is like that. From food production, to cars to houses to healthcare.

Fortwaye says

AD says

In USA, median household income is around $80,000 and the median home price is around $400,000

Likely there is no way they can qualify for a mortgage unless it is less than 5% :-(

Whole system is based on permanent inflation, because it makes people who run the system money. If health insurance went away, cost of healthcare would drop like a rock. If government stopped subsidizing borrowing, costs would drop. It's a shit system really, because it is ran for the benefit of the few. And it's in every damn industry, everything is like that. From food production, to cars to houses to healthcare.

Yes, just on face value there are enough socieoeconomic statistics like from Yahoo Finance about top 10% owning 93% of the stock market.

And I would safely surmise at least 65% of the top 10 are Democrat supporters ranging from Soros family to executives with non government organizations and non profits.

I'd like to see profit sharing and employee owned companies, and more emphasis at local level such as with trade schools.

.

AD says

In USA, median household income is around $80,000 and the median home price is around $400,000

Likely there is no way they can qualify for a mortgage unless it is less than 5% :-(

AD says

In USA, median household income is around $80,000 and the median home price is around $400,000

I stick to the 3x's income method. Not gonna get you a luxurious house but $240k can get you a lot of decent homes in good areas. Might not be your dream home and there might be some sweat equity, but it's doable in most parts of the country. https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/210-Koch-Dr_Genoa_IL_60135_M86386-56867

This is NOT near me but I know where it is. There are massive suburbs to the East along I-90 so there's plenty of job opportunities. Nothing fancy house wise. 40 minutes drive roughly to O'hare. Bunch of union and high school grad type jobs that pay $50-60k/yr for one person. Wife gets a $30-40k/yr job and this house would be easy. You can get that with a high school education and that comes out to $80-100K/yr income.

Problem is people can complain about prices, maybe they're not using their income properly. I think that's the bigger culprit of housing. "Waaaaa I can't afford a house after I spent 20% of my income on cars or Chinese crap." Stop pointing and remember you have a thumb. Lift that arm and point it at yourself.

Americans have become cry baby bitches. A lot of boomers were soft or non-existent as parents. As a guy it's seriously so trivial to go make $100k. If you have kids you'll need a partner that can bring in $20-30k if you have kids. $130k/yr is a $390k home and you could stretch it to $425-50k if you wanted to be house poor in my opinion.

Point is you're either living in an area you shouldn't be or you don't know how to make money. It's one or the other.

WookieMan says

Point is you're either living in an area you shouldn't be or you don't know how to make money. It's one or the other.

People retired down from 1990 to 2020 to Florida panhandle from the north after selling their $700,000 bungalow crap shack like New Jersey and Connecticut and then buying a $450,000 home that is near the beach, 4 bedroom, 3 bath, with garage so their family can visit and stay with them.

It's surreal how housing prices got to where they did in New Jersey and New York (Long Island) compared to you part of Illinois (within 1 hr of Chicago).

But that cycle has ended. That is what I am hearing from the local establishment in Bay County Florida as far as them diversifying the economy and not only with tourism (only 5 hour drive within Atlanta).

,

AD says

It's surreal how housing prices got to where they did in New Jersey and New York (Long Island) compared to you part of Illinois (within 1 hr of Chicago).

We didn't build for about 15-20 years in most parts of the state, IL. That's why our prices aren't going down anytime soon HERE. Other areas will go down for sure if they built over the last decade.

Not PCB, but I know the whole Water Color area is booming. No pun intended, but that's destined to happen in that part of the Panhandle. St. George island is out of control to your east, but they stuck to single family on the island. You can get houses and lots in the Plantation, but even the most outdated house is probably $600k if lucky (admittedly haven't looked recently). No high rises so they by default restricted supply.

I've never looked at PCB for real estate. Also my searches would be strictly for vacation/retirement. I know Destin, Ft. Walton, Navarre and Pensacola near the beach are going well still.

Weird part with the Panhandle is that vacation rental rates pretty damn high. I've seen multiple properties triple in about 5 years. That's why we've only been back once in 5 years. I'd rather go to St. Thomas or St. John for a week for $1-2k more. It's nice to get away from chain restaurants and that bull shit. Even if not an official chain, they're all owned by 3-5 groups that make the same food. I like the sand better in the Panhandle though.

