>>60997177
Kek boomers can never lose
The entire government will mobilize to protect boomer investments
Every red cent you pay will go towards pumping boomer bags

>>60997177
Lower rates will accelerate the selling. Unemployment will accelerate the selling. They have already lost.

>>60997177
It's not a straight line, we'll probably see a period of depression of prices. This will likely lead to a less saturate market as well since a lot of people won't be able to afford to sell for a loss and will just be stuck in their homes.

If we see this coupled with continued job loss the economy is going to be gigafucked so government will definitely intervene and should at that point, but if we just see home prices slow down and maybe trail slightly behind inflation for the next 5-10 years that's not abnormal, nor would it be to see a 2-3 year decline of ~20% or so followed by a bounce and return to "normalcy" within the next 2-5.

A LOT of money is tied up in mortgages. Mass defaults would be a pretty fucking bad look and no way does the public allow banks to get bailed out a second time this soon after the last. A better outcome for everyone, unironically, is continuing to pump prices via acceptance of greater inflation (even if prices aren't keeping up with inflation, they go up and people aren't completely fucked if they need to sell), and wait for salaries to catch up.

The downside risk of the inflation is greater wealth divide and the chance that less people can afford to buy a home at all, but banks will happily continue to accumulate real estate, RE portcos as well. It's very possible /biz/'s fortune telling about a certain large portion of the population being priced out forever as rentoids and the return of a "land owning" class happens.

>>60997177
Civil war would fix it.

>>60997206
Salaries can never catch up. Wages have been depressed for too long and the business system will never be able to bring wages to a level high enough to support widespread house buying in a large chunk of the country. At some point taxpayers/higher net worth individuals will just need to shoulder higher tax burdens to receive services from businesses.

>>60997206
>A better outcome for everyone, unironically, is continuing to pump prices via acceptance of greater inflation (even if prices aren't keeping up with inflation, they go up and people aren't completely fucked if they need to sell), and wait for salaries to catch up.
And he believes it, too! alucard.gif

>>60997672
This is it. The distortion of the mid-century equilibrium wasn't women entering the workforce (they were already there), nor immigrants, nor anything but the outflow of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy (both directly and in the form of disappearing subsidies). You correct the distortion by taxing rich people. There should be windfall protections, but no one should get used to seeing decimillion or centimillion (controlling for inflation) incomes yearly.

>>60997710
Well, all of those in the first set of examples were ways that the business system was able to get lower wages to achieve the second (Higher incomes).

Taxation in itself isn't going to fix the problem as the majority of government programs are boondoggles and nobody is going to support a "barista wage support" program despite that being a necessity.

File: IMG_9040.jpg (140 KB, 800x450)

140 KB JPG

>>60997177
So what are the elites gonna do when they have a nation of disenfranchised people who can't afford anything and realize going to work is just paying for their debt slavery?

>>60997710
Sorry, addendum: they're gonna cry about it because it's going to make them, individually, poorer than their counterparts in Asia and Europe. To which I say: tough titties. You're American. Equal sons, equal daughters and all that. If you don't like it, feel free to buy a prayer rug and Maserati, but pay your exit taxes on the way out. And don't come running to the embassy when you run afoul of some obscure hadith.

>>60997710
The mistake was reducing asset based taxation in favor of income based taxation. Including heavily cutting down on inheritance tax.
Also, the idea that asset holding should bring returns without any utilization is pure lunacy. Real estate should depreciate in value with time (due to natural degradation), not grow. The market is ruled by artificial scarcity.

>>60997710
you're a fucking idiot if you think there is a single rich person on the planet making billions of dollars worth of income on a yearly basis

>>60997732
I don't count the distractions, as the meat of the con was going to happen no matter what sleight-of-hand and propaganda they chose.

Speaking of, you've fallen for it. There are many (most) government programs that produce more value than are put into them, in part BECAUSE they reduce a complex set of easily fuck-up-able steps to "walk into government building, receive service." Are they maximally more efficient than a sophisticated agent might be able to conjure (often through what would be crime if regulations were ever allowed to catch up to them)? No. But they reduce the collective burden and free up resources for other, less predictable or more risky enterprise, which is essentially the role of government. If "barista wage support" keeps shops staffed and staff secure enough in their free time to produce the art that constitutes our soft power, Bill can forego another million acres of farmland.

