Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-12-2022, 04:53 PM
 
106,942 posts, read 109,218,153 times
Reputation: 80367

Advertisements

In real return the markets recovered fully from the Great Depression in less than 5 years

The raw numbers didn’t include dividends as high as 14% …many stocks that were popular like ibm were not in the indexes yet and we’re doing better then the market indexes ..the cpi fell 18%

So just like we adjust our market returns for inflation, we need to adjust them for deflation too
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-12-2022, 04:55 PM
 
Location: Ohio
24,621 posts, read 19,208,282 times
Reputation: 21745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklazona Bound View Post
Explain how letting China take over our manufacturing benefited pension funds and retirees?
The pinnacle of manufacturing is not making plastic kitchen gadgets with a Nissei plastic-injection molding machine, in spite of your protestations.

That is so undignified.

Time for Ponzi-scheme pension plans to die.

Why do you think the 27 MAFIA families were all over unions like white on rice?

I'll explain it in 3 words: Al Ca-pone.

Get it?

Capone got imprisoned for tax evasion.

The MAFIA families wanted control of unions because it gave them access to union slush funds, which was undocumented money.

The MAFIA wanted those slush funds to launder money, and a clever accountant could easily manipulate the slush funds to do that.

To launder even more money, mob accountants crafted those Ponzi-scheme pension plans that employers could not afford. If you had 6,000 employees in 1948 you'd need 180,000 employees working now in the hopes of being able to pay the pensions.

Then why did those companies agree to union demands?

Gosh, I don't know, what part of "union" do you not understand?

If you ain't on board, then the union strikes and you already know the National Labor Relations Board is gonna rule in favor of the union so why even bother? All you get for your trouble is lost production, bad press, bad publicity, and then the National Labor Relations Board rams it to you anyway.

Let's see how smart you are.

Why did the MAFIA-controlled unions want control of healthcare plans and sue to get control?

If you said, "Because it would give the MAFIA one more vehicle to launder money" then you get a cookie (that culminated in the 1949 In re: Inland Steel Supreme Court decision.)


Retiree pensions are blood-money.


Yeah, that's right....I'm not losing any sleep over the fact that their pensions are in danger.


Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesclues5 View Post
It enhanced the lives of Americans by allowing cheaper goods to enter the country.
It GREATLY enhanced the lives of the wealthy by vastly increasing their profits.
That's not how it works.

The over-whelming majority of persons with an income of $1 Million or more are athletes, actors, actress, musicians, other celebrities, and persons related to each of those fields, namely agents and producers.

The other significant group is securities/Wall Street Wizards™.

Only a tiny fraction -- 0.22% -- of the roughly 680,000 publicly-traded corporations earn more than $1 Million in cash.

Most of the "wealthy" don't actually have cash. What they have is no-cash assets.

The cash they do have they generate through the purchase/sales of stocks and other assets.

If you spent less time posting and more time working to build wealth by studying markets, then you'd be wealthy, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesclues5 View Post
1 million dead from covid and you think it was handled well and deemed appropriate.
Guess senior citizen lives don't matter.
If seniors need the government to tell them to stay home/limit trips and wear a mask, then double dumb-ass on them.

I guess it's a good thing it was STUPID-19 and not Spanish Flu, because, if it was, you know, Spanish Flu then 5-6 Million would be dead.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2022, 05:08 PM
 
Location: Middle of the valley
48,581 posts, read 34,987,245 times
Reputation: 73942
Covid-19 overtakes 1918 Spanish flu as deadliest disease in American history
https://www.statnews.com/2021/09/20/...rican-history/
__________________
____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2022, 06:08 PM
 
Location: Ohio
24,621 posts, read 19,208,282 times
Reputation: 21745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolverine607 View Post
Yes exactly. The fact that people are actually spending over $500K on first homes is alarming. And sad reality is, that price is actually a small starter home these days in many markets and not just Los Angeles, Seattle, New York City, Washington DC, or Boston let alone the Bay area either anymore. Those metros a starter home is looking closer to $650K to $900K or more.
You can thank Departments of Housing & Urban Development and Transportation for that.

Yeah, that's right....your government caused it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolverine607 View Post
It should be more like national average where small starter homes are $110K to $140K and larger 2000+ square feet homes are like $200K to $300Ks instead of the absurdly high $250K to $300K for small starter homes and like $500Ks for 2000 plus square foot larger homes.
Komrad Wolverine, there's no such thing as a "national average."

