2 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

You are triggered so easily and its kinda funny to me when you go on one of your meltdowns and go right to personal attacks, simply because someone dared to charge the elites with malfeasance.

It was unintelligible because of the way you were writing out the numbers.

There definitely is hoarding, it's been widely reported that most of the new home sales are being bought by individuals and management companies that already own many properties, to then turn into rental properties/Air BnBs and jack up rates well beyond inflation.

Poor little Vikas can't feel like a man unless he's calling someone else stupid and $hitting on poor people. How sad and pathetic.

 

single and double digit numbers are incomprehensible!

1 minute ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

No, YOU were talking about rent control, because you wanted to cherry pick.

 

Semantics.

You are such a big baby.

OK, genius. What's your suggestion? Saying people can't own multiple properties? Banning institutional buyers? Congrats, you just destroyed the housing market. But I'm sure you won't come crying for mortgage relief for all the people who go massively under water.

12 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

OK, genius. What's your suggestion? Saying people can't own multiple properties? Banning institutional buyers? Congrats, you just destroyed the housing market. But I'm sure you won't come crying for mortgage relief for all the people who go massively under water.

 

I don't know what the answer is, but I know that the first step to finding one is admitting that there's a problem.

 

Limiting the number of properties that people can hold in some of these areas doesn't sound all that crazy to me. It's just like anything, where you get to a point that the supply is so tightly controlled by the wealthy that they just keep swapping them amongst themselves, giving the illusion that the housing market is booming and raising the price of housing to the the breaking point.

Just now, vikas83 said:

OK, genius. What's your suggestion? Saying people can't own multiple properties? Banning institutional buyers? Congrats, you just destroyed the housing market. But I'm sure you won't come crying for mortgage relief for all the people who go massively under water.

Not for nothing, but the original post was an explanation that a huge percentage of price increases during this inflationary cycle was due to corporate profits.  It wasn't specifically about the housing market and it wasn't about any proposal for solving the issue.  It was just about informing people.  Unless for some reason you think the American people are smart enough to figure this out on their own, which I know you don't believe.

Just now, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I don't know what the answer is, but I know that the first step to finding one is admitting that there's a problem.

 

Has it ever crossed your mind that you, and those like you, might be the problem?

Just now, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I don't know what the answer is, but I know that the first step to finding one is admitting that there's a problem.

You're diagnosing the problem wrong. There isn't "hoarding" of real estate -- no one is buying up homes and then taking them off the market to sit empty. As a landlord (both personally and professionally), the last thing you want is an empty property earning no return. Occupancy rates are at all time highs, and people are paying the rents. 

The issue IS a lack of supply, but that's because overregulation and other factors make building affordable housing unattractive. The issue you need to combat is there needs to be a GREATER supply of low cost housing, which is pretty impossible to do in the current environment (regulations, inflation, borrowing costs). It could have been done over the last decade, but trying to build in ANY of these places is a nightmare. Just the EIR (environmental impact) studies alone take years and cost millions. We've done some of this for work in Southern CA, and it's just never worth it. 

1 minute ago, vikas83 said:

You're diagnosing the problem wrong. There isn't "hoarding" of real estate -- no one is buying up homes and then taking them off the market to sit empty. As a landlord (both personally and professionally), the last thing you want is an empty property earning no return. Occupancy rates are at all time highs, and people are paying the rents. 

The issue IS a lack of supply, but that's because overregulation and other factors make building affordable housing unattractive. The issue you need to combat is there needs to be a GREATER supply of low cost housing, which is pretty impossible to do in the current environment (regulations, inflation, borrowing costs). It could have been done over the last decade, but trying to build in ANY of these places is a nightmare. Just the EIR (environmental impact) studies alone take years and cost millions. We've done some of this for work in Southern CA, and it's just never worth it. 

My favorite part is how you are forced to build public spaces on private property, so that way your tenants are forced to live around homeless people and the landlord os forced to deal with the destruction of their property.

Just now, TEW said:

My favorite part is how you are forced to build public spaces on private property, so that way your tenants are forced to live around homeless people and the landlord os forced to deal with the destruction of their property.