The Chinese are putting out stuff that looks like THIS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGmWE9bnGQg

We have a PROBLEM.

>>60997791
My brother in Capitalist Jesus, do you not know what "decamillion" or "centimillion" mean?

>>60997819
No one talks like that you fucking weirdo benchod

>>60997710
>decimillion or centimillion
thats 100.000 usd and 10.000 usd yearly incomes
you colossal retard

>>60997808
Chinese government programs are designed with intention of reducing barrier of entry and cost of doing business.

US government programs are designed with intention of transferring public funds to 'preferred' businesses/groups and building artificial bureaucratic moat for the rest.

It's really as simple as that. Fixing it however is not.

>>60997189
>The entire government will mobilize to protect boomer investments


The government is run by boomers so yeah

>>60997779
I agree, but we know why Georgism never took hold. It first would have fucked over the hegemony of rich land-owners in a way that the income tax couldn't (hence why it was implemented in the first place; a band-aid to stave off a full revolt, as with the New Deal). Second, it would have screwed up the late-century urban exodus/white flight, again without which you probably would have seen first mass disapproval and then a cross-cultural, cross-racial prole coalition bent on toppling the elite (hence also post-OWS wedges via co-opting grassroots movements like the Tea Party and BLM).
They do everything they can to avoid doing what they ought to.

>>60997189
when the last boomer dies will they just pull the plug and collapse the economy and the nation since it's no longer needed?

>>60997710
Holy fucking upvote
Enjoy the gold kind stranger!

>>60997914
That would be my guess yeah

>>60997892
>US government programs are designed with intention of transferring public funds to 'preferred' businesses/groups and building artificial bureaucratic moat for the rest.
tbf this is most American institutions in general, public and private alike. I've worked way to many jobs where the business model was to squeeze the public purse for as much as possible (whooh, boy, change orders). And I can think of a few government programs that don't, if you're willing to exclude institutions serving the broad public interest as outside your definition of "preferred". Those would be things like the Smithsonian, the various public/private corporations involved in public broadcasting, etc. There is an argument for calling them "pork-barrel spending," but I think there's a stronger argument for calling them public services. E.g., If you can get to DC, you can walk into the major museums and art galleries for free. If you can't, the web-accessible archives are extensive. That's beside the quasi-public institutions that essentially pay for themselves but that certain groups have a hateboner for anyhow (USPS).
I've heard that Chinese firms will often undercut parts prices by double digit percentages compared to the prices internationally, accepting a small marginal profit and an implicit, long-term guarantee of business. Whereas we put our customers out of business trying to get "market rate" out of them (gouging). I agree, I don't know how you change that mindset, other than a high level, "We're not going to operate like rent-seekers anymore," determination.

>>60998018
Good point about certain public utilities being 'free'. And I do consider those programs in isolation as 'useful'. However - they aren't funded or carried out in isolation. They come bundled with legion of bureucratic and consultative 'support'.
At a point when various admin is the biggest item on the price list - I would argue that bureaucracy becomes the main purpose of the program. And the stated goal serves as an excuse to justify the bureaucracy existence to the public.
It's true that some programs are more guilty of that than others, and maybe some are relatively pork free. But overall, I would say the majority of 'public good' programs use 'public good' as a cover rather than the goal.

>>60998018
>>60998107 (cont)

As for Chinese private companies, a see their low margin prices as result of still developing economy and healthy competition.

As a business, you often face the decision - do you focus on expanding your customer base / product offerings or do you try to make larger profits from existing customers / products? And in my experience, Chinese companies tend to focus on the first.
On one hand, with their price/value ratio they still have a ton of market to grow into - both global and domestic.
And on the other hand, very free Chinese market and government that doesn't allow for moats. So if companies try to profit more on same offerings, they run the risk of competitors taking away their customer base.