You live in a federal republic.

I would also point out the "average" is statistically invalid and no person knowledgeable in anything would ever consider it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolverine607 View Post
Well they do not have a choice and want to own a home so have to pay insanely high prices.
But they do have a choice.

They don't know they have a choice because they're stupid. A patch of brown liquid has more brains than they do.

Let's see how smart you are.....

You've been offered two teaching jobs, one in San Freaksisco for $85,000 and one in Cincinnati for $49,000.

Which job should you take and why?

The teaching job in Cincinnati pays $5,000 more per year.

Yeah, that's right. Let's revisit 4th Grade Math.

49,000 is more than 85,000

But, when you add units, that's a game changer and $ are units.

Now, $49,000 can be less than, equal to or greater than $85,000.

In this instance, $49,000 is $5,000 more than $85,000.

What idiot wouldn't want a $5,000/year pay raise and be able to buy a 3-bedroom 2 1/2 bath ranch with a 2 car garage on 4 acres of land?

Yeah, it sucks to be stupid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolverine607 View Post
And the greedy local zoners and Federal reserve driving dow interest rates has contributed to these insanely high prices.
No, Komard Wolverine, you got it wrong.

I bet you can't even show us the last time in the last 50 years a zoning law was enacted that had a negative impact on property in your area.

If anything, the zoning laws increased the amount of housing by reducing the minimum size of lots.

The Federal Reserve has nothing to do with the Dow.

And, the Federal Reserve does not engage in Mind Control.

Yes, lower interest rates means many people could afford to pay more for a home.

The fact that a 2.7% mortgage allows you spend up to $600,000 on a house does not logically necessitate that you should spend $600,000.

Those people could have just as easily spent $350,000 or $400,000 and then used the money saved from the difference of $600,000 to invest and build wealth....oh, wait,....what the hell am I saying? That would be logical. Those people are illogical. Never mind.

Don't blame the Federal Reserve for the stupid behavior of others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolverine607 View Post
If interest rates were actually normal and the old rule of 20% down minimum still applied and builders built homes at a normal rate, small starter homes would be $110K to $140K in good neighborhoods of most major metro areas.
What is a "normal" interest rate?

Although the Federal Reserve lowered its interest rate, it does not logically follow that banks and lenders should lower their interest rates. In fact, they are not legally, morally, or ethically obligated to lower interest rates.

The 20% down rule was abolished by the Clinton Administration as "racist."

Seeing how you easily succumb to Göbbelisms like "national average" I'm guessing you don't even know how to calculate relative value for comparisons.

The only true and accurate way to compare housing prices across time is price/sq ft.

Yes, homes were "cheaper" in the 1950s, but then average sq ft was 780 sq ft to 900 sq ft.

Today's homes were 2,500 sq ft in the first part of the decade and most now are 4,000-4,400 sq ft.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolverine607 View Post
Instead we get absurdly low interest rates and lack of building punishing responsible savers who want to work their tail off for large down payment or to pay cash for such home in many years.
Wrong again. Savers who put down 20% will always be winners.

Which builds Wealth: Putting 0% down on a $250,000 McMansion and paying $250,000 for a McMansion, plus paying $318,000 in interest....

...or...

....Saving money to put 20% down on the $250,000 McMansion and paying only $79,956 in interest....

...and then use $238,044 saved to invest or save or both to build Wealth?


And then some people on this forum have the unmitigated gall to whine they don't have any wealth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsright19 View Post
Why would the prices in highly desirable metros have “average” prices that are dragged down by hundreds/thousands of different housing markets in totally unrelated areas?
Sign....don't you ever get tired of trying to inject some reality into the equation?

Right there with you.

If someone can prove to me how a 3-bedroom ranch with 2-baths on a half-acre lot selling for $89,000 in Hamilton, Ohio has a bearing on housing prices in San Freaksisco, I'm all ears.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsright19 View Post
Also, when you’ve sold your own houses, do you seek to sell them lower than what you can get and instead sell them in that lower range? Do you build or rehab properties and sell them at this price point? Or do you just want 1 sided economics?
Oooops....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2022, 06:09 PM
 
Location: Ohio
24,621 posts, read 19,208,282 times
Reputation: 21745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklazona Bound View Post
It could be done if it was subsidized with tax breaks and incentives. And newer ways of building homes.


