@ryanjmcgowan.bsky.social
Regardless of if a home is a rental or owner-occupied, there's people living in them.
There's less homes being built.
There's more people needing homes.
Prices are rising.
Profits are at a peak.
They aren't getting built.
Why?
There's less homes being built.
There's more people needing homes.
Prices are rising.
Profits are at a peak.
They aren't getting built.
Why?
January 8, 2025 at 5:13 AM
Regardless of if a home is a rental or owner-occupied, there's people living in them.
There's less homes being built.
There's more people needing homes.
Prices are rising.
Profits are at a peak.
They aren't getting built.
Why?
There's less homes being built.
There's more people needing homes.
Prices are rising.
Profits are at a peak.
They aren't getting built.
Why?
What do you mean it lags population growth. Population growth is roughly linear, slightly exponential. Construction is has gone back 27 years. Did something happen to the population? Was it Covid? We didn't lose 26 years of population, did we?
January 8, 2025 at 5:11 AM
What do you mean it lags population growth. Population growth is roughly linear, slightly exponential. Construction is has gone back 27 years. Did something happen to the population? Was it Covid? We didn't lose 26 years of population, did we?
Profit margins on a house are as high now as they were in 2006. But people are not building homes. There's something stopping the progress.
January 7, 2025 at 3:21 AM
Profit margins on a house are as high now as they were in 2006. But people are not building homes. There's something stopping the progress.
Again, why are we not building now? Again, demand is high. Housing costs are very high. It's a perfect time to build and make money, is it not? Think about it. Why are we not building homes?
January 7, 2025 at 3:20 AM
Again, why are we not building now? Again, demand is high. Housing costs are very high. It's a perfect time to build and make money, is it not? Think about it. Why are we not building homes?
I'm blaming specific actions that did occur, and bore witness to the fallout. You can assume my opinions are based on spite or bias, but what we are dealing with isn't swayed by your opinions. What does sway change is fixing bad regulations so we can address housing.
January 7, 2025 at 3:18 AM
I'm blaming specific actions that did occur, and bore witness to the fallout. You can assume my opinions are based on spite or bias, but what we are dealing with isn't swayed by your opinions. What does sway change is fixing bad regulations so we can address housing.
No, and let's not muddy a conversation with everything under the sun. No one was expecting an insurrection. There's no point to prove there.
January 7, 2025 at 1:51 AM
No, and let's not muddy a conversation with everything under the sun. No one was expecting an insurrection. There's no point to prove there.
Yes, and typically they would never approve loans like this. It's risk. So they sold them to foreign investors, but also Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: 70% of the bad loans didn't come from private banks. They came from gov program lending. One wonders where we'd be if 70% of the problem was removed...
January 7, 2025 at 1:50 AM
Yes, and typically they would never approve loans like this. It's risk. So they sold them to foreign investors, but also Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: 70% of the bad loans didn't come from private banks. They came from gov program lending. One wonders where we'd be if 70% of the problem was removed...
It hit bottom shortly after. I'm not implying it caused it. I'm suggesting it destroyed an industry and we are all suffering high housing costs as a result of policy that causes an artificial shortage. Demand is sky high. Why are we not building and making money on it? Is there some other reason?
January 7, 2025 at 1:46 AM
It hit bottom shortly after. I'm not implying it caused it. I'm suggesting it destroyed an industry and we are all suffering high housing costs as a result of policy that causes an artificial shortage. Demand is sky high. Why are we not building and making money on it? Is there some other reason?
I got a balloon loan in 2002 that was one such loan that was previously illegal, but used it to build a house that became my primary and refinanced. Not everyone is savvy enough to understand the risks.
January 7, 2025 at 1:06 AM
I got a balloon loan in 2002 that was one such loan that was previously illegal, but used it to build a house that became my primary and refinanced. Not everyone is savvy enough to understand the risks.
No, they were victims. The problem was Congress was encouraging banks to lend to unqualified borrowers, and created things like subprime loans, stated income, etc. I 80% blame legislature, 20% blame lenders who were doing what they were told to, and saved skin by selling the notes.
January 7, 2025 at 1:04 AM
No, they were victims. The problem was Congress was encouraging banks to lend to unqualified borrowers, and created things like subprime loans, stated income, etc. I 80% blame legislature, 20% blame lenders who were doing what they were told to, and saved skin by selling the notes.
I do not agree that my graph doesn't support what I'm saying. We should be at least to 2006 levels of housing new starts. Most new housing are large corps that can afford to absorb banking regs. Home builders can't survive without bank money. You can feel free to verify with others in the industry.
January 7, 2025 at 1:02 AM
I do not agree that my graph doesn't support what I'm saying. We should be at least to 2006 levels of housing new starts. Most new housing are large corps that can afford to absorb banking regs. Home builders can't survive without bank money. You can feel free to verify with others in the industry.
I absolutely support change in laws that prevent what happened. But what happened was *caused* by Bernie Frank. As in the Frank in Dodd Frank. He spent a good portion of his time in congress early 2000s promoting subprime lending. And then blamed banks for actually doing it. Then wrote Dodd Frank.
January 7, 2025 at 12:58 AM
I absolutely support change in laws that prevent what happened. But what happened was *caused* by Bernie Frank. As in the Frank in Dodd Frank. He spent a good portion of his time in congress early 2000s promoting subprime lending. And then blamed banks for actually doing it. Then wrote Dodd Frank.