And in contrast, I feel like western company markets are already saturated to near max, and there is often present bureucratic moat (or brand name recognition that also acts sort of like it) - so extracting more value from those existing customers becomes the more attractive option.
The notion of 'fair' price that is communally established by the sphere makes the situation even worse - it allows companies to collaborate to collectively extract more value from fixed size shared market.

>>60998107
I can't really argue that that's not true. I just wonder what the utility of demonizing it is. Per "Bullshit Jobs", much of the private sector is also hamstrung with legions of quasi-bureaucrats who don't do anything useful. I think if I have any animosity towards this paradigm, it's that it dresses itself up in the illusion of necessity or efficiency. However, if you call make-work what it is, you can no longer justify hoarding it for the people you like (this is, above all, the reason I think they still exist as they do). So you're only allowed to do away with the pretense if you're really really rich, or on the dole. Is it any wonder that these two groups, the only ones truthful about their status and utility, survive while the middle created by a comfortable lie disintegrates?
People think of appeals to truth and compassion as platitudes, but I do think that it's sometimes a matter of simply facing reality: the average individual's ultimate uselessness to the Capitalist project, the average level of abundance that decades of productivity gains have given us collectively, the common need for material goods and shelter, the common individual responsibility to keep ourselves and the people around us in some sort of self-made purpose. The lie that the state or quasi-state private monoliths can give life meaning is crumbling; so too should the lie that they don't have an obligation to provide us the fruits of production that are so abundant (and with it, the lie that we don't have a responsibility to responsibly steward those fruits, in the knowledge that a lack of scarcity is not an eternal state). Boomers throw so much shit away.

>>60998202
I can't remember where I read it, but it's not (simply) a matter of competition that keeps Chinese pricing low. There's a cultural component where long-term value is acknowledged more consistently, e.g., as mentioned, the long-term value of not overcharging customers so that they stay customers over a long period, decreasing potential short-term revenue while increasing it in the absolute, long-term view. The example I remember was an American investor begging a Chinese firm to increase the price of a widget to be competitive with foreign suppliers, in exchange for a massive windfall. The Chinese firm declined and continued taking a small but predictable profit, even though they COULD have raised their price and possibly see the market support that raise for some time.
The moat is existing business relationships. America has a form of this, too, but we also turn cutthroat and burn bridges quite often, if the money is right.

>>60998255
Since we are veering into pseudo-socialist territory, modern capitalism holds misconception that are similar to commie ones

Communism is predicated on a theory that labor of different people creates approximately equal real value
Modern liberal capitalism postulates that each person is capable of producing enough value to sustain a comfortable lifestyle, and that personal net worth is approximate measure of this created value

But it's becoming increasingly clear, that in current system HUGE number of jobs produce near zero or even negative value - while still accumulating respectable wealth. And I see growing wealth-from-ownership as special case of that.

At the end of the day, I think we will need to contend with the fact that most of us are not nearly as useful or deserving of wealth as we like to believe - and that stable society inevitably involves ton of redistribution. But that redistribution should be done in a way that promotes actual use value creation, rather than monetary wealth consolidation and expansion.

>>60998360
True, culture plays into that as well. Even on level as people see their businesses, Asian people in my experience tend to be more humble and willing to settle for lower reliable profits. Where western business owners in my experience are more likely to look for ways to make their business propel them into 'rich' lifestyle - as they think they 'deserve'.
I have seen another form of that in commission artist space - eastern artists keep landing tons of low price commissions, while western ones refuse to lower their prices even while seeing barely any orders.

>>60997189
>Kek boomers can never lose
Some of them will lose a bit, after getting beat up by feral browns in nursing home.
But yeah...

>>60997177
Lance, listen, it's not the mortgage rates. The problem is that boomers have dementia, and there are some people in tech who are crazy, and they ran out of ways to spend money, so they bought a few houses for any price, and the delusional realtors and boomers hope to catch more of this retarded tech fish. Nobody in their right mind will buy a cardboard box built in 1965 for a million dollars. It's just not happening. The mortgage rates must go into negatives for me to even begin to consider that.

