Zohran Mamdani - Democratic Socialist Mayor of NYC

[Northwestcoug]

USUC is fairly correct though. Narrowing wealth inequality isn’t going to lead to increased production. You won’t magically have more new houses spring up that weren’t there before. Housing will just become more expensive as demand increases from the distributed wealth. It’s not like rich people are buying up all the Big Macs so that the poors can’t currently afford to eat.

Severe wealth inequality is a problem and the US isn’t trending in the best direction, but the presence of billionaires isn’t a bad thing and it’s not the main problem. But it’s an easy way to score political points and it is easy for people that are not economically literate to understand because it sounds right even though it’s wrong. This is why I’m never surprised when it’s people that are liberal arts majors, doctors, non-college-degrees hourly workers, etc. that push that narrative.

I see what you did there.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I've bought 4 houses. I still couldn't explain to you what PMI is or how it works, and if I never have to learn it I'll die a happy man. So I am fairly economically illiterate.

But it's not like we're having a robust economics debate filled with experts here. It's a bunch of fairly intelligent people from varied walks of life. I'll share my opinions, just like every other non-economist here. If they're valid they'll survive the scrutiny.

Apologies if I've missed the presence of an economist here!

[Shaka]

With the trajectory of the US birthrate, I guarantee you that the housing crisis will be solved in 1-2 decades. Just look at Japan if you want to see our future. Used to have the most expensive real estate in the world and now houses are dirt cheap and the second you buy one, it starts to depreciate.

Hmmm, maybe I'll have to figure out how to retire in Japan....

[Jeff Lebowski]

Hmmm, maybe I'll have to figure out how to retire in Japan....

You can pick up a nice house out in the countryside for as low as $30K.

Not sure they are still doing it, but recently they were paying high cash incentives for professionals to come to Japan to work (certain trades/specialties).

[Shaka]

You can pick up a nice house out in the countryside for as low as $30K.

Not sure they are still doing it, but recently they were paying high cash incentives for professionals to come to Japan to work (certain trades/specialties).

I'm just a humble product/project manager with a tiny manufacturing company as a side hustle.

[Moliere]

I agree that narrowing wealth inequality isn't necessarily going to lead to increased production and more houses. I also don't necessarily believe that billionaires are a bad thing. And this isn't about scoring political points for the supposed economically illiterate

Simply removing government regulations won’t automatically result in more homes being built. Developers will only build if profit margins make it worthwhile. You don't need to be a lawyer to understand that profit margins drive home construction If deregulation does not produce an increase in supply, property values remain high and largely out of reach for much of the population. Developers (billionaires for example) only build where and when profits are highest.

Margins are driven by more than prices.

[tooblue]

Margins are driven by more than prices.

Sure: market demand, competition, materials and labour costs are all a factor which underly the point that reducing regulations does not result in homes magically being built and all supply needs being met. The state, or government, actually plays an arguably minor role in a very complex housing market. But I'm just a liberal arts grad so maybe that complexity is beyond me.

[Pelado]

You can pick up a nice house out in the countryside for as low as $30K.

Not sure they are still doing it, but recently they were paying high cash incentives for professionals to come to Japan to work (certain trades/specialties).

When you say "professionals" does that include certain professional musicians?

[Copelius]

I see what you did there.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I've bought 4 houses. I still couldn't explain to you what PMI is or how it works, and if I never have to learn it I'll die a happy man. So I am fairly economically illiterate.

But it's not like we're having a robust economics debate filled with experts here. It's a bunch of fairly intelligent people from varied walks of life. I'll share my opinions, just like every other non-economist here. If they're valid they'll survive the scrutiny.

Apologies if I've missed the presence of an economist here!

And me.

[Bo Diddley]

And me.

+1

I have no delusions about being anywhere but the shallow end of the pool. I mean, I still don't quite get CA's point.

[Bo Diddley]

I do appreciate what NWC was trying to say.

In the whole discussion, I thought Moli made the most sense with putting wealth in perapective.

Despite my admiration of the late Queen Elizabeth II, I'm not a fan of being born into obscene amounts of money. I'm socialist enough to favor capping how much can be passed down to the next generation.

Our tax code in the US allows the wealthy to avoid taxea disproportionately. And we're getting to a point where taxes will need to go up--for all of us.

