Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 1, 2010 at 9:54 AM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #534667April 1, 2010 at 9:54 AM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #534932
(former)FormerSanDiegan
ParticipantThis guy is mixing inflaiton adjusted curves and non-inflation adjusted curves.
I completely disagree with the chart where he has a big yellow bar that indicates the remaining bubble to deflate to get us back to 1996 (or 1994 or 1989) prices.
He’s completely ignored inflation in that chart.
Consider that due to inflation it requires about $140 today to equate to $100 in 1994.
If he did this analysis on a High School Economics project he would receive an F.
ParticipantOn another note, I do not fault BillS78 (whether real or a troll) for operating in what he perceives to be his own self-interest.
ParticipantOn another note, I do not fault BillS78 (whether real or a troll) for operating in what he perceives to be his own self-interest.
ParticipantOn another note, I do not fault BillS78 (whether real or a troll) for operating in what he perceives to be his own self-interest.
ParticipantOn another note, I do not fault BillS78 (whether real or a troll) for operating in what he perceives to be his own self-interest.
ParticipantOn another note, I do not fault BillS78 (whether real or a troll) for operating in what he perceives to be his own self-interest.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
I gave up making sense of it when in a single thread there was a point made that our economy country runs on debt and a point made that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy.
I figure that I am simply too dense to understand.[/quote]
FSD, look at the context of my responses.
I never said that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy. I was responding to a comment by jpinpb who suggested that if people don’t pay their mortgages and spend the money they save, they are helping immediately the economy.
In this situation, it’s just coincidental that the more money spent up front, now, the bigger the immediate boost to the economy. It’s a short term boost.
I’m not saying that debt payment avoidance should be economic policy either. As you rightly pointed out, in the longer term that would be a problem. Banks would lack capital to lend and people who relied on the money would have to cut back.[/quote]
I guess I misinterpreted your statment that “debt repayment does not contribute to economic activity” as “debt repayment adds nothing to the economy”
I should have interpreted it as “debt repayment adds nothing to economic activity”
So, replace “the economy” with “economic activity” and my point still stands.
In fact there can be short-term negative impacts to people not paying their mortgages. Consider the impact of those who stopped making payments back in 2007 because their subprime mortgage reset. Even though those folks got a free ride for at least 3-6 months, the overall short-term impact to economic activity was negative.
I think jpinpb made a compelling argument from a microeconomic viewpoint which may not hold up in the macro sense, because the overall economy has feedbacks and other complexities.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
I gave up making sense of it when in a single thread there was a point made that our economy country runs on debt and a point made that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy.
I figure that I am simply too dense to understand.[/quote]
FSD, look at the context of my responses.
I never said that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy. I was responding to a comment by jpinpb who suggested that if people don’t pay their mortgages and spend the money they save, they are helping immediately the economy.
In this situation, it’s just coincidental that the more money spent up front, now, the bigger the immediate boost to the economy. It’s a short term boost.
I’m not saying that debt payment avoidance should be economic policy either. As you rightly pointed out, in the longer term that would be a problem. Banks would lack capital to lend and people who relied on the money would have to cut back.[/quote]
I guess I misinterpreted your statment that “debt repayment does not contribute to economic activity” as “debt repayment adds nothing to the economy”
I should have interpreted it as “debt repayment adds nothing to economic activity”
So, replace “the economy” with “economic activity” and my point still stands.
In fact there can be short-term negative impacts to people not paying their mortgages. Consider the impact of those who stopped making payments back in 2007 because their subprime mortgage reset. Even though those folks got a free ride for at least 3-6 months, the overall short-term impact to economic activity was negative.
I think jpinpb made a compelling argument from a microeconomic viewpoint which may not hold up in the macro sense, because the overall economy has feedbacks and other complexities.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
I gave up making sense of it when in a single thread there was a point made that our economy country runs on debt and a point made that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy.
I figure that I am simply too dense to understand.[/quote]
FSD, look at the context of my responses.
I never said that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy. I was responding to a comment by jpinpb who suggested that if people don’t pay their mortgages and spend the money they save, they are helping immediately the economy.
In this situation, it’s just coincidental that the more money spent up front, now, the bigger the immediate boost to the economy. It’s a short term boost.
I’m not saying that debt payment avoidance should be economic policy either. As you rightly pointed out, in the longer term that would be a problem. Banks would lack capital to lend and people who relied on the money would have to cut back.[/quote]
I guess I misinterpreted your statment that “debt repayment does not contribute to economic activity” as “debt repayment adds nothing to the economy”
I should have interpreted it as “debt repayment adds nothing to economic activity”
So, replace “the economy” with “economic activity” and my point still stands.
In fact there can be short-term negative impacts to people not paying their mortgages. Consider the impact of those who stopped making payments back in 2007 because their subprime mortgage reset. Even though those folks got a free ride for at least 3-6 months, the overall short-term impact to economic activity was negative.
I think jpinpb made a compelling argument from a microeconomic viewpoint which may not hold up in the macro sense, because the overall economy has feedbacks and other complexities.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
I gave up making sense of it when in a single thread there was a point made that our economy country runs on debt and a point made that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy.
I figure that I am simply too dense to understand.[/quote]
FSD, look at the context of my responses.