>>60998397

the most glaring issue I see with this - how do you tell 'actual value' creation from fake, or perceived value? I'm not sure if there's any other metric but the price one is willing to pay now to obtain a good (labor in this case). there's just too many factors at play

>>60997177
Theres a generational disconnect now. These fed retards are trying to keep boomers afloat, everyone else needs prices to crash, badly. Its insane. Boomers should be disregarded at this point. If they havent made it by now its their fault

File: 1692642374517847s.jpg (2 KB, 113x125)

2 KB JPG

He kept warning you repeatedly that house prices would NEVER come down again and you didn't listen.

>>60997743
Kill the dissidents with drones, probably.

>>60998623
yeah fuck me for watching cartoon network at 8 playing maplestory, and occasionally riding my bike to my friends house to get a day at the pool going back in 2008

>>60998536
Agreedthat 'aggregate demand' is probably the least bad ground truth measure we have. And it applies both to economy via markets and politics via democracy. But it has two big failure modes (and perhaps other smaller ones) -

One, it is highly manipulatable via (mis)information. That includes both information on actual matter being 'demanded', as well as formation of intrinsic moral value system underpinning persons choices.
In modern western markets, it has become far more profitable to create and spread image of a superior product, rather than superior product itself. Similar with political choices.

Two, personal demand is highly susceptible to putting personal self-interest over collective one. This leads to the situation of choices maximising personal gain when taken together leading to collective neutral or even negative outcome.

I believe it is the responsibility of both state as well as individual citizens to curtail those failure modes from developing and taking over economic focus. And coincidentally, since democracy itself is subject to both those principles - I have doubts of it being achievable purely within framework of modern liberal democracy and moral egoism.

>>60998643
When I was 8 I worked 3 jobs and paid my college tuition myself without any handouts. Even saved up a down payment for a starter home

>>60997189
Boomers are already in the house they're going to die in and don't particularly give a shit if it becomes worth $100k less or more than its current value.

The housing market enters a death spiral when prices begin to tank, because nobody but the dumbest among us wants to go into massive debt to acquire an asset that's losing value over time. You probably think that prices going down would create more buyers, but it also creates people who'd rather invest their money in something else.

If a house that was worth $700k two years ago tanks to $450k, you're really gonna run to the bank and take out a loan to secure an asset that's lost ~36% of its value in two years, while we have negative population growth and limited future home buyers?

>>60997779
You sound poor.
>>60997710
You sound poor too.

>>60998587
Who is everyone? Poor people?

>>60998701
>Boomers (...) don't particularly give a shit if it becomes worth $100k less or more than its current value.
haHAHAHAHA

there are boomers living today who will live forever if they survive the next 20 years

let that sink in

immortality tech is around the corner

>>60998741
>>60998747
You don't seem to realize that you are endanger of your "riches" being taken.

I'm easily the 1% of overall wealth and married to a doctor earning 400k. You can only shield yourself so much from the entire country turning to shit retard.
You better be VERY rich. Or you are retarded.
There are VERY few people rich enough that they aren't being robbed of having a lot fucking more.
So that's what he means by "everyone" I imagine.

>>60998787
I enjoy mogging the 99%. You dont?

>>60998787
Fuck everyone. I got mine.
Everyone and their parents and grandparents had 100 plus years to make it.
They are legit losers now and should be treated as such.

>>60998897
>>60998917
If you have money...even if it's 10 million which around where I'm at total assets but is really not THAT much money...a crash benefits you more than anyone as long as you are liquid.
I'm trying to get a vacation farm in Arkansas here man and maybe a backhoe for fun and digging.

Unless you are strung out on debt, you want a crash.