Here's my favorite real world example. One of the things we did in the past was buying golf courses by acquiring the debt at a discount. Post the Tiger boom, this country built waaaaaaay too many courses, and most can't make money or support the debt. So we'd buy them and then begin the process of getting them re-zoned and re-entitled to build housing. And EVERYONE fought us. Nearby homeowners fight tooth and nail, because they don't want affordable housing near them. Each project we're going through multiple rounds of EIRs and CEQA submissions, trying to move it forward. Eventually, we end up either dealing with a city council, planning commission or in some cases a ballot initiative. All of this, and we commit to make 20-30% of the homes affordable housing for low income residents. 

Usually, it's like a 7 year process just to get to the point where we can bring in a homebuilder. Now, we can sit on that, invest millions more and work the process because we don't have LPs. But normal investors can't have dead money for a decade, no matter what the payoff. 

They need to make it easier to actually build housing.

15 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I don't know what the answer is, but I know that the first step to finding one is admitting that there's a problem.

 

Limiting the number of properties that people can hold in some of these areas doesn't sound all that crazy to me. It's just like anything, where you get to a point that the supply is so tightly controlled by the wealthy that they just keep swapping them amongst themselves, giving the illusion that the housing market is booming and raising the price of housing to the the breaking point.

There is no possible way that is Constitutional. 

What you really want to do is limit 1031 exchanges to try and combat people re-investing with no tax. I don't support that, but it would be much more effective and legal.

3 hours ago, vikas83 said:

OK. Let's educate with a real world example of liberal economic illiteracy.

For decades in Oakland, buildings built pre-1983 have been subject to rent control. This only allowed rents to be raised at a maximum of CPI. Landlords entered into this deal willingly and abided by it for decades as CPI generally was below 2%. This lead to massively below market rents, especially as Oakland gentrified and an influx of people crossed the bay from San Francisco. 

Now that CPI is over 8%, the City Council passed a bill limiting rent increases to the lower of 3% of 60% of CPI, because dammit -- people have a need to live. So now landlords in older buildings (who tend to be individuals, not corporations), have costs skyrocketing (labor, maintenance, borrowing costs) and can't recoup that from rents even though they agreed not to raise rents for decades.

The end conclusion? Landlords are now looking to file for bankruptcy. And what can they do in bankruptcy you ask? Why...REJECT THEIR TENANT LEASES, THROW THEM OUT AND RE-PRICE THE UNITS TO MARKET RATES. Which is exactly what is beginning to happen. 

Liberals -- the most economically illiterate clowns on the planet.

maybe those landlords should learn to code. 

 

3 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Here's my favorite real world example. One of the things we did in the past was buying golf courses by acquiring the debt at a discount. Post the Tiger boom, this country built waaaaaaay too many courses, and most can't make money or support the debt. So we'd buy them and then begin the process of getting them re-zoned and re-entitled to build housing. And EVERYONE fought us. Nearby homeowners fight tooth and nail, because they don't want affordable housing near them. Each project we're going through multiple rounds of EIRs and CEQA submissions, trying to move it forward. Eventually, we end up either dealing with a city council, planning commission or in some cases a ballot initiative. All of this, and we commit to make 20-30% of the homes affordable housing for low income residents. 

Usually, it's like a 7 year process just to get to the point where we can bring in a homebuilder. Now, we can sit on that, invest millions more and work the process because we don't have LPs. But normal investors can't have dead money for a decade, no matter what the payoff. 

They need to make it easier to actually build housing.

Can’t really blame them tbh…

1 minute ago, mr_hunt said:

maybe those landlords should learn to code. 

 

OK, that made me laugh.

I hope Vikas treats his tenants better than his secretaries...

1 minute ago, DEagle7 said:

I hope Vikas treats his tenants better than his secretaries...

Currently evicting one right now. Total PITA. 

It's a business in a mall we own, not a person. Before everyone has a stroke.

1 hour ago, vikas83 said:

Currently evicting one right now. Total PITA. 

It's a business in a mall we own, not a person. Before everyone has a stroke.

Business is business. I've had to evict a tenant before (only once) and it sucked. I was lucky after that and had the same family for the  next 11 years I owned the house before selling.

