- This topic has 95 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 6 months ago by
UCGal.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 26, 2009 at 1:37 PM #405772May 26, 2009 at 1:50 PM #406027
Arraya
Participant[quote=davelj][quote=Arraya]The normal population growth probably requires 1.2-1.3M new houses every year, and the builders are only building 500K per year right now.
You need to find some economic growth for you population growth or it does not mean anything except additional burden on a society. That is the crux of the problem. [/quote]
GDP = C + I + G + (X-Imp)
The percentage change in GDP will reflect the changes in the above inputs. The percentage change in GDP over the long term will ALSO equal Population Growth + Productivity Growth. This relationship is axiomatic.So, you see, GDP growth is partly a function of population growth, not vice versa. I think (re: hope) what you’re trying to say is that we need growth in productivity and innovation to create jobs that will take up the current slack in the job market. Otherwise, you’re confused on how the pieces fit together.[/quote]
I was just saying that citing population growth to solve the over capacity in housing misses a big variable and actually a problem if job growth does not come.
May 26, 2009 at 1:50 PM #406329Participant[quote=davelj][quote=Arraya]The normal population growth probably requires 1.2-1.3M new houses every year, and the builders are only building 500K per year right now.
You need to find some economic growth for you population growth or it does not mean anything except additional burden on a society. That is the crux of the problem. [/quote]
GDP = C + I + G + (X-Imp)
The percentage change in GDP will reflect the changes in the above inputs. The percentage change in GDP over the long term will ALSO equal Population Growth + Productivity Growth. This relationship is axiomatic.So, you see, GDP growth is partly a function of population growth, not vice versa. I think (re: hope) what you’re trying to say is that we need growth in productivity and innovation to create jobs that will take up the current slack in the job market. Otherwise, you’re confused on how the pieces fit together.[/quote]
I was just saying that citing population growth to solve the over capacity in housing misses a big variable and actually a problem if job growth does not come.
May 26, 2009 at 1:50 PM #406476Participant[quote=davelj][quote=Arraya]The normal population growth probably requires 1.2-1.3M new houses every year, and the builders are only building 500K per year right now.
You need to find some economic growth for you population growth or it does not mean anything except additional burden on a society. That is the crux of the problem. [/quote]
GDP = C + I + G + (X-Imp)
The percentage change in GDP will reflect the changes in the above inputs. The percentage change in GDP over the long term will ALSO equal Population Growth + Productivity Growth. This relationship is axiomatic.So, you see, GDP growth is partly a function of population growth, not vice versa. I think (re: hope) what you’re trying to say is that we need growth in productivity and innovation to create jobs that will take up the current slack in the job market. Otherwise, you’re confused on how the pieces fit together.[/quote]
I was just saying that citing population growth to solve the over capacity in housing misses a big variable and actually a problem if job growth does not come.
May 26, 2009 at 1:50 PM #405782Participant[quote=davelj][quote=Arraya]The normal population growth probably requires 1.2-1.3M new houses every year, and the builders are only building 500K per year right now.
You need to find some economic growth for you population growth or it does not mean anything except additional burden on a society. That is the crux of the problem. [/quote]
GDP = C + I + G + (X-Imp)
The percentage change in GDP will reflect the changes in the above inputs. The percentage change in GDP over the long term will ALSO equal Population Growth + Productivity Growth. This relationship is axiomatic.So, you see, GDP growth is partly a function of population growth, not vice versa. I think (re: hope) what you’re trying to say is that we need growth in productivity and innovation to create jobs that will take up the current slack in the job market. Otherwise, you’re confused on how the pieces fit together.[/quote]
I was just saying that citing population growth to solve the over capacity in housing misses a big variable and actually a problem if job growth does not come.
May 26, 2009 at 1:50 PM #406267Participant[quote=davelj][quote=Arraya]The normal population growth probably requires 1.2-1.3M new houses every year, and the builders are only building 500K per year right now.