It doesn't take that long to recover, I assure you. The fact that banks no longer offer construction loans, and private money is now the primary source of funding for residential construction should be evidence enough that it's a massive issue, whether you chose to ignore it or not.
January 6, 2025 at 10:37 PM
It doesn't take that long to recover, I assure you. The fact that banks no longer offer construction loans, and private money is now the primary source of funding for residential construction should be evidence enough that it's a massive issue, whether you chose to ignore it or not.
This is why we have a housing shortage. We are at 1998 levels of construction, when we had 80% of the current population.
I get it. We want to pass regulations to punish home builders. But they went on to other jobs, and the people getting punished are people that pay rent and buy a home.
I get it. We want to pass regulations to punish home builders. But they went on to other jobs, and the people getting punished are people that pay rent and buy a home.
January 6, 2025 at 6:22 PM
This is why we have a housing shortage. We are at 1998 levels of construction, when we had 80% of the current population.
I get it. We want to pass regulations to punish home builders. But they went on to other jobs, and the people getting punished are people that pay rent and buy a home.
I get it. We want to pass regulations to punish home builders. But they went on to other jobs, and the people getting punished are people that pay rent and buy a home.
You can achieve clean water without massive amounts of paperwork. The thing that keeps the water clean is the retention design, not binders and paperwork. A policy that simply quantifies that we withhold peak flow of a 10-yr, 24-hr storm is the policy that keeps the water clean. Not the rest of it.
January 6, 2025 at 6:13 PM
You can achieve clean water without massive amounts of paperwork. The thing that keeps the water clean is the retention design, not binders and paperwork. A policy that simply quantifies that we withhold peak flow of a 10-yr, 24-hr storm is the policy that keeps the water clean. Not the rest of it.
As far as clean water, this is also something I deal with directly. I do WQMPs: 200-page binders brought on by EPA regs. 20-80 hours of work, tabulate pollutants in downstream waterways.
No one reads it but the plan checker.
Ultimately, it's just sizing retention.
This is a one-page spreadsheet.
No one reads it but the plan checker.
Ultimately, it's just sizing retention.
This is a one-page spreadsheet.
January 6, 2025 at 6:11 PM
As far as clean water, this is also something I deal with directly. I do WQMPs: 200-page binders brought on by EPA regs. 20-80 hours of work, tabulate pollutants in downstream waterways.
No one reads it but the plan checker.
Ultimately, it's just sizing retention.
This is a one-page spreadsheet.
No one reads it but the plan checker.
Ultimately, it's just sizing retention.
This is a one-page spreadsheet.
As someone in housing, I would put #1 is Dodd-Frank. The intention was to punish banks for the housing fiasco. It did so very effectively. And took out the home building industry as a result. I used to produce 3-4 new permit sets per week. In 2024 I had 2. Construction loans are now for large corps.
January 6, 2025 at 6:07 PM
As someone in housing, I would put #1 is Dodd-Frank. The intention was to punish banks for the housing fiasco. It did so very effectively. And took out the home building industry as a result. I used to produce 3-4 new permit sets per week. In 2024 I had 2. Construction loans are now for large corps.
Elon wants what I want. Ease off on the excessive regulations and bureaucracy so we can help the country solve the issues we are facing. He's not pushing tax policy. He's pushing efficiency and transparency. Almost religiously.
November 26, 2024 at 4:47 PM
Elon wants what I want. Ease off on the excessive regulations and bureaucracy so we can help the country solve the issues we are facing. He's not pushing tax policy. He's pushing efficiency and transparency. Almost religiously.
When I make a point, I'm not trying to sting. I'm trying to dismantle the propaganda with facts as close to the source of truth as possible, ideally the subject itself. You're not doing that. And if your goal is to sting, you're doing that poorly as well.
November 26, 2024 at 4:42 PM
When I make a point, I'm not trying to sting. I'm trying to dismantle the propaganda with facts as close to the source of truth as possible, ideally the subject itself. You're not doing that. And if your goal is to sting, you're doing that poorly as well.
Perfect example. Unnamed sources speculating. Did you even read the article?
November 26, 2024 at 4:36 PM
Perfect example. Unnamed sources speculating. Did you even read the article?
Nice article. Does it disprove any of the facts I said? What was the outcome?
November 24, 2024 at 4:12 PM
Nice article. Does it disprove any of the facts I said? What was the outcome?
Read what I said again. Does what I stated sound like the characteristics of an oligarchy? I directly addressed your question.
November 24, 2024 at 4:10 PM
Read what I said again. Does what I stated sound like the characteristics of an oligarchy? I directly addressed your question.
The irony is you are a low-information base against him and rely on smears to try to make arguments and don't see it. You employ ad hominem in every single sentence. "bigoted" "cult" "low information" "hating" "distracted" "oligarchs". That was one sentence. You're completely unable to do otherwise.
November 23, 2024 at 7:29 PM
The irony is you are a low-information base against him and rely on smears to try to make arguments and don't see it. You employ ad hominem in every single sentence. "bigoted" "cult" "low information" "hating" "distracted" "oligarchs". That was one sentence. You're completely unable to do otherwise.