re: Trump promoting a 50 year mortgage. Dave Ramsey will lose his mind. Terrible idea - imo

quote:

---

He should be promoting 50 year treasuries at sub 1% rates to help the deficit and finance long term growth.

---

quote:

---

He should be promoting 50 year treasuries at sub 1% rates to help the deficit and finance long term growth

---

Lighten up Francis…it was a joke.


Only someone who would buy a timeshare or run a government agency would buy a security with that little of a return.

Your chart doesnt show a sizable amount of time where values didnt go up

quote:

---

This is a stable genius move

---

You are retarded

quote:

---

You're going to have a lot of RE hit the market with a smaller population.

---

Even if the premise was true (it isn't), there would be markets (retiree laden, e.g., FL) hit more heavily, and markets nearly completely spared.

quote:

---

That is a sign of an unhealthy economy and a period of extreme asset inflation.

---

What is the reference?
Market escalation over the past several decades?
GDP growth?
The Schiller graph you posted?
Record personal savings set for transition?

quote:

---

Even if the premise was true (it isn't),

---

What?

Boomers are a larger population than Gen Z and younger. The population will be net smaller when they're gone.

Their RE will hit the market.

Both are true.

quote:

---

What is the reference?

---

In a healthy economy, parents aren't having to subsidize normal livings costs. It's a sign of low wages and high COL, which means the market is not healthy and likely skewed by government polity to create that unhealthiness.

quote:

---

those of you that think housing prices just keep rising to infinity

---

You're delving in areas you understand less than you realize.

Leverage (debt) can be good or bad. For most Americans, mortgage loans (leverage) and home sales will yield better net ROI than any financial instrument they'll engage otherwise. Though there are always exceptions to the rule, Americans not in the home ownership game are generally disadvantaged.

It is always an individual situation though. More choices equate to better opportunity. E.g., We carried a low fixed interest (~3.5%) loan on one of our homes for years, up to deductible limits ($1M for a while, then $750K IIRC). At the same time, we leveraged a second home within an investment portfolio with ~ 2% floating rate loan and $0 toward principal with interest written off as capital expense. Later we fixed that rate X 5yrs at 3%. When the 5yr period ended in 2023, the new rates were higher. So we just paid off the note. We could have cashed out both places at any point. But the money we would have tied up in the homes was instead invested with significant annual returns. We sold both places over a two-year span recently, taking advantage of the $500K Section 121 Exclusion X 2 to lower a portion of the tax exposure as we did.

You say "It’s fricking stupidity." I'd counter that your approach, in our case, would be "fricking stupidity."

quote:

---

Boomers are a larger population than Gen Z and younger.

---

Negative!
Statistics are like bikinis ....

"Boomers" are categorized by births over an 18yr span. There are ~76M.

Of those born over the next 18yrs, there are ~79M.

The problem with your comparison is Gen X is demarcated by births over a 15yr period. The same is true of Gens Y & Z.

Lololol

quote:

---

This is a stable genius move Lets stop pretending anyone pays off a home now with a 30yr fix

---

It shouldn’t take fifty years to pay off a double wide trailer.