>>60997177
a lot of houses need to be demolished

>>60998397
Agreed on pretty much all counts. Certain portions of our history seem to preclude having that sort of humility. I look at, say, someone slaving away at 8-10 hours a day at a retail wagie position, and think how much nicer it might be for an unemployed person to split that job at 3/4s the pay. But you don't even get to fight with TPTB over it: the worker himself will block it out of a misplaced pride in work, or a slightly more rational fear of not making ends meet. You could get past that by, say, allowing people to "rent" out their positions to a third party (essentially the same kind of delegation or task subletting that the owner class avails of themselves by habit), but of course the boss won't allow it.
All of this to serve as an example of the myriad ways we might retool how we do things, if we would open ourselves to the possibility of working fewer hours, of taking on and splitting menial labor, of demanding a drop in take-home pay less-than-commensurate with the drop in a given individual's worked hours. There're also things like remote work, abolishment of those BS jobs, reshoring of offshored work that functions poorly in its current state, etc. But everyone's somehow both too prideful and too afraid to imagine anything else than the dysfunctional paradigm we currently have. And it all kind of goes back to the OP's contention, which is that the people currently holding high-value assets will never, ever allow those values to fall. They can't, it would ruin them.

Also wanna commend you on the bit about eastern artists. Definitely experienced that firsthand. I do wonder how much of it is sort of embedded culture, and how much of it is a culture that's developed in response to our differing circumstances. Like, as above: are Western artists in this weird position where they're terrified of lowering prices, not seeing a commensurate rise in (their ability to) complete commissions, and then they're just hosed? Or is it a culture of hubris? Both?

>>60997177
oh my god not the house prices! we need emergency immigration now!!

>>60998741
That's nice. We're having a good time here. Filtered.

>>60997177
What the fuck.

>>60997743
same as dictators. people will happily defend you from the poors if you pay them for it

>>60997177
>downside risks to housing valuations
Yeah, that's called affordable housing. The horror!

>>60998701
yeah, people dont know that, but house prices traditionally barely keep up with inflation
its only recently that people think its an "investment" and that has led to distortions

File: 1744225912594961.jpg (64 KB, 618x597)

64 KB JPG

>>60998741
>>60998747
>>60998897
>>60998917

>zoomer faggot LARPing again

>>60998951
So many ruralfags

>>60997744
We already have an outflow of capital, much wealth is held as corporate assets. Historically raising business taxes nets a loss in government receipts. The government cannot stomach this, they have to keep money flowing at all costs and they've already created an environment adversarial to new investment when it's easier on other shores. There is no good solution, American government is backed into a corner, already exhibiting fiscal dominance. You cannot tax your way out of this, you'll pull the house of cards down. Atleast with government and economic collapse and billionaires relocating the physical plants, what few remain, and raw materials cannot be taken with them, but the government will fight tooth and nail to keep them in the hands of vampires. You can't win a ticket with taxes or austerity anyway, we have to let something break and then fuck it up further until plebs start carrying torches. I'd say we're well ahead of schedule.

>>60998701
Houses are for living in, not for speculation.

imagine if the government simply allowed cheap housing and maximal use of land and stopped wasting 25 % of space on fucking roads

>>60999181
And it's only been pushed as an investment because of the "financial innovation" of bundling mortgages and selling them off. Your house used to be known as a "nest egg"; something you put a lot of time and energy into, and eventually it hatches. It was meant as a way to preserve that time and energy, not double or triple it. The idea that it's an investment is just them pumping their bags.

>>60998741
>>60998747
>>60998897
>>60998917
I hope you are getting revenue for your Rage Baits, zoomer faggot.

>>60999520
It feels like you're aware but also still a little too owner-class minded. The government allowing capital flow and consolidation with private interests is what set up their seeming ability to threaten taking the ball away and going home. But it's a bluff. The geographic reality is that there are a handful of places that can replace the US for any sort of national enterprise on our level, and all of them are to the left of us or run by dictators engaging in some form of ethnic nationalism (no whitey allowed). They can't run to NZ, they can't run to Israel, they can't run to Ireland, they can't run to China (they tried; oh boy, did they try), and any attempt to take West/Central Africa or South America is going to be long and painful and they're going to have the Chinese AND the Russians AND the Americans breathing down their neck the entire time (because they gave up one and they cannot co-opt the others).