Entekra, located in California and focused on off-site framing, focuses on increasing home building productivity and reducing time and costs. Stick-built framing of a typical 2,500-square-foot house generally takes a crew of five workers about 15 days (71 man-days) to complete, but with Entekra’s Fully Integrated Off-Site Solution (FIOSS) and a crane, the framing can be accomplished in just four days by a crew of four (14 man-days). This represents a productivity increase of more than 500 percent and reduces total build time by an average of 30+ days, with estimated savings for each house up to $25,000. FIOSS also contributes to a reduction in errors and reduces on site skilled labor needs.
I'm all for efficiency, but not subsidies and tax breaks. In any event, that will not solve the problem.

The problem is now and always will be too many people; not enough housing.

Does building houses faster solve the problem?

No, it does not because the Supply of Land in any one of the 120,000+ housing markets in the US is finite.

Since this is the Economics Forum and not the Fantasy Forum or the Emotions Forum, let's discuss Economics.

Anytown, USA is one of 597 separately functioning economies within the US.

Anytown, USA has 106 housing markets.

Housing Market #38 in Anytown is desirable because _______________

A) it has convenient access to interstates/major thoroughfares
B) it has a low crime rate
C) it has good schools
D) it has convenient access to retail, grocery, and dining
E) it has convenient access to other amenities (medical, dental, specialty shoppes, entertainment etc)
F) all houses have more than 3,500 sq ft of space
G) large lots
H) Both ___ and ____
I) These three ______, ______, and _______
J) These four ______, ______, ______, and ______
K) These five ______, ______, ______, _______, and ______
L) All the above

Get it?

It is desirability that generates Demand.

The Housing Supply in Housing Market #38 in Anytown is finite. Every single square inch of land in Housing Market #38 is occupied, if not by a house, then by those things that give it desirability. If Demand increases, then what happens?

Housing prices in Housing Market #38 in Anytown rise.

See how that works?

I just annihilated your claim.

But, for the sake of argument, let's assume Housing Markets #105 and #106 in Anytown are vacant land, perhaps old farm land that has been subdivided and you can build new housing there.

What happens to housing prices?

Nothing, except they continue to rise.

Why?

Because you could never build enough housing in Housing Markets #105 and #106 to offset the tremendous overwhelming Demand for the other housing markets in Anytown.

Those houses will cost the same or more.

The only thing you've done is increase the profit margin for houses built using FIOSS.

The only possible way FIOSS could ever decrease the price of new housing is if it was used in one of the 597 separately functioning economies where the Housing Supply is greater than or equal to Housing Demand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2022, 06:14 PM
 
Location: Everywhere.
2,062 posts, read 1,618,035 times
Reputation: 2781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sugarlandbubba View Post
I am trying to leave politics out of this and maintaining that Presidents do very little to affect the stock markets.
You were the one who brought up how well the markets were doing for each of those years under both Presidents, not me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2022, 07:43 PM
 
30,253 posts, read 11,879,363 times
Reputation: 18719
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
I'm all for efficiency, but not subsidies and tax breaks. In any event, that will not solve the problem.

The problem is now and always will be too many people; not enough housing.

Does building houses faster solve the problem?

No, it does not because the Supply of Land in any one of the 120,000+ housing markets in the US is finite.

Since this is the Economics Forum and not the Fantasy Forum or the Emotions Forum, let's discuss Economics.

Anytown, USA is one of 597 separately functioning economies within the US.

Anytown, USA has 106 housing markets.

Housing Market #38 in Anytown is desirable because _______________

A) it has convenient access to interstates/major thoroughfares
B) it has a low crime rate
C) it has good schools
D) it has convenient access to retail, grocery, and dining
E) it has convenient access to other amenities (medical, dental, specialty shoppes, entertainment etc)
F) all houses have more than 3,500 sq ft of space
G) large lots
H) Both ___ and ____
I) These three ______, ______, and _______
J) These four ______, ______, ______, and ______
K) These five ______, ______, ______, _______, and ______
L) All the above

Get it?
You have to think outside the box. And you are deep inside the box stating the obvious. Yes all those are important factors in suburbia. But lots of people are moving into my part of the country because they don't have the sort of marketable skills that are required to afford to live in a place with all your bullet points. And others cash out in more expensive markets and move here.

