Why should government bail out people in housing crisis?

12346

Comments

  • Tim Simmons
    Tim Simmons Posts: 10,541
    Some of my favorite articles are the ones that have some young twenty something becoming a half a million dollar home owner before 30 and its revealed all they needed to do was shop at Aldi and Goodwill, not go out on weekends, and have their parents pay off their school debt. 
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 8,690
    Tim Simmons said:
    Oh, build wealth is all they have to do? Easy. 

    Mr Wonderful claims having success coaching those with $50-60k incomes, he prolly lies like me.
  • Tim Simmons
    Tim Simmons Posts: 10,541
    christ almighty
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 8,690
    Tim Simmons said:
    christ almighty
    It’s great to know better than an O’Leary or a Dave Ramsey about finance, isn’t it?
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 8,690
    josevolution said:
    Lerxst1992 said:
    Tim Simmons said:
    No one was arguing that that is not sound financial advice. It was that doing that would allow people to afford houses. 

    Build wealth first. Then housing becomes easier to accomplish.
    But isn’t it almost impossible to afford a house for younger couples these days! My house here on Long Island just got appraised at $700K so my question is how much of a down payment would you need to have to get a bank to loan you the rest? And have a manageable mortgage payment 

    35 to $70k and that’s in a high cost region. “Build more with govt subsidies” is not the panacea the left thinks. Building new housing and infrastructure in established high cost popular regions is extremely expensive, so then we are going to use high taxes to subsidize building to drive down that real estate cost to make it affordable? Sounds like an economic disaster waiting to happen. The second a young prospective buyer makes the plunge and buys, that’s likely the last thing they will support going forward, especially if they see their values drop after they buy.

    financial experts like O’Leary and Ramsey say things like pay and invest in yourself first, at about 15% of salary. And I’ve been saying there are much better economic  tools (than using taxes to drive down the markets) currently available to build wealth, like the 401k. Take half that 15% and put it in a 401k. With an average employer match that’s going to result in about $150k balance after ten years and lower your taxes at the same time. Take the other half and invest it for a home purchase. That well exceeds the down payment needed in your example. 
  • Tim Simmons
    Tim Simmons Posts: 10,541
    Lerxst1992 said:
    Tim Simmons said:
    christ almighty
    It’s great to know better than an O’Leary or a Dave Ramsey about finance, isn’t it?
    It was more the dramatic self flagellation of the post really.

  • Tim Simmons
    Tim Simmons Posts: 10,541
    Also the completely imagined intention of what I was getting at is :chefskiss
  • Halifax2TheMax
    Halifax2TheMax Posts: 43,587

    * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

    There we go with the fuzzy math again. What employers are giving a 401K match of 7.5% and what’s the annualized return on investing half of that 15% of a $60K salary? And is that pre/post tax salary? Show the maths.

    Hate to break it to you but you’re not some financial guru telling the yutes how to do it. These concepts have been around for decades but you know what’s changed? Wages and salaries haven’t kept pace with the flow of wealth to the top 1%. But keep on telling everyone “how easy it is to build wealth.” Maybe go on the stump.

    And Mr. Happy started off with $6M from the sale of his company to private equity, fucking over his employees and investors. Granted, he earned it but he sold out to the greed. I’m sure he drives pre-owned, lives in a small size appropriate house and doesn’t stream, have subscription services or enjoy an Starbucks or two a week. How much for his wealth building seminars?

    Everyone should do it because the only thing that matters is you. Teach your kids the fuck with everyone else. Don’t need ‘em.
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR; 05/03/2025, New Orleans, LA;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • OnWis97
    OnWis97 St. Paul, MN Posts: 5,749
    Tim Simmons said:
    We should be relaxing zoning laws and incentivizing building.  