But if you calculate by gold price, it's now ~ $1,082,900.

MolotovCocktail says

But if you calculate by gold price, it's now ~ $1,082,900.

And on 1 income.

WookieMan says

they're all owned by 3-5 groups that make the same food

ditto. 4 of the 5 Seafood places here aren't chains but all run by the same Family. The same right down to the Sysco orange tangy dipping sauce.

Median household income was $5100 and minimum wage was $1 an hour in 1958. Median home price was around $12,000.

Today it is about $80,000 and I figure the starting hourly wage is around $14. Median house price is around $420,000.

Median price increased by about 5.5% annually.

Let's see...

2025 - 1958 = 67 years

1.055 ^ 67 = 36x

At 5.5% for 67 years, $5100 becomes $183,600, so salaries did not go up 5.5% per year. Salaries went up about 80000 / 5100 = 15x, which corresponds to 4.1% increase annually.

But $12,000 x 36 = $432,000, so yes, prices went up about 5.5%.

Patrick says

Let's see...

2025 - 1958 = 67 years

1.055 ^ 67 = 36x

At 5.5% for 67 years, $5100 becomes $183,600, so salaries did not go up 5.5% per year. Salaries went up about 80000 / 5100 = 15x, which corresponds to 4.1% increase annually.

But $12,000 x 36 = $432,000, so yes, prices went up about 5.5%.

I prefer the median income, not household.

It's a bad comparison between Ward Cleaver plus wife,kids, and pets on a single income to Ashley and Raylan the DINKs with two incomes, a dog, but no kids.

So over such a time, between the 50s and today, we should compare apples to apples... a ONE income family. Using today's median household income distorts that due to DINKs - No kids by the 30s was another rarity prior to the last few decades, but common now.

I'd say use $50k, not $80k. Or maybe split the difference to get closer to the decline in living standards.

AmericanKulak says

I prefer the median income, not household.

It's a bad comparison between Ward Cleaver plus wife,kids, and pets on a single income to Ashley and Raylan the DINKs with two incomes, a dog, but no kids.

So over such a time, between the 50s and today, we should compare apples to apples... a ONE income family. Using today's median household income distorts that due to DINKs - No kids by the 30s was another rarity prior to the last few decades, but common now.

I'd say use $50k, not $80k. Or maybe split the difference to get closer to the decline in living standards.

I spent a lot of time looking at this in 2007 to try to figure out what should be the expected price of gold after the US went off the gold standard. The US went off the gold standard in 1971, but there was some "float" in the later 1960's due to international politics (I think involving France). So my benchmark year was 1967, before that happened. 1967 also happened to be the CPI benchmark year before the government changed it to a later date coincidently when it began applying hedonics to its calculations.

I tried to benchmark gold against all sorts of stuff like median rent, house price, barrel of crude oil, commodities like corn and eggs. I used numbers from US Government web sites (census, bureau of labor statistics, federal reserve board). All those stuff seemed to be dominated by their own exogenous factors that swamped out the effect of money printing.

I settled on the hours a median wage earner would have to work to trade his/her labor for an ounce of gold. At first I benchmarked median household income. That was a good proxy for the early years but I realized that in the early 1970's the typical household lived on one paycheck but by the end of the 1980's the typical household had one than one wage earner. We all know the reason, - women going into the workplace. The extra paycheck masked the declining purchasing power of a workers' wages, - while it worked.

In the beginning the divergence between median household income and median wage earners' income was minimal, almost a rounding error. But it grew year by year till it plateaued in 1995. I supposed that was the year when all the women who were going to join the workforce had done so. I forgot the calculations that I used to put a number on this effect, but I remembered the result was 1.1% per year. So essentially, due to our declining standard of living, all else being equal a median worker would have to work 1.1% more years each year to trade their labor for an ounce of gold.

At the time (2007), my estimate was that the "median" worker ought to trade something like 32 hours of labor for an ounce of gold. That gold price calculated to something like $780. When gold was near that price in 2007, I quit buying.