The reason they're pushing this, "The only way is-," thing so hard is because there is no out where you shuffle off the SSB and declare Brazil the new capital of the world or w/e. Their only play is to keep kicking the can until enough people hear
>You cannot tax your way out of this, you'll pull the house of cards down.
and respond, "That's cool, 95% marginal rate on income above $50 million and btw a 1% marginal wealth tax above $1 billion." And when the financial apparatus collapses, the smart politicians will realize
>the physical plants, what few remain, and raw materials cannot be taken
and backstop the people. We don't even have to really make it up, China just did it with their real estate sector collapse. That should have been market armageddon, and it wasn't. They told the right people to kick rocks and bailed out who they needed to.

>>60997177
“I am concerned housing might become affordable.”
total kike mayhem

>>61000121
I dont want homes to be for poor people.

File: 1595925494407.jpg (52 KB, 960x960)

52 KB JPG

>>61000079
The capital is instrumental in running or creating governments, that's just in our nature, even post soviet era. Revolutions are historically executed by the rich against other upper classes having the means to propose an alternative form of government and bankroll conflict to make it happen. This is my concern since neofeudalists are being sworn in as military officers and Elon made a half assed attempt at political splintering. Those that aren't foolish and out of the spotlight will need to be contended with and you have to simultaneously fight off communist urges that will spring up as things deteriorate. These powers need to be watched as they will not willingly exit with a fraction of their wealth. As far as a location outside of the US, southeast Asia seems to be the most ideal between demographics, regulations and access to resources and trade, though more markets are open than was the case a decade ago. Just what I've heard and I believe it enough that some are trying to quietly exit and taking what they can before they do. I don't see your political apparatus yet, not to say they aren't here but they are predominantly focused on providing crumbs for their respective bases. You need something of a despot and getting one to piss off the richest people in the world is a big ask, Trump ain't it. Honestly literally Hitler is the real goal, autocrat, populist, took capitalism and bent it to work for the base, socialism without starvation, government debt put into public works that increased productivity, killed people when needed to consolidate power. Find someone like that, a warrior turned politician then sure you'll get your taxes. I'm preparing for the alternative though, constant changes in management each worse that the last. Normies wasting each other for bread. Bad for business but in such a case almost anyone can fill a bit of the power vacuum, one block and enterprise at a time.

>>60999913
not for boomers. my dad decided he's going to die in his house and STILL won't stop talking about how much he thinks it could sell for. also a lot of poor/middle class boomers will be taking reverse mortgages out for overpriced medical care and surgeries, so housing value is still very important.

>>60997710
This is a midwit take. You can take all of the money from all of the millionaires and billionaires and you won't even make a dent in the problem. Every state and the federal government are running massive deficits. The money printing will never stop because it can't stop. The US also pays 10 million dollars per day just to fund the welfare state in Israel. Think about that for a few minuets

>>60997743
Zuckerberg built a multimillion dollar bunker under Hawaii with enough power and supplies to last years. Feel free to riot and burn down your cities while the jews watch

>>61000245
A directional bore machine can bore 8000' There is no private bunker that is safe from the formerly employed. That I think was the supposed purpose behind DUMBs, behind spending half a billion to train soldiers to fight underground. It's not enough to turtle 200' below the surface, that will get you killed. It would take a system of super structures connected under various regional centers manned by thousands of soldiers to ride out the apocalypse and not be drowned or buried alive.

>>61000267
>There is no private bunker that is safe from the formerly employed.
Anon, the hired bodyguards are just going to shoot you and push your body into the volcano

>>61000271
You implant chips into them. You die, they die.

>>60997177
They will go down but only when central banks finally loses all credibility.

>>60997710
It’s gold being unbacked from the dollar. That’s what caused more women and then immigrants to come in. Cuz it made less and less sense each and passing year and decade to work typical blue collar jobs that allowed any white American to easily make a living owning a home with 3-5 kids and the wife raising them.

>>60998701
>Boomers are already in the house they're going to die in and don't particularly give a shit if it becomes worth $100k less or more than its current value.
There is empirical evidence to say this is wrong. Boomers are the most active demographic in real estate, they objectively care about house prices since they're so heavily invested in the market. The boomer demographic has proven time and time again the one thing they don't give a single shit about is the consequences of their real estate portfolio growing by +10% every single year.