    Agreed. And eliminating parking requirements. Most urban/suburban land in the US is zoned for single family homes with minimal density. It makes building any home of less than 3000 SF with three-car garages suboptimal for developers. And we wonder why nobody can afford homes.
    1995 Milwaukee   1998 Alpine, Alpine     2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston     2004 Boston, Boston     2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty)     2011 Alpine, Alpine    2013 Wrigley     2014 St. Paul     2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley     2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley     2021 Asbury Park     2022 St Louis     2023 Austin, Austin   2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley   2025 Nashville (II)
  • OnWis97
    OnWis97 St. Paul, MN Posts: 5,749
    Tim Simmons said:
    Some of my favorite articles are the ones that have some young twenty something becoming a half a million dollar home owner before 30 and its revealed all they needed to do was shop at Aldi and Goodwill, not go out on weekends, and have their parents pay off their school debt. 
    I was 34 when I finally bought. If I'd never purchased over-priced coffee drinks, I'd totally have done this by 27. If I had not fallen for the college scam? I'd have been a homeowner by 21.
    1995 Milwaukee   1998 Alpine, Alpine     2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston     2004 Boston, Boston     2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty)     2011 Alpine, Alpine    2013 Wrigley     2014 St. Paul     2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley     2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley     2021 Asbury Park     2022 St Louis     2023 Austin, Austin   2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley   2025 Nashville (II)
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 8,690
    Tim Simmons said:
    Lerxst1992 said:
    Tim Simmons said:
    christ almighty
    It’s great to know better than an O’Leary or a Dave Ramsey about finance, isn’t it?
    It was more the dramatic self flagellation of the post really.

    For making a joke he probably lies like me?

    you flagellate at all the lefty jokes here or they get a pass? No need to answer its rhetorical
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 8,690
    Halifax2TheMax said:

    * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

    There we go with the fuzzy math again. What employers are giving a 401K match of 7.5% and what’s the annualized return on investing half of that 15% of a $60K salary? And is that pre/post tax salary? Show the maths.

    Hate to break it to you but you’re not some financial guru telling the yutes how to do it. These concepts have been around for decades but you know what’s changed? Wages and salaries haven’t kept pace with the flow of wealth to the top 1%. But keep on telling everyone “how easy it is to build wealth.” Maybe go on the stump.

    And Mr. Happy started off with $6M from the sale of his company to private equity, fucking over his employees and investors. Granted, he earned it but he sold out to the greed. I’m sure he drives pre-owned, lives in a small size appropriate house and doesn’t stream, have subscription services or enjoy an Starbucks or two a week. How much for his wealth building seminars?

    Everyone should do it because the only thing that matters is you. Teach your kids the fuck with everyone else. Don’t need ‘em.

    Did not say employers give a 7% match. I Did quote O’Leary that workers would be better off investing 15% in themselves first, and half of that could be 401k. And better options are available right now to leverage employer contribution match and tax deferrals to build wealth. That’s not saying the actual  match is 7.5%.
     
    Did not say it was easy. I did say it was a better option than increasing taxes to drive down real estate and  stock market to subsidize more public housing, on a scale needed to solve the problem of too many insisting on living in high demand areas. 

    did not say a word about O’Learys personal path. Thats all you.

    Did not suggest attending his seminars for cost. That’s all you.

    did not say everyone should do it. Did say it was smarter than the socialist options. 

    And why are you and the lefties the only ones allowed to speak freely?
  • Tim Simmons
    Tim Simmons Posts: 10,541
    Lerxst1992 said:
    Tim Simmons said:
    Lerxst1992 said:
    Tim Simmons said:
    christ almighty
    It’s great to know better than an O’Leary or a Dave Ramsey about finance, isn’t it?
    It was more the dramatic self flagellation of the post really.

    For making a joke he probably lies like me?

    you flagellate at all the lefty jokes here or they get a pass? No need to answer its rhetorical
    Yeah. You turn everything into a you party. 
  • static111
    static111 Posts: 5,285
    Lerxst1992 said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:

    * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

    There we go with the fuzzy math again. What employers are giving a 401K match of 7.5% and what’s the annualized return on investing half of that 15% of a $60K salary? And is that pre/post tax salary? Show the maths.

    Hate to break it to you but you’re not some financial guru telling the yutes how to do it. These concepts have been around for decades but you know what’s changed? Wages and salaries haven’t kept pace with the flow of wealth to the top 1%. But keep on telling everyone “how easy it is to build wealth.” Maybe go on the stump.

    And Mr. Happy started off with $6M from the sale of his company to private equity, fucking over his employees and investors. Granted, he earned it but he sold out to the greed. I’m sure he drives pre-owned, lives in a small size appropriate house and doesn’t stream, have subscription services or enjoy an Starbucks or two a week. How much for his wealth building seminars?

    Everyone should do it because the only thing that matters is you. Teach your kids the fuck with everyone else. Don’t need ‘em.

    Did not say employers give a 7% match. I Did quote O’Leary that workers would be better off investing 15% in themselves first, and half of that could be 401k. And better options are available right now to leverage employer contribution match and tax deferrals to build wealth. That’s not saying the actual  match is 7.5%.
     