[Moliere]

Sure: market demand, competition, materials and labour costs are all a factor which underly the point that reducing regulations does not result in homes magically being built and all supply needs being met. The state, or government, actually plays an arguably minor role in a very complex housing market. But I'm just a liberal arts grad so maybe that complexity is beyond me.

Deregulation isn’t a silver bullet, but regulations very clearly are a huge impediment to building new housing. And some of those regulations are a very good thing. NIMBY is a thing for everyone, Dems and Repubs alike, and regulations are what is used oftentimes to “protect home values.”

Home prices can’t stay unaffordable forever and they won’t. My college aged son tells me that he’ll never be able to afford a house, and I scoff at that. If my son, who with a business degree and decent job and employed spouse, is in the top quartile of earners his age (thanks to his degree) can’t afford a house, then who is buying the houses and who is renting them? The market forces will create an equilibrium as they always do.

Also, my first home was in Weet Valley City and it was a very small rambler. It was tiny but it worked for me and my family. Sure, we’d have loved to buy a bigger home in Draper or Davis county, but we couldn’t afford it. So we bought a starter home in the hood because that’s where my salary allowed for us to live. Don’t expect to own a nice house until you hit your 30s or 40s

[Northwestcoug]

Also, my first home was in Weet Valley City and it was a very small rambler. It was tiny but it worked for me and my family. Sure, we’d have loved to buy a bigger home in Draper or Davis county, but we couldn’t afford it. So we bought a starter home in the hood because that’s where my salary allowed for us to live. Don’t expect to own a nice house until you hit your 30s or 40s

Our first house was in Massachusetts. Our 2 bedroom apartment in a Boston suburb was getting pretty small for a family of 5, and interest rates were alluring enough that we reasoned a mortgage payment would be at least the same as the exhorbitant rent we were paying. We quickly found out that we needed to be outside a 25 mile radius from Boston to have any luck affording a home. We found a 70 year-old colonial on a fairly busy road which needed a lot of loving rehab. With a generous down payment from my FIL we barely afforded it. I spent a lot of time repairing plaster walls (it was that old) and painting. It was also fun finding out that any time it rained more than an inch in 24 hours the basement would flood, despite the presence of 2 sump pumps. It happened enough that we got very efficient rolling up carpets, putting them on Rubbermaids, and quarantining the basement for a week while it dried out. It was a small miracle that we were able to find a young couple that was just as desperate as we were to buy that house, and we even made a small profit.

Believe me, I'm with you on expectations for first homes. But the house market correction you are hoping for is not going to happen in a vacuum. It will be a significant event that will reverberate throughout the economy. At least that's what this economically illiterate person believes

[Jeff Lebowski]

Embedded Tweet

[BigPiney]

Embedded Tweet

That is hilarious

[Jeff Lebowski]

WaPo editorial board with a brutal take on Mamdani. When did the WaPo stop being liberal?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ew-york-mayor/

Zohran Mamdani drops the mask

The mayor-elect divides New Yorkers into two groups: the oppressed and their oppressors.

A new era of class warfare has begun in New York, and no one is more excited than Generalissimo Zohran Mamdani. Witness the mayor-elect’s change of character since his Tuesday election victory.

Mamdani ran an upbeat campaign, with a nice-guy demeanor and perpetual smile papering over a long history of divisive and demagogic statements. New Yorkers periodically checking in on politics could understandably believe that he simply wanted to bring the city together and make it more affordable. That interpretation became much harder after his victory speech.

Across 23 angry minutes laced with identity politics and seething with resentment, Mamdani abandoned his cool disposition and made clear that his view of politics isn’t about unity. It isn’t about letting people build better lives for themselves. It is about identifying class enemies — from landlords who take advantage of tenants to “the bosses” who exploit workers — and then crushing them. His goal is not to increase wealth but to dole it out to favored groups. The word “growth” didn’t appear in the speech, but President Donald Trump garnered eight mentions.

People’s lives, in Mamdani’s world, can be improved only by government: “We will prove that there is no problem too large for government to solve, and no concern too small for it to care about.” The crowd cheered, of course, but a thinking person might wonder whether it’s good for the institution that has a monopoly on violence to insist that nothing is beyond its purview.

Such crass appeals have real support in New York, where overpriced housing is a real problem. But it’s important to recognize that high rents are a function of too much government rather than too little. Temporary relief because of the rent freeze he promised for 2 million housing units will inevitably lead to less investment, driving up costs in the long run.

Ouch.