Investing General Discussion

Gravel

Mr. Poopybutthole
36,600
116,705
I have an anecdote on this from a recent friend group hang.

My friends have three kids and are thinking about a fourth. The wife was hosting a family event at their 3 bed 2 bath 1600 sq ft home. For some reason, while talking her grandmother, she said, "Yeah, we can't have any more kids bc our house is too small."

Her grandmother, who is generally sweet a demure, widened her eyes and snapped, "Don't you ever say that again! I was raised in a house half this size with six brothers and sisters. You and your husband have plenty of room!" She ended the story with, "So, yeah, I guess we're going to have more kids and keep living in the same house."

I personally live in a 3/2 1960's ranch that I love. I hate seeing subdivisions go up with huge monolithic homes. I always wonder who in the world wants to live in those giant things. Give me a brick one-story all day. Plus, your family is closer together and you actually see each other.
Gotta have a bedroom for every kid, plus an office, and playroom for the kids.
 
  • 1Worf
Reactions: 1 user

Ranak

Molten Core Raider
214
382
Supply and demand is hard bro. Give him a break.

It is also a good cross between this and the post you made in the housing thread about all the red tape and how much it added to your build.

Edit: And this. Anyway, to your point, this is why I say anyone can manage their own money. At least, anyone capable of having enough to invest (meaning you're not a retard like 70% of the population). Why pay an idiot to skim 1-2% off the top and give you results worse than the market?

Agree to an extent with this tweet, but it doesn't have the last 3 years of hyper price inflation taken into account or that current levels are the highest they've ever been (not including the last 3 years). Costs of building have negated the ability to provide smaller starter homes other than townhomes/condos. The trajectory is not sustainable. I think this graph is more helpful.

1695404454895.png
 

Blazin

Creative Title
<Nazi Janitors>
6,414
33,669
Agree to an extent with this tweet, but it doesn't have the last 3 years of hyper price inflation taken into account or that current levels are the highest they've ever been (not including the last 3 years). Costs of building have negated the ability to provide smaller starter homes other than townhomes/condos. The trajectory is not sustainable. I think this graph is more helpful.

View attachment 491736
Why is it not sustainable? Explain what your saying pls. Why can't it go up another 300%?
 

Sanrith Descartes

Von Clippowicz
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
41,535
107,628
Amod would probably prefer this in a different part of the forum, but not particularly interested in those areas so fuck amod


Stuff I think about as a framework. Mean that literally, all other ideas about govt/taxes, markets, culture, etc occur for me within the framework of generational cycles and secular trends

1929-1945 (16 yrs) Silent Gen - Consolidation
1946-1966 (20 yrs) Boomers - Expansion
1967-1981 (14 yrs) Gen X - Consolidation
1982-1999 (17 yrs) Millennials - Expansion
2000-2013 (13 yrs) Zoomers - Consolidation
2013-????

We give labels to population groups because they often represent shifts within society. Ways of doing things, ways of thinking. These shifts line up very well with economic cycles as not surprisingly they are reflections of us and our sentiment and circumstances. I could go further back it goes on and on. Tons of minds over the centuries have noticed these cycles, looking at how they play out as generational bubbles go through their life cycles. There are larger dynamics that occur that are larger in time frame then a single generation, reflecting the the maxim "Strong men create...."

Is the cycle about to end? Traditionally expansion cycles are normally noted by new household formation, and here we are in year 10 of a bull market and most of the industrialized world is in population decline. Will the rising up the third world into a higher standard of living offset this lack of growth? Are new home formations still viable to the masses? Are men and women forming families and rearing children? What happens if a boom cycle turns into a bust? Are technological advancement and subsequent productivity gains enough to offset the traditional just "MORE" of a growth cycle? Were the last few hundred years and cycles within them a product of the industrial revolution, and now new dynamics will render them obsolete?

The more I study these things the more the same thing keeps popping up, by late this decade early next we are fucked, and likely fucked in way that nobody living will fully appreciate until it's already upon us.
Amod saying fuck Amod.

nodding smiling GIF
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Gravel

Mr. Poopybutthole
36,600
116,705
This seems relevant. Curious about anyone's thoughts on it.

Basically that the Fed seems hyper focused on housing (incl rent) costs, and so aren't lowering rates due to that. But that keeping interest rates high is driving that problem. At least, that's what I took from it.

Put another way, the Fed is trying to lower Core CPI by crushing housing demand, but the tool they're using, interest rate hikes, is the very thing driving it up. Their inflation fighting tool is just creating more inflation.

 
Last edited:

Big Phoenix

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Gold Donor>
44,804
93,654
Housing is fucked regardless. You see how many people are being let into the country atm?
 
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 user

Il_Duce Lightning Lord Rule

Lightning Fast
<Charitable Administrator>
10,552
54,400
This seems relevant. Curious about anyone's thoughts on it.

Basically that the Fed seems hyper focused on housing (incl rent) costs, and so aren't lowering rates due to that. But that keeping interest rates high is driving that problem. At least, that's what I took from it.

Put another way, the Fed is trying to lower Core CPI by crushing housing demand, but the tool they're using, interest rate hikes, is the very thing driving it up. Their inflation fighting tool is just creating more inflation.