>>60997177
Low housing prices is good, even if you fkn own a home. So what if your dollar value of the home goes down. It doesn’t mean anything. Unless you have a mortgage then you are fucked and can’t sell, but speaking of boomers that have fully paid off homes. Prices going down doesn’t do anything to them because if they sell they have to buy a new home so if prices or low or high it’s all relative

>>60997743
They are importing browns en mass. Browns have always been slaves so they won’t complain about the new world order as they have never knew freedom like whites and the new world order compared to their 3rd world shithole will be an improvement so they will actually defend their slave owners

>>61000205
Famous last words, but this time might be different, because we do have some awareness of where we are and what worked in the past. You can see that they went after communication and knowledge access first (Twitter, Google -> AI), and while that's been painful, there were people aware enough to set up alternatives and work-arounds, and essentially to salvage a semblance of what we had. The seeds of organization and coalition are there, and you've seen that even some obvious attempts haven't pushed people into doing dumb shit - again, this is precisely why the elites are scrambling, because the old methods aren't working quite as well as they used to.
>Southeast Asia
You can't shift to a place so prone to natural disaster. 200k dead during that tsunami a few years ago. Krakatoa is just a generation or two outside living memory. We're talking about the need for stability on at least the century timescale. That + racism is why they sabotaged Japan. Imagine if Three Mile Island had cleared out Philly and Baltimore like Fukushima did Fukushima, because it was an act of God and not just human error. Unthinkable.
There is also very old money there that you'd have to clear out, again with Chinese ties.
>Hitler
Rank odiousness aside, you can't do it here. The ethnic minorities you have to scapegoat are currently your prime labor force. Whiteness is demographically top-heavy.
You need an FDR. I would not be surprised if they're setting up Obama for another term. Someone will probably try to assassinate Mamdani (I'm praying for his providence).
If America sees its sunset, it looks more like Britain's or France's than Rome's. I think we see dispossession of foreign assets if we can't appropriate elite capital to pay down debt, but we kind of have what we need here (both materially and spiritually) to ride out quasi-austerity (which would really just be "not-overconsuming").
I guess it's a matter of whether you really think things are efficaciously coordinated or not.

the actually shitty part about this is that there is essentially no form of investing your money that isn't a gamble. there is no form of accurate prediction or modeling of future trends now. there is no low risk investing. you have to not only earn an impressive chunk of change to begin with, but to keep it you have to make the arbitrarily correct choice in what to do with it. cool.

File: boston-tea-party-gettyima(...).jpg (702 KB, 2000x1125)

702 KB JPG

>>61000240
I've thought about it a lot. Your incorrect assumption is that every obligation is going to be met in a true crisis. It didn't happen in 2008 and it won't happen next time. The real question is who gets thrown under the bus, and even more than then, it's obvious where the dead weight lies. The yachts will get scuttled (poetic, picrel).

>>61000419
On that last note, Thiel does scare me but he merely wishes he were an Antediluvian. I think that perhaps that he didn't quite understand that Lex Luthor's shtick was only being openly and cartoonishly evil when he was outside the public eye. Maybe I misplace my trust in my fellow countrymen, but enough people have his number.

>>60998701
I'm curious why people think Boomers=old people. Boomers are a specific generation. The people you're thinking of, the silent generation, don't care because they aren't totally soulless but your average 65yo never-retiring double-pension boomboom definitely cares that number is going up.

Boomers will cannibalize the entire nation and then toss the keys to the antichrist on their way out to hell.

>>60997206
>It's very possible /biz/'s fortune telling about a certain large portion of the population being priced out forever as rentoids and the return of a "land owning" class happens.
Enjoy your actual revolution lmao. Btw American obesity has peaked in 2023 and going down, skinnier countries on average have more revolutions.

>>60997177
Yes. House prices going down is deflation. You can't keep borrowing money with an unlimited credit card indefinitely if you can't inflate that debt away.

