Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Full Version: Let's Talk About- Political Edition
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 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 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623
(08-01-2024, 07:52 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 07:20 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly why young people cannot afford to be homeowners.  Corporate greed.

The government printing endless money and driving up interest rates is the main culprit why young people can't afford to be homeowners. Not to mention first time buyers refusing to lower their standards. Wine budget, beer pocketbook (and not the good beer)

The first sentence is wrong.  Home prices spiked before interest rates went up.  They would have spiked more if low rates persisted for longer.  Mortgage interest is given pre tax treatment for primary residences.  There is not much else the federal level can do in terms of interest rates and home affordability.

The second sentence, you have a point.
(08-01-2024, 08:19 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 07:52 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]The government printing endless money and driving up interest rates is the main culprit why young people can't afford to be homeowners. Not to mention first time buyers refusing to lower their standards. Wine budget, beer pocketbook (and not the good beer)

The first sentence is wrong.  Home prices spiked before interest rates went up.  They would have spiked more if low rates persisted for longer.  Mortgage interest is given pre tax treatment for primary residences.  There is not much else the federal level can do in terms of interest rates and home affordability.

The second sentence, you have a point.

So why aren't the building more to generate more supply to lower home prices? I'll help you. High interest rates. Face it, this administration decimated the economy.
(08-01-2024, 08:35 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 08:19 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]The first sentence is wrong.  Home prices spiked before interest rates went up.  They would have spiked more if low rates persisted for longer.  Mortgage interest is given pre tax treatment for primary residences.  There is not much else the federal level can do in terms of interest rates and home affordability.

The second sentence, you have a point.

So why aren't the building more to generate more supply to lower home prices? I'll help you. High interest rates. Face it, this administration decimated the economy.

They are building a lot and corporations and private landlords are buying too much of it.

Zoning is also a problem in places.
(08-01-2024, 07:52 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 07:20 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly why young people cannot afford to be homeowners.  Corporate greed.

The government printing endless money and driving up interest rates is the main culprit why young people can't afford to be homeowners. Not to mention first time buyers refusing to lower their standards. Wine budget, beer pocketbook (and not the good beer)

Those are contributors however corporations are buying up single family homes (read Blackrock) by blocks and neighborhoods.  This reduces the supply, upping the demand and pricing young people out of the market, forcing them to remain renters.  This is pure evil.  In fact there was a movie that touched on this very subject made years ago.  You might have seen it, “It’s a Wonderful Life” is the name.
(08-01-2024, 08:48 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 07:52 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]The government printing endless money and driving up interest rates is the main culprit why young people can't afford to be homeowners. Not to mention first time buyers refusing to lower their standards. Wine budget, beer pocketbook (and not the good beer)

Those are contributors however corporations are buying up single family homes (read Blackrock) by blocks and neighborhoods.  This reduces the supply, upping the demand and pricing young people out of the market, forcing them to remain renters.  This is pure evil.  In fact there was a movie that touched on this very subject made years ago.  You might have seen it, “It’s a Wonderful Life” is the name.

Corporations buying up residential real estate seems to be a fairly recent event over the past several years. What do you think the catalyst for them pursuing this asset class is? was?

(08-01-2024, 08:42 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 08:35 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]So why aren't the building more to generate more supply to lower home prices? I'll help you. High interest rates. Face it, this administration decimated the economy.

They are building a lot and corporations and private landlords are buying too much of it.

Zoning is also a problem in places.

Private landlords? Why put an evil spin on average Americans attempting to supplement their retirement with something more reliable than social security?
(08-01-2024, 09:08 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 08:48 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]Those are contributors however corporations are buying up single family homes (read Blackrock) by blocks and neighborhoods.  This reduces the supply, upping the demand and pricing young people out of the market, forcing them to remain renters.  This is pure evil.  In fact there was a movie that touched on this very subject made years ago.  You might have seen it, “It’s a Wonderful Life” is the name.

Corporations buying up residential real estate seems to be a fairly recent event over the past several years. What do you think the catalyst for them pursuing this asset class is? was?

On the surface just plain corporate greed.

When you look a little deeper, there is a push by globalist to crush the middle class, the American dream, independence and overall self reliance.  Not just in the USA but dare I say globally.  Ultimately it is all about power and control.
(08-01-2024, 09:20 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 09:08 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Corporations buying up residential real estate seems to be a fairly recent event over the past several years. What do you think the catalyst for them pursuing this asset class is? was?

On the surface just plain corporate greed.

When you look a little deeper, there is a push by globalist to crush the middle class, the American dream, independence and overall self reliance.  Not just in the USA but dare I say globally.  Ultimately it is all about power and control.

What do you propose we do?
(08-01-2024, 09:23 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 09:20 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]On the surface just plain corporate greed.

When you look a little deeper, there is a push by globalist to crush the middle class, the American dream, independence and overall self reliance.  Not just in the USA but dare I say globally.  Ultimately it is all about power and control.