Ya, that seems like horseshit to me. Looks like academia being paid for articles to persuade the Fed to 'pivot' when inflation has barely been touched according to real numbers that have nothing to do with housing, and not the governments cooked numbers.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Blazin

Creative Title
<Nazi Janitors>
6,414
33,669
This seems relevant. Curious about anyone's thoughts on it.

Basically that the Fed seems hyper focused on housing (incl rent) costs, and so aren't lowering rates due to that. But that keeping interest rates high is driving that problem. At least, that's what I took from it.

Put another way, the Fed is trying to lower Core CPI by crushing housing demand, but the tool they're using, interest rate hikes, is the very thing driving it up. Their inflation fighting tool is just creating more inflation.


The Fed is use to fighting inflation caused by too much demand. With housing we do have high demand but a big contributor to the problem is the lack of supply and the more the raise the worse that supply becomes and so far it is not being offset by sufficiently decreased demand. This is the point. We need more housing, there is not some magical other way out of this, it's why the housing bubble argument is retarded. If prices somehow dropped how does that help the lack of supply in what way does that result in more houses being created.

Some builder is gonna say "well gosh now that I make less to nothing at all on a house I'll think I'll build more."
 
  • 4Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 4 users

Aldarion

Egg Nazi
8,964
24,528
This seems relevant. Curious about anyone's thoughts on it.
from the article:
Consumer prices ex-shelter were up 1.9% on a year-over-year basis in August, up from 1% in July, according to the Labor Department.
I can't get past this. This number is so far from reality I don't know what to believe from the article.

Maybe theres some "official" source that matches this number. All I'm saying is, this number is fucking horse shit.
 
  • 1Truth!
Reactions: 1 user

Gravel

Mr. Poopybutthole
36,600
116,705
I can't get past this. This number is so far from reality I don't know what to believe from the article.

Maybe theres some "official" source that matches this number. All I'm saying is, this number is fucking horse shit.
Agreed. All the numbers the Fed is making decisions with are bullshit. But that's not stopping them from using them.
 

Haus

<Silver Donator>
11,160
42,265
I have an anecdote on this from a recent friend group hang.

My friends have three kids and are thinking about a fourth. The wife was hosting a family event at their 3 bed 2 bath 1600 sq ft home. For some reason, while talking her grandmother, she said, "Yeah, we can't have any more kids bc our house is too small."

Her grandmother, who is generally sweet a demure, widened her eyes and snapped, "Don't you ever say that again! I was raised in a house half this size with six brothers and sisters. You and your husband have plenty of room!" She ended the story with, "So, yeah, I guess we're going to have more kids and keep living in the same house."

I personally live in a 3/2 1960's ranch that I love. I hate seeing subdivisions go up with huge monolithic homes. I always wonder who in the world wants to live in those giant things. Give me a brick one-story all day. Plus, your family is closer together and you actually see each other.
Grandparents bought a 1500 sq ft 3 bed 1 bath in 1954. Proceeded to raise 4 kids (all of which were already born) in it along with themselves. Then once all the kids had left adopted me from their daughter to raise one more. Whenb I was 7 my grandfather did convert the one car garage into an additional room. because he wanted a TV/Football watching room. (Circa 1977) (built a carport out back for the cars)
 

Palum

what Suineg set it to
23,615
34,165
The Fed is use to fighting inflation caused by too much demand. With housing we do have high demand but a big contributor to the problem is the lack of supply and the more the raise the worse that supply becomes and so far it is not being offset by sufficiently decreased demand. This is the point. We need more housing, there is not some magical other way out of this, it's why the housing bubble argument is retarded. If prices somehow dropped how does that help the lack of supply in what way does that result in more houses being created.

Some builder is gonna say "well gosh now that I make less to nothing at all on a house I'll think I'll build more."
I don't know why this is hard to figure out unless you're like a Blizzard dev that can only balance based on a spreadsheet. Basically 98% of the market supply is reflected in demand for non first time home buyers because you sell one and buy one. People selling their only home or an extra home, are relatively uncommon. This is also offset by people buying another home. It also turns out renters live in homes and since homes are owned by someone, the only actual way out is to start killing people or build more homes.

I don't see a lot of heads on spikes outside new subdivisions, so I guess it's just fucked while they keep making it harder for builders to fund with raising interest rates.

crazy-pills-will-ferrell.gif
 

Furry

WoW Office
<Gold Donor>
19,680
24,924
I just shrug every time I hear the words housing bubble. I've been hearing that for over 20 years, and the one time it was bursting my home value went down a few thousand for a couple years. I routinely tell people who say they are holding off on buying a house because of the housing bubble, that I think they aren't being smart... I mean unless they can't afford a house.

Sure some real estate markets crater, but that's a local thing, and can be influenced by so many factors. A general US-wide housing collapse... not probable until people start running the other way over the borders.
 

Big Phoenix

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Gold Donor>
44,804
93,654
Pretty much all new construction that isnt high end around here is high density, apartments condos or "single family" homes packed in like sardine cans.

This is whats built today;

1695438009360.png


v what was built up to the late 80s;

1695438036815.png
 
  • 1Tiresome
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 users