Economy U.S. economy has already seen 75% of the impact from Fed’s hikes, IMF says

[MeatheadMike]

Yeah I agree I was being facetious when I made my comment but think it’s generally okay.

Some predictions seem to say if rates get down to around the 5% range, it will be low enough to cause home owners to stop clutching their 2%-3% mortgage rate and start selling again. But not low enough to drive buyers into a frenzy like we saw in 2021.

Not sure if it will be that simple, but either way it's hard to imagine things getting much worse for buyers than they have been the past 2 years.

 

[Rob Battisti]

Let’s do a little fall experiment Jack. Let’s take your home and transport you back to 2019. What would your monthly cost be to buy your home then versus now with the same down payment?

 

[Rob Battisti]

"Diminish home value" is the flip side of "diminish housing costs." So, yeah, your priority is keeping rich people rich, while I think we should be thinking about easing the burden of poverty, reducing homelessness, increasing economic growth, etc. I'm not saying that you're wrong to favor the interests of the wealthy over everyone else and of generally reducing freedom, but I don't think that you should prevail.

You keep saying the rich and wealthy. I’m talking about middle class homeowners! This is such a terrible framing of the situation. It blows my mind!

 

[Jack V Savage]

You keep saying the rich and wealthy. I’m talking about middle class homeowners! This is such a terrible framing of the situation. It blows my mind!

You're prioritizing the interests of people who own homes over people who don't. Where I live, you can't get a house for under a million bucks. So it very much is about prioritizing the interests of the rich over everyone else. In places with lower home values, there isn't huge demand for new apartments, generally (in many places, there's almost no demand for it, and in fact, there is excess supply).

 

[Rob Battisti]

You're prioritizing the interests of people who own homes over people who don't. Where I live, you can't get a house for under a million bucks. So it very much is about prioritizing the interests of the rich over everyone else. In places with lower home values, there isn't huge demand for new apartments, generally (in many places, there's almost no demand for it, and in fact, there is excess supply).

I’m sure you and everyone around you. It’s just itching to have a bunch of a AUD’s in each others backyards

 

[Rob Battisti]

The truth of the matter is this, if it were more affordable to buy homes right now, everyone will be buying homes. The truth is no one is buying homes anywhere! If its more affordable to buy homes, everyone will be refinancing because it would mean it was less affordable then when they bought so they would be able to afford a cheaper payment on their homes if it was more affordable, that clearly isn’t the case.

 

[terrapin]

This is a bit of a myth. Its true that there is an increasing number of institutional investors but they remain a small minority of investors as whole, something like 2.5% of inverts purchases. The vast majority of SFH bought as investments by absentee landlords are by landlords who own less than ten units or in other words so called "mom and pop" landlords. I guess that's how you depends on how you define it being a problem. The segments I heard on breaking points talked about thousands of homes being pulled out from under regular human beings so that corporations could buy them.

I think I can see your point, but that's one of the areas where people come to obfuscate. I know you're not doing that by the way. You can say oh, it's only 1 to 3% of the problem. But you know what that means really right? That means thousands of homes are being taken by corporations that normal people could have gotten...
Just saying it's only two or three percent of the problem doesn't really evaluate the human cost.

 

[terrapin]

I’m sure you and everyone around you. It’s just itching to have a bunch of a AUD’s in each others backyards

I have not been following your arguments with anyone else. Just so you know I'm just coming in fresh from here.

Are you really against people being able to put in tiny homes and low-income homes in your neighborhood?

Because if we're against that and we're against new tiny homes being built in neighborhoods with regular homes, aren't we just sort of staying wealthy based on the artificial exploitation of other less fortunate human beings?


If all I'm worried about is my property value isn't that greedy and not thinking about the least among us?

 

[Rob Battisti]

I have not been following your arguments with anyone else. Just so you know I'm just coming in fresh from here.

Are you really against people being able to put in tiny homes and low-income homes in your neighborhood?

Because if we're against that and we're against new tiny homes being built in neighborhoods with regular homes, aren't we just sort of staying wealthy based on the artificial exploitation of other less fortunate human beings?


If all I'm worried about is my property value isn't that greedy and not thinking about the least among us?

I’m absolutely against it. I’m for zoning new areas in high density formatting.

The answer isn’t to bring down the middle class into the lower class.