8 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Currently evicting one right now. Total PITA. 

It's a business in a mall we own, not a person. Before everyone has a stroke.

My dad was a commercial developer and dabbled in some residential stuff.  I get it.  Evictions blow.

1 hour ago, Bacarty2 said:

I don't know what the answer is, but I know that the first step to finding one is admitting that there's a problem.

1 hour ago, vikas83 said:

Currently evicting one right now. Total PITA. 

It's a business in a mall we own, not a person. Before everyone has a stroke.

Not as if we care either way

This is the Bay Area in one screenshot :

1 hour ago, TEW said:

This is the Bay Area in one screenshot :

It's important that we have strict permitting processes for buildings such as this to ensure public heath is not compromised.  

Meanwhile, also in San Francisco...

Biden hails ‘largest ever decline in the federal deficit'

On Oct. 21, President Biden celebrated the $1.4 trillion drop in the federal deficit seen in 2022, the largest one-year decline in U.S. history.

 

President Biden on Friday touted recent figures showing the federal budget deficit fell by $1.4 trillion in fiscal 2022 from the prior year’s levels as Democrats work to fend off Republican attacks on the economy and inflation ahead of the midterm elections.

Biden boasted the decline as "the largest one-year drop in American history” in remarks to reporters on Friday.

"Let me repeat that. The largest ever decline to the federal deficit,” he said. "Let me be clear. This record deficit reduction includes the cost of my student loan plan and everything else we’re paying for.”

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen also marked the numbers as "further evidence of our historic economic recovery” on Friday, shortly after her office released data showing the deficit reached $1.375 trillion in fiscal 2022, which ended last month.

The Biden administration said the figure was $40 billion less than forecasted in Biden’s 2023 budget and half of the fiscal 2021 deficit, which reached $2.8 trillion, the second largest in history. The new reporting also found that, as a percentage of gross domestic product, the fiscal 2022 deficit "was 6.8 percentage points lower than in the previous year.”

"The President’s economic plan is focused on growing our economy from the bottom up and the middle out,” Shalanda Young, director of the Office of Management and Budget, said in a statement. "Under his leadership, more Americans are working today than at any point in our country’s history, our economy has added more than 10 million jobs, manufacturing is booming, and we cut last year’s deficit in half.”

However, budget hawks and conservatives have seized on the news, sounding a different note by taking aim at Democratic pandemic-related relief like the American Rescue Plan and the Biden administration’s recent student loan forgiveness plan that they’ve panned as costly amid rising inflation.

"We borrowed $1.4 TRILLION last year. That is not an accomplishment — it’s a reminder of how precarious our fiscal situation remains,” Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said in a statement.

"The entirety of the decline in the deficit between 2021 and 2022 can be attributed to the expiration of temporary COVID relief, not due to a renewed era of fiscal responsibility,” she said, while estimating the "deficit would have been almost $400 billion lower had the Biden Administration not decided to enact an inflationary, costly, and regressive student debt cancellation plan in August.”

The news on Friday comes weeks after Biden signed a sprawling climate, health care and tax bill, dubbed the Inflation Reduction Act, into law.

Democrats have touted the plan, a key piece of the president’s agenda, as a tool to fight inflation by putting billions toward deficit reduction. And while some experts agree the plan could be a step in the right direction to getting the country’s finances on track, many have downplayed the impact the plan would have on rising costs.

The press conference comes as Republicans have been hammering Democrats on the economy to win over voters upset about rising prices weeks before the 2022 midterm elections.

At the same time, Democratic leadership has acknowledged the party has room to improve in its messaging on inflation, as recent polling shows Republicans gaining the upper hand in key races.

During the press conference on Friday, Biden noted that "the polls have been all over the place” but expressed optimism that Democrats will see "one more shift back to our side [in] the closing days.”

"We’re starting to see some of the good news on the economy. Gas prices are down sharply in 46 of the 50 states because of what I’ve been doing. We’re moving in the right direction,” Biden said, before going after Republicans for "mega MAGA trickle down” policies.