I lost all the data when my employer replaced the PC's assigned to us, and I lost the mojo to make a new spread sheet. I suppose that since 2007 the gold price CAGR has averaged between 7% to 8%, - a piss poor investment compared to stocks. But a good return for a fiat money substitute. BTW my cool and hip Silicon Valley residence has appreciated at a CAGR of about 3% during the same years.

.

So housing started to deviate from the historical median around the start of Bill Clinton's second term. What legislation did he sign to contribute to this, or what policies and executive orders as well ?

But one thing for sure, housing has become an asset like stocks such as with AirBnB, etc.

Combine this with the banking industry promoting HELOCs and reverse mortgages.

.

MolotovCocktail says

But if you calculate by gold price, it's now ~ $1,082,900.

AD says

MolotovCocktail says

But if you calculate by gold price, it's now ~ $1,082,900.

....and that is where we are headed. The era of 3% interest rates are over...at least until the Millennials flood the capital markets with massive amounts of retirement funds starting in the mid 2030s.

https://x.com/nickgerli1/status/1922291339191853089

B.A.C.A.H. says

a piss poor investment compared to stocks

I think that gold should not be considered an investment at all, but only to be real money which holds its value more or less, unlike fiat "money". No one should count on real returns or losses from gold. Gold just sits there, but it's very good at that. Doesn't even rust.

Real investments are those that actually produce an income stream. Businesses are a good example. Land may be another, because water and sunshine continuously fall on land, letting plants and animals grow there. So a plot of harvestable forest land is a real investment.

Patrick says

I think that gold should not be considered an investment at all, but only to be real money which holds its value more or less, unlike fiat "money". No one should count on real returns or losses from gold. Gold just sits there, but it's very good at that. Doesn't even rust.

Real investments are those that actually produce an income stream. Businesses are a good example. Land may be another, because water and sunshine continuously fall on land, letting plants and animals grow there. So a plot of harvestable forest land is a real investment.

Yup. Gold is money, not an investment.

Apartments are not doing well. Explains why construction stopped on Hathaway Luxury Apartments in Panama City Beach after they excavated last April.

This may adversely effect townhomes and condos values since about 50% of them in Panama City Beach are owned by landlords.

"The CMBS delinquency rate for multifamily properties increased to 6.57% in April 2025, a rise of 113 basis points from March. This follows a significant increase in March, where the rate rose to 5.44%, its highest level in nearly 10 years. Over the past year, the multifamily delinquency rate has risen by 360 basis points."

I looked at the city that I moved from 5 years ago. Rents and houses are still crazy high, I haven't seen any drops. Along with those increases the cost of insurance, gas, and everything else I don't know how people are making it. The mortgage on my old house would be over 5k with 20% down. My friend that's looking in neighborhoods with good schools told me he can't find a 3br apt that's under 3.5k

RC2006 says

I looked at the city that I moved from 5 years ago.

What city is it?

B.A.C.A.H. says

Yup. Gold is money, not an investment.

I have seen as many people pay for stuff with Bitcoin as I have seen them pay with Gold. That is Zero.

In 1980 the average price of gold was $615 per ounce. Then it hit a bad spell as a commodity. It dropped in price every year for 20 straight years. In 2000 the average price was $280 per ounce. Nobody in 2000 thought of gold as money (you couldn't spend it freely), nobody thought of it as a store of value (dropping in price for 20 straight years cures people of that notion).

Gold is a commodity and not a particularly useful one.

Generally, there are no bad investments, only bad timing.

Everything the gold salesman are saying about gold today, they said in 1980 as well.

B.A.C.A.H. says

RC2006 says

I looked at the city that I moved from 5 years ago.

What city is it?

Valencia

AD says

.

So housing started to deviate from the historical median around the start of Bill Clinton's second term. What legislation did he sign to contribute to this, or what policies and executive orders as well ?

But one thing for sure, housing has become an asset like stocks such as with AirBnB, etc.

Combine this with the banking industry promoting HELOCs and reverse mortgages.

.

Glass Steagal?

Misc says

B.A.C.A.H. says

Yup. Gold is money, not an investment.

I have seen as many people pay for stuff with Bitcoin as I have seen them pay with Gold. That is Zero.