What do you propose we do?

Depends how you define "corporate". I know investors who own a single property, placed in an LLC. Technically that's corporate, but doesn't check the box of "evil corporation".

Solution is likely a state level issue. Similar to what DeSantis quietly did with the Chinese trying to buy up land.
(08-01-2024, 09:23 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 09:20 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]On the surface just plain corporate greed.

When you look a little deeper, there is a push by globalist to crush the middle class, the American dream, independence and overall self reliance.  Not just in the USA but dare I say globally.  Ultimately it is all about power and control.

What do you propose we do?

A true gotcha moment for me personally.  I am repulsed by the idea of government intervention but what is occurring is even worse.  Some kind of cap on net worth owning multiple homes perhaps?  Or maybe a progressive tax so extreme owning over a certain number of homes would not be profitable.

(08-01-2024, 09:32 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 09:23 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]What do you propose we do?

Depends how you define "corporate". I know investors who own a single property, placed in an LLC. Technically that's corporate, but doesn't check the box of "evil corporation".

Solution is likely a state level issue. Similar to what DeSantis quietly did with the Chinese trying to buy up land.

Someone owning a few rental properties is not the issue.  This is the issue:  https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/21/how-wall...-rent.html
(08-01-2024, 09:32 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 09:23 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]What do you propose we do?

Depends how you define "corporate". I know investors who own a single property, placed in an LLC. Technically that's corporate, but doesn't check the box of "evil corporation".

Solution is likely a state level issue. Similar to what DeSantis quietly did with the Chinese trying to buy up land.

It has the same effect though.  A rich guy turns a nice house from an opportunity for a new family to get their first home to a simple money making scheme for himself.

(08-01-2024, 09:46 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 09:23 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]What do you propose we do?

A true gotcha moment for me personally.  I am repulsed by the idea of government intervention but what is occurring is even worse.  Some kind of cap on net worth owning multiple homes perhaps?  Or maybe a progressive tax so extreme owning over a certain number of homes would not be profitable.

(08-01-2024, 09:32 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Depends how you define "corporate". I know investors who own a single property, placed in an LLC. Technically that's corporate, but doesn't check the box of "evil corporation".

Solution is likely a state level issue. Similar to what DeSantis quietly did with the Chinese trying to buy up land.

Someone owning a few rental properties is not the issue.  This is the issue:  https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/21/how-wall...-rent.html

I don't think it's plausible for the feds to get into the property tax game.  

It's more plausible that they create a new category of income tax for rental income, specifically rental income derived from ownership of single family detached homes.  It could be set to the top marginal personal rate regardless of household income or corporate organization.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C-Kdo70NS...MGxiYmRqaw==

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
The cleverness of Israelis to kill their enemies never ceases to amaze me. 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ham...r-BB1r2akp
(08-01-2024, 09:46 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 09:23 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]What do you propose we do?

A true gotcha moment for me personally.  I am repulsed by the idea of government intervention but what is occurring is even worse.  Some kind of cap on net worth owning multiple homes perhaps?  Or maybe a progressive tax so extreme owning over a certain number of homes would not be profitable.

(08-01-2024, 09:32 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Depends how you define "corporate". I know investors who own a single property, placed in an LLC. Technically that's corporate, but doesn't check the box of "evil corporation".

Solution is likely a state level issue. Similar to what DeSantis quietly did with the Chinese trying to buy up land.

Someone owning a few rental properties is not the issue.  This is the issue:  https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/21/how-wall...-rent.html

If you crush the incentive to own rental properties, no one will want to build more rental properties.  The answer is to let the free market deal with the problem.  If people or corporations are making gobs of money owning rental properties, then more people and corporations will want to build more rental properties, and that will stabilize the cost of rent.   It's a supply and demand issue.  Not enough supply leads to more supply if you let the free market operate.
There is truly no better investment than real estate for an investor. So many advantages in appreciation, tax deductions, mortgage principal paydown by a tenant and interest that is also deductable, and then best of all you can 1031 exchange to a better property to defer taxes basically forever with the right estate planning.

Donald Trunp was right when he said there is nothing better than real estate.
(08-02-2024, 07:26 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2024, 09:46 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]A true gotcha moment for me personally.  I am repulsed by the idea of government intervention but what is occurring is even worse.  Some kind of cap on net worth owning multiple homes perhaps?  Or maybe a progressive tax so extreme owning over a certain number of homes would not be profitable.


Someone owning a few rental properties is not the issue.  This is the issue:  https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/21/how-wall...-rent.html

If you crush the incentive to own rental properties, no one will want to build more rental properties.  The answer is to let the free market deal with the problem.  If people or corporations are making gobs of money owning rental properties, then more people and corporations will want to build more rental properties, and that will stabilize the cost of rent.   It's a supply and demand issue.  Not enough supply leads to more supply if you let the free market operate.

