0
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 9/23/26 at 12:53 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
In a perfect world this entire paradigm changes
*ETA: of course there will be pain to some on that path. I understand that.
It just been entrenched for decades now.
What would the alternative look like? A house would have to continue to hold value to some extent, i would think.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 12:57 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
There is plenty of supply now.
Freddie Mac says we are 3.7 million homes short. NAHB says we are 1.2 million short. I don't know one way or the other-not my area of expertise-and not going to argue with you especially since what we are really talking about is a lack of supply of AFFORDABLE new starter homes.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 12:59 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
Freddie Mac says we are 3.7 million homes short. NAHB says we are 1.2 million short.
1. Where are all the homes?
2. If we are that short then there is money to made. Why are people not building?
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:02 pm to SparkyWilson
quote:
What would the alternative look like? A house would have to continue to hold value to some extent, i would think.
Oh absolutely and it would increase nominally.
But the concept of housing would return to it being a home and not an investment/number in net worth. This is a very recent societal shift. When people bought housing for it to be their home, the homes could/would still appreciate.
What's going to decrease are the arbitrage opportunities.
This plan would disincentivize institutional investors from buying homes, too, which is anothing thing people get worked up over.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:02 pm to lsu777
South La has people moving out, insurances rates rising at an alarming annual rate, over priced houses sitting and like you said, they still keep raising property tax like we are sitting on golden dirt.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:03 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
since what we are really talking about is a lack of supply of AFFORDABLE new starter homes.
There is certainly a shortage of affordable housing.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:05 pm to ronricks
quote:
Imagine using this from 40 years ago as a coping mechanism
We know things like facts don’t matter to you. Look at the last 40 years. I believe it’s posted on here and tell us again how out of control interest rates are. You have the financial acumen of a Doberman.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:07 pm to Stonehog
And values were closer to 120k
Whats your point
Whats your point
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:12 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
People bought inflated assets
Maybe, but the premise still stands. Unless you want a total collapse of the market like 2008 we need to keep prices up. Wages need to move up and more creative loan programs to make affordability easier to access,
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:15 pm to aubie101
quote:
Maybe, but the premise still stands. Unless you want a total collapse of the market like 2008
That will require people to stop paying their mortgages. As long as people pay their mortgages. It won't be anything like 2008. The reason why prices and the bubble popped in 2008 was because of that input variable. The reason my prices have increased now is a completely different input variable.
As long as people pay their mortgage, those mortgages still have value throughout the financial system and there isn't the direct issue of the foreclosures in the societal impacts. People will just lose arbitrage opportunities in terms of selling their house to upgrade and some people will be stuck and not able to sell if they're trying to move
Will there be negative economic consequences? Yes obviously but that's an inevitability. All we've done is kick the can since 2009 and haven't faced that and we keep making the corresponding bubble to pop bigger.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:18 pm to Tomatocantender
Are housing prices really out of whack?
I don't see it.
The median starting salary of someone just coming out of college with a bachelors is $60,000. A married couple with college degrees should be able to afford 7.25% interest rate on a $350-$365,000 house and stay under 1/3 of income going to housing.
There are plenty of houses for sale in that price range in the Nashville area - a real estate market that is still hot.
I don't see it.
The median starting salary of someone just coming out of college with a bachelors is $60,000. A married couple with college degrees should be able to afford 7.25% interest rate on a $350-$365,000 house and stay under 1/3 of income going to housing.
There are plenty of houses for sale in that price range in the Nashville area - a real estate market that is still hot.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:20 pm to boogiewoogie1978
It's correct to say that housing starts are stagnant, not collapsing.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:22 pm to boogiewoogie1978
quote:
Where are all the homes?
Approximately 3 out of every 10 homes (about 30% to 33.8%) in Florida are not owner-occupied year-round, factoring in a mix of renter-occupied units and vacant or seasonal/vacation properties.
Breakdown of Florida Housing Stock
Total Housing Units: Florida has roughly 10.7 million total housing units.Homeownership (Owner-Occupied) Rate: The state's homeownership rate sits around 66.2% to 67.6%, meaning roughly two-thirds of occupied households live in a home they own.
Renter-Occupied & Vacant/Seasonal Units: The remaining share—roughly 3.2 million to 3.6 million units—consists of renter-occupied households, empty investment properties, and seasonal or vacation homes. Recent U.S. Census data highlights that Florida contains about 1.48 million entirely vacant or seasonal homes alone, with roughly half of those designated strictly for seasonal or recreational use.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Oh absolutely and it would increase nominally.
But the concept of housing would return to it being a home and not an investment/number in net worth. This is a very recent societal shift. When people bought housing for it to be their home, the homes could/would still appreciate.
What's going to decrease are the arbitrage opportunities.
This plan would disincentivize institutional investors from buying homes, too, which is anothing thing people get worked up over.
I don't see a problem with that.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:30 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Look at the last 40 years
Irrelevant as to what is going on today. Home prices 40 years ago were far different as well. You are just trying to make excuses for Trump as usual.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:36 pm to JimEverett
quote:Yes, housing prices are out of whack compared to historical norms. The median home price was 3.0-3.5x the median household income throughout the 80s and 90s, and even up through a decade or so ago. The median home price today is approaching 5x median income. That's a huge difference.
Are housing prices really out of whack?
I don't see it.
The median starting salary of someone just coming out of college with a bachelors is $60,000. A married couple with college degrees should be able to afford 7.25% interest rate on a $350-$365,000 house and stay under 1/3 of income going to housing.
Your illustration further reinforces this fact, because in order to make the math work on a house that is $100,000 below the median home price in Nashville, you have to assume that it's being purchased by a multi-earner household, where both earners have college degrees, and both are making at least the median income of new college grads.
This post was edited on 9/23/26 at 1:37 pm
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:43 pm to lgtiger
Artificially low.
Companies projected to be bankrupt in 2008-09 got bailed out. Refi Corporate Bonds at 3% instead of 8-9% and they all made billions.
TBTF - let’s see how that works this time when it costs the US taxpayers another $10-20 trillion in bailouts for the billionaires.
Companies projected to be bankrupt in 2008-09 got bailed out. Refi Corporate Bonds at 3% instead of 8-9% and they all made billions.
TBTF - let’s see how that works this time when it costs the US taxpayers another $10-20 trillion in bailouts for the billionaires.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:44 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That will require people to stop paying their mortgages. As long as people pay their mortgages. It won't be anything like 2008. The reason why prices and the bubble popped in 2008 was because of that input variable. The reason my prices have increased now is a completely different input variable.
As long as people pay their mortgage, those mortgages still have value throughout the financial system and there isn't the direct issue of the foreclosures in the societal impacts. People will just lose arbitrage opportunities in terms of selling their house to upgrade and some people will be stuck and not able to sell if they're trying to move
Will there be negative economic consequences? Yes obviously but that's an inevitability. All we've done is kick the can since 2009 and haven't faced that and we keep making the corresponding bubble to pop bigger.
Paying the note doesn’t make the crash fake. The house is the collateral, the 401(k), the city budget. Slash values 20% and you don’t get a “mobility inconvenience.” You get poorer banks, broke towns, and owners who did everything right gutted on paper. That’s why prices have to be defended.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 1:47 pm to aubie101
quote:
and owners who did everything right
If they bought an overpriced asset, this cannot be true. We don't apply this logic to anything other than homes, basically and that's why we're in this mess.
Page 5 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News