    Did not say it was easy. I did say it was a better option than increasing taxes to drive down real estate and  stock market to subsidize more public housing, on a scale needed to solve the problem of too many insisting on living in high demand areas. 

    did not say a word about O’Learys personal path. Thats all you.

    Did not suggest attending his seminars for cost. That’s all you.

    did not say everyone should do it. Did say it was smarter than the socialist options. 

    And why are you and the lefties the only ones allowed to speak freely?
    The problem being that the millennials are the first generation that have to do all this extra bullshit, and it has steadily gotten worse..  Previous generations could buy decent homes with one or two crappy jobs and not have to run around investing and constantly penny pinching and living a life of denial just to stay afloat, let alone get ahead.  

    The younger generations are rightly looking elsewhere as it is very clear the current system isn't working for them. Take away peoples ability to afford a decent life and put them in a constant rent cycle where it is near impossible to get ahead, and they are going to be less and less into feeling like contributing to that system.

    The main thing that has changed is that the rich are getting more and more wealth funneled upward and less and less is coming down to the masses. The rich and corporations are paying less in taxes and working people’s wages aren’t keeping up with inflation and housing.  

    To say the answer is to gamble money with investments when most people hardly have a month or two of extra in savings is a joke. Also, should an emergency arise you will be swiftly penalized for trying to access those funds even if they have lost money.

    What you are saying does work when the rest of the economy is healthy.  Unfortunately the current state of the economy is precarious at best. 

    Scio me nihil scire

    There are no kings inside the gates of eden
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 8,690
    static111 said:
    Lerxst1992 said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:

    * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

    There we go with the fuzzy math again. What employers are giving a 401K match of 7.5% and what’s the annualized return on investing half of that 15% of a $60K salary? And is that pre/post tax salary? Show the maths.

    Hate to break it to you but you’re not some financial guru telling the yutes how to do it. These concepts have been around for decades but you know what’s changed? Wages and salaries haven’t kept pace with the flow of wealth to the top 1%. But keep on telling everyone “how easy it is to build wealth.” Maybe go on the stump.

    And Mr. Happy started off with $6M from the sale of his company to private equity, fucking over his employees and investors. Granted, he earned it but he sold out to the greed. I’m sure he drives pre-owned, lives in a small size appropriate house and doesn’t stream, have subscription services or enjoy an Starbucks or two a week. How much for his wealth building seminars?

    Everyone should do it because the only thing that matters is you. Teach your kids the fuck with everyone else. Don’t need ‘em.

    Did not say employers give a 7% match. I Did quote O’Leary that workers would be better off investing 15% in themselves first, and half of that could be 401k. And better options are available right now to leverage employer contribution match and tax deferrals to build wealth. That’s not saying the actual  match is 7.5%.
     
    Did not say it was easy. I did say it was a better option than increasing taxes to drive down real estate and  stock market to subsidize more public housing, on a scale needed to solve the problem of too many insisting on living in high demand areas. 

    did not say a word about O’Learys personal path. Thats all you.

    Did not suggest attending his seminars for cost. That’s all you.

    did not say everyone should do it. Did say it was smarter than the socialist options. 

    And why are you and the lefties the only ones allowed to speak freely?
    The problem being that the millennials are the first generation that have to do all this extra bullshit, and it has steadily gotten worse..  Previous generations could buy decent homes with one or two crappy jobs and not have to run around investing and constantly penny pinching and living a life of denial just to stay afloat, let alone get ahead.  

    The younger generations are rightly looking elsewhere as it is very clear the current system isn't working for them. Take away peoples ability to afford a decent life and put them in a constant rent cycle where it is near impossible to get ahead, and they are going to be less and less into feeling like contributing to that system.

    The main thing that has changed is that the rich are getting more and more wealth funneled upward and less and less is coming down to the masses. The rich and corporations are paying less in taxes and working people’s wages aren’t keeping up with inflation and housing.  

    To say the answer is to gamble money with investments when most people hardly have a month or two of extra in savings is a joke. Also, should an emergency arise you will be swiftly penalized for trying to access those funds even if they have lost money.

    What you are saying does work when the rest of the economy is healthy.  Unfortunately the current state of the economy is precarious at best. 



    With that logic, buying a house is an enormous financial gamble, if the folks who now want to raise taxes to depress the markets had the political durability to implement lasting change. 

    To raise taxes with the goal to depress markets is not sustainable , because the moment  a first time buyer acquires a home, the last policy they will vote for moving forward are those that will depress their home value.