I’m not against people owning rental properties and not suggesting people should not own them.  It is corporations buying up whole neighborhoods and taking those homes off the market thus preventing homeownership.    I have no issues with corporations buying and building apartments.  Call me old fashioned but I believe homeownership is the cornerstone of the American dream.  You are right, it is a supply and demand issue as these corporations are scarfing up homes, lowering the supply, raising the cost of ownership and crushing that dream.
(08-02-2024, 07:59 AM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-02-2024, 07:26 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]If you crush the incentive to own rental properties, no one will want to build more rental properties.  The answer is to let the free market deal with the problem.  If people or corporations are making gobs of money owning rental properties, then more people and corporations will want to build more rental properties, and that will stabilize the cost of rent.   It's a supply and demand issue.  Not enough supply leads to more supply if you let the free market operate.

I’m not against people owning rental properties and not suggesting people should not own them.  It is corporations buying up whole neighborhoods and taking those homes off the market thus preventing homeownership.    I have no issues with corporations buying and building apartments.  Call me old fashioned but I believe homeownership is the cornerstone of the American dream.  You are right, it is a supply and demand issue as these corporations are scarfing up homes, lowering the supply, raising the cost of ownership and crushing that dream.

And, again, the best way to increase the supply of houses is to have people, or corporations, make a ton of money owning houses.  Everywhere they have put restrictions on the ability to make money owning a house, the cost of housing has gone up, not down, because no one wants to build more houses.   Government control of the free market usually leads to unintended consequences.  The incentive to build more houses, and thus increase supply, is achieved when people and corporations make money by doing that.  Government intervenes, and they no longer make money, so they no longer build houses, and that doesn't do anyone any good.
(08-02-2024, 08:25 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-02-2024, 07:59 AM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]I’m not against people owning rental properties and not suggesting people should not own them.  It is corporations buying up whole neighborhoods and taking those homes off the market thus preventing homeownership.    I have no issues with corporations buying and building apartments.  Call me old fashioned but I believe homeownership is the cornerstone of the American dream.  You are right, it is a supply and demand issue as these corporations are scarfing up homes, lowering the supply, raising the cost of ownership and crushing that dream.

And, again, the best way to increase the supply of houses is to have people, or corporations, make a ton of money owning houses.  Everywhere they have put restrictions on the ability to make money owning a house, the cost of housing has gone up, not down, because no one wants to build more houses.   Government control of the free market usually leads to unintended consequences.  The incentive to build more houses, and thus increase supply, is achieved when people and corporations make money by doing that.  Government intervenes, and they no longer make money, so they no longer build houses, and that doesn't do anyone any good.

I completely agree. However, where does it end for corporations? If they’re buying and building up homes by blocks and neighborhoods, what is the tipping point for them to stop. Isn’t it possible they could corner a big chunk of the housing market and keep it artificially high?
Would anyone be upset if I set up a NAWJ conference next year?
(08-02-2024, 09:44 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-02-2024, 08:25 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]And, again, the best way to increase the supply of houses is to have people, or corporations, make a ton of money owning houses.  Everywhere they have put restrictions on the ability to make money owning a house, the cost of housing has gone up, not down, because no one wants to build more houses.   Government control of the free market usually leads to unintended consequences.  The incentive to build more houses, and thus increase supply, is achieved when people and corporations make money by doing that.  Government intervenes, and they no longer make money, so they no longer build houses, and that doesn't do anyone any good.

I completely agree. However, where does it end for corporations? If they’re buying and building up homes by blocks and neighborhoods, what is the tipping point for them to stop. Isn’t it possible they could corner a big chunk of the housing market and keep it artificially high?

Due to wealth concentration, it seems there is no tipping point.

(08-02-2024, 08:25 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-02-2024, 07:59 AM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]I’m not against people owning rental properties and not suggesting people should not own them.  It is corporations buying up whole neighborhoods and taking those homes off the market thus preventing homeownership.    I have no issues with corporations buying and building apartments.  Call me old fashioned but I believe homeownership is the cornerstone of the American dream.  You are right, it is a supply and demand issue as these corporations are scarfing up homes, lowering the supply, raising the cost of ownership and crushing that dream.

And, again, the best way to increase the supply of houses is to have people, or corporations, make a ton of money owning houses.  Everywhere they have put restrictions on the ability to make money owning a house, the cost of housing has gone up, not down, because no one wants to build more houses.   Government control of the free market usually leads to unintended consequences.  The incentive to build more houses, and thus increase supply, is achieved when people and corporations make money by doing that.  Government intervenes, and they no longer make money, so they no longer build houses, and that doesn't do anyone any good.

I think you are making a mistake lumping rent control in as equal to higher taxes on landlords.

Rent control hits a landlord's revenue in unpredictable ways.  A landlord can't always predict which tenants will stay and which will turn over.
But a higher tax rate would only hit their profit, or revenue minus expenses, and it would be entirely predictable.
Pages: 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 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623