What I am saying is try to level the playing field and create areas that people will want to move to. It would take a master planned community approach and a lot of incentives to get it done. For example there is lots of available affordable land in SE Arizona, Southern New Mexico, West Texas, etc. Areas that have desirable climates and scenery. Build all the houses 100% solar powered. You make a plan to add say one million housing units scattered in these states and work with businesses to relocate there. Make the homes much more affordable and the jobs plentiful. Give people a tax break. Say 5 years no income taxes. People would flock to these places. Lots of people priced out of the expensive cities. And this would take pressure off of housing prices in areas that have a shortage of housing. In fact target the incentives for people people from the tightest housing markets. There are lots of blanks to fill in here but the overall concept could be done.

Just doing the same old thing and saying nothing can be done is not good enough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2022, 08:03 PM
 
15,569 posts, read 7,583,489 times
Reputation: 19460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklazona Bound View Post
You have to think outside the box. And you are deep inside the box stating the obvious. Yes all those are important factors in suburbia. But lots of people are moving into my part of the country because they don't have the sort of marketable skills that are required to afford to live in a place with all your bullet points. And others cash out in more expensive markets and move here.

What I am saying is try to level the playing field and create areas that people will want to move to. It would take a master planned community approach and a lot of incentives to get it done. For example there is lots of available affordable land in SE Arizona, Southern New Mexico, West Texas, etc. Areas that have desirable climates and scenery. Build all the houses 100% solar powered. You make a plan to add say one million housing units scattered in these states and work with businesses to relocate there. Make the homes much more affordable and the jobs plentiful. Give people a tax break. Say 5 years no income taxes. People would flock to these places. Lots of people priced out of the expensive cities. And this would take pressure off of housing prices in areas that have a shortage of housing. In fact target the incentives for people people from the tightest housing markets. There are lots of blanks to fill in here but the overall concept could be done.

Just doing the same old thing and saying nothing can be done is not good enough.
None of those areas has enough water to support larger populations. And most of West Texas is owned by people who do not want to sell, and, quite frankly, the conditions are awful. Texas has no income tax.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2022, 10:59 PM
 
Location: Spain
12,722 posts, read 7,602,203 times
Reputation: 22639
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklazona Bound View Post
Explain how letting China take over our manufacturing
Can confirm, there is no more manufacturing in USA it all went to China.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2022, 12:38 AM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,029 posts, read 14,250,053 times
Reputation: 16767
Perhaps a little background is in order.
Like most Americans, I had no clue, having been duly indoctrinated by the world's greatest propaganda machine. (WGPM - isn't that 79.8 on the FM dial ?)
. . . For example, I only knew about Americans as citizens, as residents, as duly enumerated socialists, and who could only reside at residences, which were subject to property taxes, zoning, and building codes. And I only experienced paper currency (Federal Reserve Notes), and not constitutional money (gold & silver coin - which did not include "fractional" (less than $1) denominations). [And this was endlessly repeated on national news casts and organs of propaganda.]
. . . IN reading law, one can find that unlike citizens who have only "constitutional rights" with mandatory civic duties (paying taxes, jury duty, militia duty, etc), there were American people / free inhabitants / non-citizens who had "Creator endowed rights" (life, liberty, absolute ownership of private property, yada yada yada), that governments were instituted to secure - not tax, regulate nor trespass.

WHOA. Slow down.

Nope.

And if they had not consented nor enrolled into FICA, they retained their endowed rights, that no American government, state or federal, could infringe. PERIOD.
. . . .
What most Americans are unaware of, is that thanks to usury (interest), imposed by the "borrowing" of Federal Reserve Notes ("dollar bills") under the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the gubmint went bankrupt in 1933, declaring an EMERGENCY, confiscating all lawful gold money and criminalizing the possession of constitutional money by "FREE" Americans. [/sarcasm]
The sheeple barely looked up at THAT shearing.
. . . .
. . . .
Senate Report 93-549
https://archive.org/stream/senate-re...3-549_djvu.txt
War and Emergency Powers Acts
United States, Senate Report 93-549 states: "That since March 09, 1933 the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency." Proclamation No. 2039 declared by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on March 9, 1933. This declared national emergency has never been revoked and has been codified into the US Code (12 U.S.C. sec. 95a and b).

