- 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
re: Executive Order banning Big Wall Street from buying up single-family homes
Posted on 5/11/26 at 9:49 pm to RobbBobb
Posted on 5/11/26 at 9:49 pm to RobbBobb
quote:
If you buy up 20 homes on the market, afforded advantages from the sellers, then you are monopolizing that market
Not shocked you don't know what monopoly means
0
Posted on 5/11/26 at 9:50 pm to Sofaking2
quote:
Rich coming from you. All you do here is take the opposite position of whatever is popular, lol.
Not close to being true.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 9:50 pm to RobbBobb
quote:
Did you buy 20 at a time? Did you pay all cash? Did you not do home inspections on each? Were you working with sellers to undercut the market for actual home buyers?
Does the EO specifically cite/cover these issues?
Posted on 5/11/26 at 9:57 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Does the EO specifically cite/cover these issues?
Do you not read something before you post against it? Seems odd
quote:
prevent agencies and Government-sponsored enterprises from engaging in the following,
(A) providing for, approving, insuring, guaranteeing, securitizing, or facilitating the acquisition by a large institutional investor of a single-family home that could otherwise be purchased by an individual owner-occupant
(B) disposing of Federal assets in a manner that transfers a single-family home to a large institutional investor; and promote sales to individual owner-occupants, including through anti-circumvention provisions, first-look policies, and disclosure requirements.
The Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission shall review substantial acquisitions, including series of acquisitions, by large institutional investors of single-family homes in local single-family housing markets for anti-competitive effects and prioritize enforcement of the antitrust laws
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:34 pm to RelicBatches86
That boomer comment is a lie. Probably by someone living in their parents basement. I'm 76 and my property taxes are outrageous. So tell me these programs that let boomers pay lower taxes please.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:40 pm to RelicBatches86
That boomer comment is a lie. Probably by someone living in their parents basement. I'm 76 and my property taxes are outrageous. So tell me these programs that let boomers pay lower taxes please.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:45 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Just like MAGA will be defending government manipulation of free markets
With populists, expect populism
Let's hear your argument if Trump had encouraged corporations to buy up houses.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:56 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Nah
I wouldnt care if corporations bought homes, and sold to someone for a profit.
But turning them into rentals destroys a neighborhood.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:59 pm to Bass Tiger
quote:This is ashistorical nonsense. The American consumer was so banged and bruised by the GFC - many BECAUSE of stupid housing decisions they had made - that they had essentially zero buying power. The government went out of its way to offer via the Agencies to offer loan mods and the like that kept millions of Americans in their homes.
Many of us were calling for this right after the Financial Meltdown of 2008/2009. Any one with a functioning brain knew the 'big money" was going to snap up hundreds of thousands of distressed residential real estate properties for 40-60% discount using US taxpayer funded ZIRP money.
There were still millions that would have sat empty and eventually become condemned. I drove entire neighborhoods of empty homes in greater Atlanta at the time. The firms (and private citizens) who bought these up en masse, renovated them, and then offered them as affordable rentals was OBVIOUSLY a net societal positive.
I understand why Trump does this, but it's stupid economically.
This post was edited on 5/11/26 at 11:00 pm
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:04 pm to Bass Tiger
There are approximately 25 million SFR homes in America. Institutional investors own around 500 thousand. 2% of the overall capacity of homes in America is not the root cause of people not being able to purchase homes.
The language in the bill was written by Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and their friends. It’s weird because both sides (dem/rep) agree that it is an issue that needs to be addressed, but it feels more like a political maneuver to collect mid term votes.
They’ll pass whatever form of law and then housing will still be unattainable for many because of inflation and other factors.
The language in the bill was written by Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and their friends. It’s weird because both sides (dem/rep) agree that it is an issue that needs to be addressed, but it feels more like a political maneuver to collect mid term votes.
They’ll pass whatever form of law and then housing will still be unattainable for many because of inflation and other factors.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:15 pm to Ailsa
How will the executive order be enforced? It sounds good, but it also sounds like something Congress needs to do and that the President will not be able to execute because it isn’t law.
This post was edited on 5/11/26 at 11:18 pm
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:23 pm to Ailsa
Make
Liberals
Love
Landlords
Again
Liberals
Love
Landlords
Again
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:40 pm to Sofaking2
quote:
Rich coming from you. All you do here is take the opposite position of whatever is popular, lol. Every single time like clockwork.
Just checking.
You don't think the word "populist" has anything to do with being popular, do you?
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:45 pm to DyeHardDylan
quote:
How will the executive order be enforced? It sounds good, but it also sounds like something Congress needs to do and that the President will not be able to execute because it isn’t law.
I'm no legal expert, but I would bet it will be struck down when it's challenged in court. Even if Congress does pass it.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:53 pm to RelicBatches86
quote:
Boomers paying much lower property tax due to laws favoring them and outbidding young men and women for housing with cash offers, preventing them from starting families is a far bigger problem than what Wall Street is doing
That is literally what Wall Street is doing, but you only think it's a problem when boomers do it.
I hope one day you realize that blaming a general group of people for your failures in life isn't productive. You sound no different than a hoodrat blaming white people for everything.
Posted on 5/12/26 at 1:25 am to crotiger0307
quote:
here come the boomers who bought their houses for $50k criticizing how this spoils the younger generation or some other geriatric BS.
You act like $50k at the time was nothing.
quote:
$50,000 in 1975 is equivalent to approximately $306,889.41 today.
A lot of people had to plan and sacrifice to buy a home.
Posted on 5/12/26 at 1:57 am to RelicBatches86
quote:
Boomers paying much lower property tax due to laws favoring them and outbidding young men and women for housing with cash offers, preventing them from starting families is a far bigger problem than what Wall Street is doing
Disagree for the majority of Boomers … who have been retiring at a declining rate for awhile now. Most of these retirees can no longer qualify for competitive mortgages because they can no longer demonstrate the same levels of income with which to borrow. …. so they must sell their existing home first, … before buying another …. hence the cash used for downsizing, relocation, or out of control medical expenses.
The culprit “young men and women” are looking for is inflation …. and a wage rate that hasn’t kept up with it.
Globalist corporations did that.
This post was edited on 5/12/26 at 2:12 am
Posted on 5/12/26 at 5:52 am to RobbBobb
quote:
(A) providing for, approving, insuring, guaranteeing, securitizing, or facilitating the acquisition by a large institutional investor of a single-family home that could otherwise be purchased by an individual owner-occupant
(B) disposing of Federal assets in a manner that transfers a single-family home to a large institutional investor; and promote sales to individual owner-occupants, including through anti-circumvention provisions, first-look policies, and disclosure requirements.
Where is the reference to "20 at a time" in this language?
Where is the language of "paying cash" in this language?
Where is the language about "home inspections" in this language?
Where is the language about "undercutting the market" in this language?
Or, we can just go back to the question you specifically did not answer:
quote:
Does the EO specifically cite/cover these issues?
Posted on 5/12/26 at 5:53 am to geoag58
quote:
Let's hear your argument if Trump had encouraged corporations to buy up houses.
What a retarded comment.
Why would I promote government manipulation of the market when I just criticized government manipulation of the market?
You sound like Bernie or AOC, thinking the government has to do something.
Posted on 5/12/26 at 5:56 am to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:
I hope one day you realize that blaming a general group of people for your failures in life isn't productive.
Correctly noting a government-created advantage for a population cohort is not "blaming a general group of people for failures"
He gave a great example of how some states/localities are manipulating the market to the detriment of the public. It's a really good example of government policy that artificially increases the cost/value of homes. We need government out and the market to take back over and force these values down.
Page 3 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News