In 1980 the average price of gold was $615 per ounce. Then it hit a bad spell as a commodity. It dropped in price every year for 20 straight years. In 2000 the average price was $280 per ounce. Nobody in 2000 thought of gold as money (you couldn't spend it freely), nobody thought of it as a store of value (dropping in price for 20 straight years cures people of that notion).

Gold is a commodity and not a particularly useful one.

Generally, there are no bad investments, only bad timing.

Everything the gold salesman are saying about gold today, they said in 1980 as well.

That period in the 'naughties was when the central banks of the world were divesting themselves of gold, most famously the Bank of England. It was the "End of History," the commies had been defeated, and the US was the hegemon. Confidence in the dollar was sky high.

Now the gold price is buoyed by massive central bank buying, providing an ever-escalating floor under the price of gold.

Yes, the price of gold makes no sense when you completely strip the macroeconomic context from its interpretation.

This is a mistake.

Gold is rising because the confidence of the US dollar is falling. Central banks around the world, who previously held US Treasuries, have now stopped buying them or are selling them and buying gold instead. Also, the $20 trillion injected into the world financial system during the scamdemic is creating massive monetary inflation, which was reflected in the price of gold back in 2021.

stereotomy says

Gold is rising because the confidence of the US dollar is falling.

Why is everything always about the 'confidence of the dollar' simply because that is what is used for most gold transactions?

The Chinese have been buying shitloads of bullion. Shitloads. And the only reason the dollar is 'impacted' is because nobody wants yuan for the gold except in very few cases. So the Chinks are selling treasuries to get the dollars to buy gold. Otherwise, they'd have to sell their export shit for gold directly. Like the Russians currently do.

What does that say about the yuan vs the dollar?

Ditto for Shitcoin. What is Shitcoin priced in? What is it that it is mostly sold for? Euros? Diners? Yen? Wampum or kumquats? Or yuan?

Nope. Dollars.

You all keep forgetting that peeps are also SELLING shitcoin and gold for something else. And that something else is dollars for the most part.

stereotomy says

Yes, the price of gold makes no sense when you completely strip the macroeconomic context from its interpretation.

This is a mistake.

I understand you fully now. ----- "This Time It's Different"

MolotovCocktail says

What does that say about the yuan vs the dollar?

Ditto for Shitcoin. What is Shitcoin priced in? What is it that it is mostly sold for? Euros? Diners? Yen? Wampum or kumquats? Or yuan?

Nope. Dollars.

Chicoms are pragmatic as much as they are devious.

So they will manage the yuan to get the most benefit for economic growth, which means maximizing the employment numbers of their working age population.

Gold and Bitcoin (not shitcoin) are just ways to hedge as far as fiat currency.

Technically, if 1 gold coin bought you a black suit, then 100 years from now it should be able to buy you a black suit.

It holds or stores value.

The same goes with a silver quarter (or 25 cents piece) buying a gallon of gasoline over the last 50 years.

.

AD says

Chicoms are pragmatic as much as they are devious.

So they will manage the yuan to get the most benefit for economic growth, which means maximizing the employment numbers of their working age population.

Gold and Bitcoin (not shitcoin) are just ways to hedge as far as fiat currency.

Technically, if 1 gold coin bought you a black suit, then 100 years from now it should be able to buy you a black suit.

It holds or stores value.

The same goes with a silver quarter (or 25 cents piece) buying a gallon of gasoline over the last 50 years.

None of that addresses the point I was making.

MolotovCocktail says

AD says

Chicoms are pragmatic as much as they are devious.

So they will manage the yuan to get the most benefit for economic growth, which means maximizing the employment numbers of their working age population.

Gold and Bitcoin (not shitcoin) are just ways to hedge as far as fiat currency.

Technically, if 1 gold coin bought you a black suit, then 100 years from now it should be able to buy you a black suit.

It holds or stores value.

The same goes with a silver quarter (or 25 cents piece) buying a gallon of gasoline over the last 50 years.

None of that addresses the point I was making.

Yes, ultimately the dollar remains the reserve currency or currency of choice or medium of exchange. People need dollars to exchange goods and services.

I was examining a bartering system (may have been called Trade Bank) and even it uses the dollar to facilitate the exchange of services.

.