And lest anyone think I’m being arrogant or bragging, going to school for broadcast journalism as a smart middle class kid is quite possibly the dumbest thing I ever did.
The issue is that you say that the housing market isn’t responding to market forces, you are using some never before used definition of market forces. What that definition is, no one knows. The ‘I got a degree in communications’ line is… a thing you could say I guess. Maybe you could work on just admitting you were wrong about something instead of getting into your feelings about it. It just isn’t that serious.
Dude you’ve been wrong about this shit for months, your own sources of data have showed that, and you keep waiting a few months and throwing the same shit at the wall and claiming victory if someone doesn’t re-refute it. Or you don’t read their response or address it, or act like they’re too stupid to communicate their point, etc, etc.
You get off on this bad faith bullshit or something, it’s the same act every time. Enough is enough, I’m done with it again.
If you had a smidgen of a substantive argument you’d say it. Housing prices going up when there is a spike in demand and then drop when there’s a spike in supply means market forces work. Market forces isn’t ‘prices don’t go up’ and frankly, you know better and are throwing a tantrum instead of admitting you said something wrong. Insult someone else.
I did, months ago! Calling out bad faith as bad faith isn’t insulting. It’s not like it’s some secret, you’re infamous for it. You’re a smart enough guy to know what you’re doing and that you’re known for it.
Mommy, daddy, stop fighting.
4 Likes
Under Trump: USA doesn’t even qualify for the qualifier for the T20 Cricket World Cup
Under Biden: USA beats Pakistan
Goes to the weight, not the admissibility.
Yes team USA and it’s, checks notes, three scratch that four players with the last name Patel.
Gift link:
wait when did WaPo start embedding correctly? Nice.
Anyway, interesting timing on this, in June of an election year:
This feels designed to make immigration a big wedge issue in the election (certainly Republicans fearmonger about this anyway, but now Dems are choosing to engage rather than ignore) and I don’t know that that ends well? Kudos for doing the right thing but it also could have been done a couple years ago with a less explosive impact. We’ll see.
Yeah if just looking at election would think it’s kind of risky given how effectively Rs been able to brainwash people about immigration and general tilt towards right in regard to immigration world wide makes it feel he going against the flow of the moment.
That being could be a good chance to have a specific policy where people can fear Trump would take it away from them enough to actually really motivate folks. Feel he could have done this more clearly with student loans too, maybe something remains up his sleeve in that regard
Feels like this may fire up some of the base that has lost enthusiasm, and it may actually be a good fight to pick. It’s worth noting that Melania Trump violated her initial travel visa, and got her citizenship through marriage to Trump. Being able to fall back on not splitting up married couples does allow a simple argument here that should poll reasonably well.
You overestimate the American people.
Are there any proposals for the actual political solution to the shortage of housing? I didn’t read any of the articles about Austin, but I assume there’s a good chance that the city council/mayor will pay a political price for increasing housing and thus stifling property values.
I see the whole thing as a huge coordination problem where non-homeowners are inherently transient and (relatively) without political power at the local level.
Housing is actually getting better in places that allow building. It’s hopeless in places that don’t and/or have no more land. NYC is an absolute shit show.
So it’s worth mentioning here that in terms of who runs the state of Texas a great guess would be real estate developers, and another great guess would be ranchers. Ranchers love selling land to new subdivisions for massive bonanza tier paydays and real estate developers love buying cheap ranch land and turning it into suburbia.
Also remember that this very powerful lobby has its way with the local government before they start building usually. By the time the first house is built the ground is set for them to finish developing what they plan to develop zoning wise.
The reason shit gets built so fast in Texas is that a lot of the stuff NIMBY’s use to obstruct construction in other states just doesn’t exist. The laws were written by the oil, ranching, and property development interests and they wanted it to be very permissive about building nearly anything you want on land you own. It turns out there actually are some upsides to that, like being able to build housing quickly to keep the local cost of labor at a manageable level as the barons intended.
NYC needs to convert office space to housing.
“More than 95 million square feet of New York City office space is currently unoccupied –the equivalent of 30 Empire State Buildings.”
Someone needs to explain to me like I’m six years old why this isn’t part of the solution for cities.
The right people aren’t getting rich off of it.