    A big reason homes are so expensive are due to how the govt intervened during COVID, more than half of mortgages are still under four percent and the govt infused six trillion dollars into the economy. What did people do with all that money and low rates? Hmmmmm.

    the result? Outrageous increases in housing and stock markets. Sure we can build now, but building is expensive also. So let’s raise taxes to make housing more affordable! The instant you buy is the moment most will stop voting for that. It’s just not sustainable.
  • static111
    static111 Posts: 5,285
    Lerxst1992 said:
    static111 said:
    Lerxst1992 said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:

    * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

    There we go with the fuzzy math again. What employers are giving a 401K match of 7.5% and what’s the annualized return on investing half of that 15% of a $60K salary? And is that pre/post tax salary? Show the maths.

    Hate to break it to you but you’re not some financial guru telling the yutes how to do it. These concepts have been around for decades but you know what’s changed? Wages and salaries haven’t kept pace with the flow of wealth to the top 1%. But keep on telling everyone “how easy it is to build wealth.” Maybe go on the stump.

    And Mr. Happy started off with $6M from the sale of his company to private equity, fucking over his employees and investors. Granted, he earned it but he sold out to the greed. I’m sure he drives pre-owned, lives in a small size appropriate house and doesn’t stream, have subscription services or enjoy an Starbucks or two a week. How much for his wealth building seminars?

    Everyone should do it because the only thing that matters is you. Teach your kids the fuck with everyone else. Don’t need ‘em.

    Did not say employers give a 7% match. I Did quote O’Leary that workers would be better off investing 15% in themselves first, and half of that could be 401k. And better options are available right now to leverage employer contribution match and tax deferrals to build wealth. That’s not saying the actual  match is 7.5%.
     
    Did not say it was easy. I did say it was a better option than increasing taxes to drive down real estate and  stock market to subsidize more public housing, on a scale needed to solve the problem of too many insisting on living in high demand areas. 

    did not say a word about O’Learys personal path. Thats all you.

    Did not suggest attending his seminars for cost. That’s all you.

    did not say everyone should do it. Did say it was smarter than the socialist options. 

    And why are you and the lefties the only ones allowed to speak freely?
    The problem being that the millennials are the first generation that have to do all this extra bullshit, and it has steadily gotten worse..  Previous generations could buy decent homes with one or two crappy jobs and not have to run around investing and constantly penny pinching and living a life of denial just to stay afloat, let alone get ahead.  

    The younger generations are rightly looking elsewhere as it is very clear the current system isn't working for them. Take away peoples ability to afford a decent life and put them in a constant rent cycle where it is near impossible to get ahead, and they are going to be less and less into feeling like contributing to that system.

    The main thing that has changed is that the rich are getting more and more wealth funneled upward and less and less is coming down to the masses. The rich and corporations are paying less in taxes and working people’s wages aren’t keeping up with inflation and housing.  

    To say the answer is to gamble money with investments when most people hardly have a month or two of extra in savings is a joke. Also, should an emergency arise you will be swiftly penalized for trying to access those funds even if they have lost money.

    What you are saying does work when the rest of the economy is healthy.  Unfortunately the current state of the economy is precarious at best. 



    With that logic, buying a house is an enormous financial gamble, if the folks who now want to raise taxes to depress the markets had the political durability to implement lasting change. 

    To raise taxes with the goal to depress markets is not sustainable , because the moment  a first time buyer acquires a home, the last policy they will vote for moving forward are those that will depress their home value.

    A big reason homes are so expensive are due to how the govt intervened during COVID, more than half of mortgages are still under four percent and the govt infused six trillion dollars into the economy. What did people do with all that money and low rates? Hmmmmm.

    the result? Outrageous increases in housing and stock markets. Sure we can build now, but building is expensive also. So let’s raise taxes to make housing more affordable! The instant you buy is the moment most will stop voting for that. It’s just not sustainable.
    Well I guess that leaves me praying for a market crash.
    Scio me nihil scire

    There are no kings inside the gates of eden
  • Halifax2TheMax
    Halifax2TheMax Posts: 43,587

    * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

    Raising taxes depresses the housing market? What kind of flawed economic theory is that?
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR; 05/03/2025, New Orleans, LA;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 8,690
    static111 said:
    Lerxst1992 said:
    static111 said:
    Lerxst1992 said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:

    * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

    There we go with the fuzzy math again. What employers are giving a 401K match of 7.5% and what’s the annualized return on investing half of that 15% of a $60K salary? And is that pre/post tax salary? Show the maths.