You need to find some economic growth for you population growth or it does not mean anything except additional burden on a society. That is the crux of the problem. [/quote]
GDP = C + I + G + (X-Imp)
The percentage change in GDP will reflect the changes in the above inputs. The percentage change in GDP over the long term will ALSO equal Population Growth + Productivity Growth. This relationship is axiomatic.So, you see, GDP growth is partly a function of population growth, not vice versa. I think (re: hope) what you’re trying to say is that we need growth in productivity and innovation to create jobs that will take up the current slack in the job market. Otherwise, you’re confused on how the pieces fit together.[/quote]
I was just saying that citing population growth to solve the over capacity in housing misses a big variable and actually a problem if job growth does not come.
May 26, 2009 at 5:11 PM #406418peterb
ParticipantTakes a job to get a loan, to buy the house. And herein lies the problem for the future.
Loan mods need to have cramdowns, otherwise they’re not attractive alternatives to letting the property go back to the lender.
Yes, Japan managed to spread the problem over many years. Price corrections will not be denied by the market.
May 26, 2009 at 5:11 PM #406566ParticipantTakes a job to get a loan, to buy the house. And herein lies the problem for the future.
Loan mods need to have cramdowns, otherwise they’re not attractive alternatives to letting the property go back to the lender.
Yes, Japan managed to spread the problem over many years. Price corrections will not be denied by the market.
May 26, 2009 at 5:11 PM #406357ParticipantTakes a job to get a loan, to buy the house. And herein lies the problem for the future.
Loan mods need to have cramdowns, otherwise they’re not attractive alternatives to letting the property go back to the lender.
Yes, Japan managed to spread the problem over many years. Price corrections will not be denied by the market.
May 26, 2009 at 5:11 PM #406115ParticipantTakes a job to get a loan, to buy the house. And herein lies the problem for the future.
Loan mods need to have cramdowns, otherwise they’re not attractive alternatives to letting the property go back to the lender.
Yes, Japan managed to spread the problem over many years. Price corrections will not be denied by the market.
May 26, 2009 at 5:11 PM #405871ParticipantTakes a job to get a loan, to buy the house. And herein lies the problem for the future.
Loan mods need to have cramdowns, otherwise they’re not attractive alternatives to letting the property go back to the lender.
Yes, Japan managed to spread the problem over many years. Price corrections will not be denied by the market.
May 26, 2009 at 6:34 PM #405920(former)FormerSanDiegan
Participant[quote=peterb]Takes a job to get a loan, to buy the house. And herein lies the problem for the future.
Loan mods need to have cramdowns, otherwise they’re not attractive alternatives to letting the property go back to the lender.
Yes, Japan managed to spread the problem over many years. Price corrections will not be denied by the market.[/quote]
Japan did not respond by turning on the printing presses in the same way the US has. As you point out the market will not be denied. One important aspect of that market is the supply of money.
Look at the chart in the link below.
May 26, 2009 at 6:34 PM #406617Participant[quote=peterb]Takes a job to get a loan, to buy the house. And herein lies the problem for the future.
Loan mods need to have cramdowns, otherwise they’re not attractive alternatives to letting the property go back to the lender.
Yes, Japan managed to spread the problem over many years. Price corrections will not be denied by the market.[/quote]
Japan did not respond by turning on the printing presses in the same way the US has. As you point out the market will not be denied. One important aspect of that market is the supply of money.
Look at the chart in the link below.
May 26, 2009 at 6:34 PM #406468Participant[quote=peterb]Takes a job to get a loan, to buy the house. And herein lies the problem for the future.
Loan mods need to have cramdowns, otherwise they’re not attractive alternatives to letting the property go back to the lender.
Yes, Japan managed to spread the problem over many years. Price corrections will not be denied by the market.[/quote]
Japan did not respond by turning on the printing presses in the same way the US has. As you point out the market will not be denied. One important aspect of that market is the supply of money.
Look at the chart in the link below.
May 26, 2009 at 6:34 PM #406166Participant[quote=peterb]Takes a job to get a loan, to buy the house. And herein lies the problem for the future.
Loan mods need to have cramdowns, otherwise they’re not attractive alternatives to letting the property go back to the lender.
Yes, Japan managed to spread the problem over many years. Price corrections will not be denied by the market.[/quote]
Japan did not respond by turning on the printing presses in the same way the US has. As you point out the market will not be denied. One important aspect of that market is the supply of money.
Look at the chart in the link below.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.