"A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years (as of the report 1933-1973), freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency."
FREEDOMS ... GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION ... HAVE BEEN ABRIDGED BY LAWS ... UNDER EMERGENCY RULE ...

Constitutional U.S.A. (1789 - 1933) R.I.P.
Welcome to the Peoples Democratic Socialist Republic of America. . . in place for the last 89 years.
(Ironic, eh? The Leftists are demanding SOCIALISM as the remedy to the ills of 89 years of creeping socialism.)

WAIT - what does that have to do with the FEDERAL RESERVE?
As you may not realize, the Federal Reserve is a private corporation, not an arm of government.
And you, dear muggles, aren't supposed to ask who the stockholders of the banks that own the banks that own the banks of the Federal Reserve. Nor why the FedRes is the fiduciary agent of not only the bankrupt USA, but the UN... that bastion of Leftist influence and power.

Nor are you to ask why the SECRETARY OF TREASURY is also the U.S. GOVERNOR of the World Bank, IMF, and host of other international banks, and shall NOT be paid by the US Gubmint (Title 22 USC Sec. 286), but shall be paid by the "Bank" & "Fund" via their fiduciary (you guessed it) - the FEDERAL RESERVE Corporation.

RECAPPING - Since the "Emergency" NO LAWFUL MONEY has circulated. And since Bretton-Woods Treaty, the Secretary of Treasury (whose rules are promulgated in Title 26, the income tax) is a foreign agent for an international banking cartel, and who was granted SWEEPING (pre-approved) POWERS by CONgress (Title 12 USC Sec 95a, b) as part of the perpetual "temporary" emergency.

And lacking lawful money to "pay debt" (Art. 1, Sec. 8, Sec 10, USCON), few Americans have alienated title to private property since 1933. This, coupled with "voluntary" enrollment into FICA, has effectively abolished absolute ownership of private property, and replaced it with qualified ownership of estate (i.e. "real estate") which CAN be confiscated by gubmint and NO just compensation (in lawful money) will ever be paid.
From the Communist manifesto:
"In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property."

CONNECT THE DOTS.
Who benefits from tearing apart American society? Who benefits from removing Confederate War memorials and statues? Who benefits from mobs rioting and destroying property? Who sits quietly in the background, skimming vast fortunes from the sheeple, who do not know who is skinning them alive, over and over and over?

Did you ever hear of the "Trading with the Enemy" Act? That was used by "saint" Roosevelt to institute the emergency and confiscate our money. And did you know that usury (interest) was universally condemned for over 3500 years? And if you were "trading" with banks, via loans and interest bearing accounts, you were dealing with "the enemy". Wuh Woh, Scooby.
Ironic, isn't it. The "enemy" has been quietly in control of the nation, for the last 89 years.
12 U.S. Code § 95b. The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made, or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March 4, 1933, pursuant to the authority conferred by section 95a of this title, ARE APPROVED AND CONFIRMED.
{Translation : the “SECRETARY OF TREASURY” -aka- U.S. Governor of the “Bank” and “Fund” - who is not paid by the US Gubmint - has been already approved to act or issue any orders, rules, etc., by the honorable U.S. Congress.}
22 USC Sec 286(a) Governors and executive directors; term of office
(d) Compensation for services
(1) No person shall be entitled to receive any salary or other compensation from the United States for services as a Governor, executive director, councillor, alternate, or associate.
Compensated by the Fund
Title 22 USC 286a(d) (2) The United States executive director of the Fund shall not be compensated by the Fund at a rate in excess of the rate provided for an individual occupying a position at level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5.
{Translation: The “executive director” / U.S. governor shall be paid by the FUND, but not more than what a government drone would be paid.}

Who is the “fiscal agent” of “the FUND?”
22 USC Sec. 286d. Federal Reserve banks as depositories.
Any Federal Reserve bank which is requested to do so by the Fund or the Bank shall act as its depository or as its FISCAL AGENT, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System shall supervise and direct the carrying out of these functions by the Federal Reserve banks.
THE TAIL WAGS THE DOG.


References:
http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/memdir/members.aspx
Scroll down to see who the "U.S. Governor" is.

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/22/7/XV/286a
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top