The issue in doing that it A. Destroys wealth creation for the middle class in an environment of high monetary debasement and B. Creates safety, traffic and other issues in otherwise normal suburban neighborhoods. C. The vast majority of these homes would be short term rentals or airbnbs which means more transient renters which isn’t a positive thing. D. Doesn’t even help the underlying issue of actual home ownership. Sure, let’s work 40 hours to live in a 200 sqft tiny home in some guys backyard for 1400 a month — the new American dream.

EDIT: clarification, I’m against multiple AUDs in people’s backyards. I’d be okay if there were tiny homes in my neighborhood. Just not AUDs.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I’m sure you and everyone around you. It’s just itching to have a bunch of a AUD’s in each others backyards

I think it should be legal for people to build on their own property. I don't think it should be mandated. If you don't want to have to look at a Toyota or something, you should be the one to move rather than forcing Toyota drivers to not be able to afford a home.

 

[Rob Battisti]

I think it should be legal for people to build on their own property. I don't think it should be mandated. If you don't want to have to look at a Toyota or something, you should be the one to move rather than forcing Toyota drivers to not be able to afford a home.

Jack the libertarian.

Well, I think zoning should disallow AUDs on residential properties under a certain lot size. If your mind, there should be no where to move which disallows this.

Glad this is up to local boards to decide.

For me, if your lot is 5+ acres you can have a single AUD. New areas can be zoned high density.

 

[Rob Battisti]

Jacks utopia:

 

[Rob Battisti]

To highlight how absurd this is, if I can do what I want in my backyard, would you be okay if I just put a tent city wall to wall on my property?

 

[terrapin]

I’m absolutely against it. I’m for zoning new areas in high density formatting.

The answer isn’t to bring down the middle class into the lower class.

The issue in doing that it A. Destroys wealth creation for the middle class in an environment of high monetary debasement and B. Creates safety, traffic and other issues in otherwise normal suburban neighborhoods. C. The vast majority of these homes would be short term rentals or airbnbs which means more transient renters which isn’t a positive thing. D. Doesn’t even help the underlying issue of actual home ownership. Sure, let’s work 40 hours to live in a 200 sqft tiny home in some guys backyard for 1400 a month — the new American dream.

EDIT: clarification, I’m against multiple AUDs in people’s backyards. I’d be okay if there were tiny homes in my neighborhood. Just not AUDs.

Your edit makes more sense. But wouldn't you be helping the middle class to accumulate wealth by allowing them to rent airbnbs off their property?

I have a personal stake in this as I have a half an acre in a very nice area and we do rent Airbnb out of our property....

It's actually not Airbnb though it's furnished finder and we rent three months at a time to medical professionals.

 

[Rob Battisti]

Your edit makes more sense. But wouldn't you be helping the middle class to accumulate wealth by allowing them to rent airbnbs off their property?

I have a personal stake in this as I have a half an acre in a very nice area and we do rent Airbnb out of our property....

It's actually not Airbnb though it's furnished finder and we rent three months at a time to medical professionals.

It would help the ones who can afford to install dwellings which isn’t the majority of them. For the rest, their property values would sink.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Jack the libertarian.

Yeah, I have some libertarian tendencies. I think markets generally work best, but right-wing libertarians tend to fetishize them, and they miss the areas where markets don't work. I remember when you used to say you were a libertarian, but I guess as the GOP moves away from support for markets, you're following.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Jacks utopia:

This would have been better:

Or this:

But God forbid you actually address an actual belief of someone who isn't a Republican.

 

[Rob Battisti]

This would have been better:

Or this:

But God forbid you actually address an actual belief of someone who isn't a Republican.

Yes, because that is what high density dwelling in the suburbs look like.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Yes, because that is what high density dwelling in the suburbs look like.

There isn't demand for Tokyo-style density in the suburbs even if it were legal to build. The second pic actually is what relatively high density looks like in suburbs (though that's Atlanta proper). But this is funny. You're insisting that my position is something that it isn't, I correct you, and you keep insisting. You don't seem to realize that I am an individual person and not just a figment of your imagination. My positions that I am willing to defend are the ones I come up with, not the ones you dishonestly attribute to me so you can continue to justify your arrogant idiocy.

 

[Rob Battisti]

There isn't demand for Tokyo-style density in the suburbs even if it were legal to build. The second pic actually is what relatively high density looks like in suburbs (though that's Atlanta proper). But this is funny. You're insisting that my position is something that it isn't, I correct you, and you keep insisting. You don't seem to realize that I am an individual person and not just a figment of your imagination. My positions that I am willing to defend are the ones I come up with, not the ones you dishonestly attribute to me so you can continue to justify your arrogant idiocy.

What limitations would you put on AUDs on existing suburban neighborhoods?