    Hate to break it to you but you’re not some financial guru telling the yutes how to do it. These concepts have been around for decades but you know what’s changed? Wages and salaries haven’t kept pace with the flow of wealth to the top 1%. But keep on telling everyone “how easy it is to build wealth.” Maybe go on the stump.

    And Mr. Happy started off with $6M from the sale of his company to private equity, fucking over his employees and investors. Granted, he earned it but he sold out to the greed. I’m sure he drives pre-owned, lives in a small size appropriate house and doesn’t stream, have subscription services or enjoy an Starbucks or two a week. How much for his wealth building seminars?

    Everyone should do it because the only thing that matters is you. Teach your kids the fuck with everyone else. Don’t need ‘em.

    Did not say employers give a 7% match. I Did quote O’Leary that workers would be better off investing 15% in themselves first, and half of that could be 401k. And better options are available right now to leverage employer contribution match and tax deferrals to build wealth. That’s not saying the actual  match is 7.5%.
     
    Did not say it was easy. I did say it was a better option than increasing taxes to drive down real estate and  stock market to subsidize more public housing, on a scale needed to solve the problem of too many insisting on living in high demand areas. 

    did not say a word about O’Learys personal path. Thats all you.

    Did not suggest attending his seminars for cost. That’s all you.

    did not say everyone should do it. Did say it was smarter than the socialist options. 

    And why are you and the lefties the only ones allowed to speak freely?
    The problem being that the millennials are the first generation that have to do all this extra bullshit, and it has steadily gotten worse..  Previous generations could buy decent homes with one or two crappy jobs and not have to run around investing and constantly penny pinching and living a life of denial just to stay afloat, let alone get ahead.  

    The younger generations are rightly looking elsewhere as it is very clear the current system isn't working for them. Take away peoples ability to afford a decent life and put them in a constant rent cycle where it is near impossible to get ahead, and they are going to be less and less into feeling like contributing to that system.

    The main thing that has changed is that the rich are getting more and more wealth funneled upward and less and less is coming down to the masses. The rich and corporations are paying less in taxes and working people’s wages aren’t keeping up with inflation and housing.  

    To say the answer is to gamble money with investments when most people hardly have a month or two of extra in savings is a joke. Also, should an emergency arise you will be swiftly penalized for trying to access those funds even if they have lost money.

    What you are saying does work when the rest of the economy is healthy.  Unfortunately the current state of the economy is precarious at best. 



    With that logic, buying a house is an enormous financial gamble, if the folks who now want to raise taxes to depress the markets had the political durability to implement lasting change. 

    To raise taxes with the goal to depress markets is not sustainable , because the moment  a first time buyer acquires a home, the last policy they will vote for moving forward are those that will depress their home value.

    A big reason homes are so expensive are due to how the govt intervened during COVID, more than half of mortgages are still under four percent and the govt infused six trillion dollars into the economy. What did people do with all that money and low rates? Hmmmmm.

    the result? Outrageous increases in housing and stock markets. Sure we can build now, but building is expensive also. So let’s raise taxes to make housing more affordable! The instant you buy is the moment most will stop voting for that. It’s just not sustainable.
    Well I guess that leaves me praying for a market crash.

    That would make the economy much rougher for those in need.


    Halifax2TheMax said:

    * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

    Raising taxes depresses the housing market? What kind of flawed economic theory is that?

    Raising taxes with the goal to drive down housing prices. That’s that your hero’s goal, drive down housing prices? Feel free to Substitute “significantly lower prices” for depress. Do you own a home? If Mamdani were to put significant public housing development  next door to you, would that significantly lower the value of your home? Not forming opinion in that, just curious if basic economics exists there.
  • Halifax2TheMax
    Halifax2TheMax Posts: 43,587
    Lerxst1992 said:
    static111 said:
    Lerxst1992 said:
    static111 said:
    Lerxst1992 said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:

    * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

    There we go with the fuzzy math again. What employers are giving a 401K match of 7.5% and what’s the annualized return on investing half of that 15% of a $60K salary? And is that pre/post tax salary? Show the maths.

    Hate to break it to you but you’re not some financial guru telling the yutes how to do it. These concepts have been around for decades but you know what’s changed? Wages and salaries haven’t kept pace with the flow of wealth to the top 1%. But keep on telling everyone “how easy it is to build wealth.” Maybe go on the stump.