I never said that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy. I was responding to a comment by jpinpb who suggested that if people don’t pay their mortgages and spend the money they save, they are helping immediately the economy.
In this situation, it’s just coincidental that the more money spent up front, now, the bigger the immediate boost to the economy. It’s a short term boost.
I’m not saying that debt payment avoidance should be economic policy either. As you rightly pointed out, in the longer term that would be a problem. Banks would lack capital to lend and people who relied on the money would have to cut back.[/quote]
I guess I misinterpreted your statment that “debt repayment does not contribute to economic activity” as “debt repayment adds nothing to the economy”
I should have interpreted it as “debt repayment adds nothing to economic activity”
So, replace “the economy” with “economic activity” and my point still stands.
In fact there can be short-term negative impacts to people not paying their mortgages. Consider the impact of those who stopped making payments back in 2007 because their subprime mortgage reset. Even though those folks got a free ride for at least 3-6 months, the overall short-term impact to economic activity was negative.
I think jpinpb made a compelling argument from a microeconomic viewpoint which may not hold up in the macro sense, because the overall economy has feedbacks and other complexities.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
I gave up making sense of it when in a single thread there was a point made that our economy country runs on debt and a point made that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy.
I figure that I am simply too dense to understand.[/quote]
FSD, look at the context of my responses.
I never said that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy. I was responding to a comment by jpinpb who suggested that if people don’t pay their mortgages and spend the money they save, they are helping immediately the economy.
In this situation, it’s just coincidental that the more money spent up front, now, the bigger the immediate boost to the economy. It’s a short term boost.
I’m not saying that debt payment avoidance should be economic policy either. As you rightly pointed out, in the longer term that would be a problem. Banks would lack capital to lend and people who relied on the money would have to cut back.[/quote]
I guess I misinterpreted your statment that “debt repayment does not contribute to economic activity” as “debt repayment adds nothing to the economy”
I should have interpreted it as “debt repayment adds nothing to economic activity”
So, replace “the economy” with “economic activity” and my point still stands.
In fact there can be short-term negative impacts to people not paying their mortgages. Consider the impact of those who stopped making payments back in 2007 because their subprime mortgage reset. Even though those folks got a free ride for at least 3-6 months, the overall short-term impact to economic activity was negative.
I think jpinpb made a compelling argument from a microeconomic viewpoint which may not hold up in the macro sense, because the overall economy has feedbacks and other complexities.
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]Brian you are hilarious. Really. Your postings here rival your posts on why you don’t like american women or why they don’t like you. In this one thread alone you talk about the importance of credit and how our country runs on it but then you advocate deadbeatism which in term ruins credit and even try to give some bizarre argument about how being a deadbeat helps the economy. How about moving out of the house, letting it foreclose, and rent something alot cheaper. Then you get to pay less for your shelter, spend more to “recycle” into Brians economy, and the foreclosed home gets sold to someone who will afford it and it will be sold at the correct market value. I guess that makes to much sense. Forget it your right. Credit for everyone and nobody needs to worry about being a deadbeat because it all will magically work. Sounds good man. I guess your most recent posts are the only ones that really count. Why stick with one point when you can conveniently jump to another.[/quote]
I gave up making sense of it when in a single thread there was a point made that our economy country runs on debt and a point made that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy.
I figure that I am simply too dense to understand.
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]Brian you are hilarious. Really. Your postings here rival your posts on why you don’t like american women or why they don’t like you. In this one thread alone you talk about the importance of credit and how our country runs on it but then you advocate deadbeatism which in term ruins credit and even try to give some bizarre argument about how being a deadbeat helps the economy. How about moving out of the house, letting it foreclose, and rent something alot cheaper. Then you get to pay less for your shelter, spend more to “recycle” into Brians economy, and the foreclosed home gets sold to someone who will afford it and it will be sold at the correct market value. I guess that makes to much sense. Forget it your right. Credit for everyone and nobody needs to worry about being a deadbeat because it all will magically work. Sounds good man. I guess your most recent posts are the only ones that really count. Why stick with one point when you can conveniently jump to another.[/quote]
I gave up making sense of it when in a single thread there was a point made that our economy country runs on debt and a point made that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy.
I figure that I am simply too dense to understand.
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]Brian you are hilarious. Really. Your postings here rival your posts on why you don’t like american women or why they don’t like you. In this one thread alone you talk about the importance of credit and how our country runs on it but then you advocate deadbeatism which in term ruins credit and even try to give some bizarre argument about how being a deadbeat helps the economy. How about moving out of the house, letting it foreclose, and rent something alot cheaper. Then you get to pay less for your shelter, spend more to “recycle” into Brians economy, and the foreclosed home gets sold to someone who will afford it and it will be sold at the correct market value. I guess that makes to much sense. Forget it your right. Credit for everyone and nobody needs to worry about being a deadbeat because it all will magically work. Sounds good man. I guess your most recent posts are the only ones that really count. Why stick with one point when you can conveniently jump to another.[/quote]
I gave up making sense of it when in a single thread there was a point made that our economy country runs on debt and a point made that debt repayment adds nothing to the economy.
I figure that I am simply too dense to understand.
-
AuthorPosts