"If Republicans get their way the difference is going to soar, the tax burden is going to fall on the middle class and Republicans are working really hard,” the president said, while taking aim at GOP-backed proposals in areas like taxes and Social Security.

So basically, vikas is telling us that this guy was correct and we're all wrong ...

 

LOL. Martin tried to get me to invest. I passed because he seemed insane. Couple friends I know got very involved. What he did wasn’t illegal - the whole opportunity exists because the Orphan Drug Act is poorly written. 
 

As always, the fault lies with those making the rules because they are too stupid to recognize consequences. 

10 hours ago, TEW said:

This is the Bay Area in one screenshot :

China can build and destroy entire ghost cities before this gets built, embarrassing 

2 hours ago, jsdarkstar said:

Biden hails ‘largest ever decline in the federal deficit'

On Oct. 21, President Biden celebrated the $1.4 trillion drop in the federal deficit seen in 2022, the largest one-year decline in U.S. history.

 

President Biden on Friday touted recent figures showing the federal budget deficit fell by $1.4 trillion in fiscal 2022 from the prior year’s levels as Democrats work to fend off Republican attacks on the economy and inflation ahead of the midterm elections.

Biden boasted the decline as "the largest one-year drop in American history” in remarks to reporters on Friday.

"Let me repeat that. The largest ever decline to the federal deficit,” he said. "Let me be clear. This record deficit reduction includes the cost of my student loan plan and everything else we’re paying for.”

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen also marked the numbers as "further evidence of our historic economic recovery” on Friday, shortly after her office released data showing the deficit reached $1.375 trillion in fiscal 2022, which ended last month.

The Biden administration said the figure was $40 billion less than forecasted in Biden’s 2023 budget and half of the fiscal 2021 deficit, which reached $2.8 trillion, the second largest in history. The new reporting also found that, as a percentage of gross domestic product, the fiscal 2022 deficit "was 6.8 percentage points lower than in the previous year.”

"The President’s economic plan is focused on growing our economy from the bottom up and the middle out,” Shalanda Young, director of the Office of Management and Budget, said in a statement. "Under his leadership, more Americans are working today than at any point in our country’s history, our economy has added more than 10 million jobs, manufacturing is booming, and we cut last year’s deficit in half.”

However, budget hawks and conservatives have seized on the news, sounding a different note by taking aim at Democratic pandemic-related relief like the American Rescue Plan and the Biden administration’s recent student loan forgiveness plan that they’ve panned as costly amid rising inflation.

"We borrowed $1.4 TRILLION last year. That is not an accomplishment — it’s a reminder of how precarious our fiscal situation remains,” Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said in a statement.

"The entirety of the decline in the deficit between 2021 and 2022 can be attributed to the expiration of temporary COVID relief, not due to a renewed era of fiscal responsibility,” she said, while estimating the "deficit would have been almost $400 billion lower had the Biden Administration not decided to enact an inflationary, costly, and regressive student debt cancellation plan in August.”

The news on Friday comes weeks after Biden signed a sprawling climate, health care and tax bill, dubbed the Inflation Reduction Act, into law.

Democrats have touted the plan, a key piece of the president’s agenda, as a tool to fight inflation by putting billions toward deficit reduction. And while some experts agree the plan could be a step in the right direction to getting the country’s finances on track, many have downplayed the impact the plan would have on rising costs.

The press conference comes as Republicans have been hammering Democrats on the economy to win over voters upset about rising prices weeks before the 2022 midterm elections.

At the same time, Democratic leadership has acknowledged the party has room to improve in its messaging on inflation, as recent polling shows Republicans gaining the upper hand in key races.

During the press conference on Friday, Biden noted that "the polls have been all over the place” but expressed optimism that Democrats will see "one more shift back to our side [in] the closing days.”

"We’re starting to see some of the good news on the economy. Gas prices are down sharply in 46 of the 50 states because of what I’ve been doing. We’re moving in the right direction,” Biden said, before going after Republicans for "mega MAGA trickle down” policies.

"If Republicans get their way the difference is going to soar, the tax burden is going to fall on the middle class and Republicans are working really hard,” the president said, while taking aim at GOP-backed proposals in areas like taxes and Social Security.

 Good one