    And Mr. Happy started off with $6M from the sale of his company to private equity, fucking over his employees and investors. Granted, he earned it but he sold out to the greed. I’m sure he drives pre-owned, lives in a small size appropriate house and doesn’t stream, have subscription services or enjoy an Starbucks or two a week. How much for his wealth building seminars?

    Everyone should do it because the only thing that matters is you. Teach your kids the fuck with everyone else. Don’t need ‘em.

    Did not say employers give a 7% match. I Did quote O’Leary that workers would be better off investing 15% in themselves first, and half of that could be 401k. And better options are available right now to leverage employer contribution match and tax deferrals to build wealth. That’s not saying the actual  match is 7.5%.
     
    Did not say it was easy. I did say it was a better option than increasing taxes to drive down real estate and  stock market to subsidize more public housing, on a scale needed to solve the problem of too many insisting on living in high demand areas. 

    did not say a word about O’Learys personal path. Thats all you.

    Did not suggest attending his seminars for cost. That’s all you.

    did not say everyone should do it. Did say it was smarter than the socialist options. 

    And why are you and the lefties the only ones allowed to speak freely?
    The problem being that the millennials are the first generation that have to do all this extra bullshit, and it has steadily gotten worse..  Previous generations could buy decent homes with one or two crappy jobs and not have to run around investing and constantly penny pinching and living a life of denial just to stay afloat, let alone get ahead.  

    The younger generations are rightly looking elsewhere as it is very clear the current system isn't working for them. Take away peoples ability to afford a decent life and put them in a constant rent cycle where it is near impossible to get ahead, and they are going to be less and less into feeling like contributing to that system.

    The main thing that has changed is that the rich are getting more and more wealth funneled upward and less and less is coming down to the masses. The rich and corporations are paying less in taxes and working people’s wages aren’t keeping up with inflation and housing.  

    To say the answer is to gamble money with investments when most people hardly have a month or two of extra in savings is a joke. Also, should an emergency arise you will be swiftly penalized for trying to access those funds even if they have lost money.

    What you are saying does work when the rest of the economy is healthy.  Unfortunately the current state of the economy is precarious at best. 



    With that logic, buying a house is an enormous financial gamble, if the folks who now want to raise taxes to depress the markets had the political durability to implement lasting change. 

    To raise taxes with the goal to depress markets is not sustainable , because the moment  a first time buyer acquires a home, the last policy they will vote for moving forward are those that will depress their home value.

    A big reason homes are so expensive are due to how the govt intervened during COVID, more than half of mortgages are still under four percent and the govt infused six trillion dollars into the economy. What did people do with all that money and low rates? Hmmmmm.

    the result? Outrageous increases in housing and stock markets. Sure we can build now, but building is expensive also. So let’s raise taxes to make housing more affordable! The instant you buy is the moment most will stop voting for that. It’s just not sustainable.
    Well I guess that leaves me praying for a market crash.

    That would make the economy much rougher for those in need.


    Halifax2TheMax said:

    * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

    Raising taxes depresses the housing market? What kind of flawed economic theory is that?

    Raising taxes with the goal to drive down housing prices. That’s that your hero’s goal, drive down housing prices? Feel free to Substitute “significantly lower prices” for depress. Do you own a home? If Mamdani were to put significant public housing development  next door to you, would that significantly lower the value of your home? Not forming opinion in that, just curious if basic economics exists there.

    * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

    Please link to The Bus Driver’s plan to lower housing prices by driving down the cost via higher taxes. What does “significantly lower” mean to you in this made up scheme you’re prattling on about? Got any examples where raising taxes lowered or “depressed” housing costs?

    Maybe you can find out what happened in Maryland to property values when public housing went up in Chevy Chase or Rockville, eh?

    I wonder if you know that public housing that’s rent controlled went up with the additional land created by the WTC excavation fill. It really ruined the neighborhood. Battery Park City is a slum, eh?

    To answer your question, it would depend on the design, scope and scale of the project. Empty lots next to existing housing get developed all the time. Do they lower the value of existing homes? Or houses next to acres of farm and field that turn into 300+ home communities. Do those existing homes lose value as a result?
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR; 05/03/2025, New Orleans, LA;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 8,690
    “ We can’t afford to wait for the private sector to solve this crisis. Zohran will triple the City’s production of publicly subsidized, permanently affordable, union-built, rent-stabilized homes, constructing 200,000 new units over the next 10 years. ”



Categories