>>61001123
remove housing prices from pce, boom, no more deflation :^)

>>60997177
Who gives a fuck. I just want freedom, not a wooden plastic cave.

File: xmr.png (671 KB, 1024x1024)

671 KB PNG

I remember reading last year how the treasury and the fed want to "unlock" about a trillion in US home equity (read BOOMERS). They were pushing for banks to offer favorable HELOC loans to homeowners in order to get them to spend more and stimulate the economy. Then when the boomers die, the lenders can scoop up the defaulted houses and keep younger generations from inheriting them.

https://www.fairviewlending.com/us-government-plans-to-unlock-850-billion-in-homeowners-equity/

>>60997819
Whats wrong with making money? You can do it too. Show me a tree that grows only half as tall as it can.

>>60997710
This is an utterly moronic take and by the way the easy litmus test for whether youre clouded by biases is whether this position is emotionally easy to sustain. Its a lot less of a psychological load to blame some rich cunt you will never meet than it is to blame your nan. But the truth is the mega rich are an anti inflationary heat sink. They have disproportionately more wealth and assets than they spend so they have a relatively smaller contribution to inflationary effects. Similarly if wages of middle class people were to rise do you think house prices would go down? The only thing that can bring housing down is if supply exceeds demand and that only happens when net productivity grows faster than population, which only happens when population is low on disabled/old/low skill workers.

File: 1639188107055.png (55 KB, 545x650)

55 KB PNG

>>60998107

>>60998780
Immortality tech has been around for 6 millenia. Mortality is a genetic defect, wherein the wages of sin is death. Therefore the solution requires belief in a genetic solution- the blood of the Jesus Christ, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God.

>>61001232
if rich people produced value with all those assets they owned, housing wouldn't be a problem. I guess they're just terrible stewards of wealth huh

>>61001242
The government has hogged half the economy by using welfare and you think rich people are the problem? Just lmao.
The feudalization of the modern economy is nothing else but the government creating feuds by fiat. Oh, you want to save money and become a small business owner which is the foundation of the middle class? Too fucking bad. Here is a wave of regulations, taxes and other services you must pay for to keep yopur business open legally.
Only big corporations can afford the regulation upkeep of a business. Small businesses close down and the owners go to work for the big corpos for a slave salary. Big corpos are all owned by the same investment funds btw. The same ones that lobby to increase regulations even more because that is a direct benefit to them. It wipes away competition.
I know all of this because I own a family business that has been active since 1991 and my retired aunt who managed bookeeping before me told me how much fucking paper you need to push to be able to work now.

>>61001257
>I know all of this because I own a family business that has been active since 1991 and my retired aunt who managed bookeeping before me told me how much fucking paper you need to push to be able to work now.


Ah yeah anon's aunt, the most reliable source of information. If you own the business, shouldn't you know all this firsthand?

File: file.jpg (9 KB, 255x253)

9 KB JPG

I regret backing out of my $400k home purchase this year. The same home is going to be $500k next year, I don't even see anything less than $400k anymore.

>>61001228
Pruning encourages the growth of fruit.

>>60997177
>NOOOOOO THE FAKE AND GAY PLYWOOD BOX PONZI ECONOMY MIGHT CRASH WE HAVE TO PUMP THEM +25% A YEAR NOOOOOOO

>>61001232
>"Build more" guy has arrived.
The ultra-wealthy don't capture and sequester excess wealth to remove it from the economy permanently, they siphon wealth from labor and deploy it so as to reduce the friction in any transaction they wish to make to as close to zero as possible. This, as you can imagine, is distortive, as friction is the means by which scarcity imposes rational economic decision-making. The point of any economy is to reduce friction for basic needs through increased productivity, but consolidation of capital in the hands of the wealthy shifts that reduced friction to the desires of the wealthy. Hence, for example, cutting-edge supercomputers that fit in your hand which cost a fraction of what a modest domicile (literally millennia-old technology) does.
Asset prices are set at the margins. A large wealth store allows the wealthy to acquire those assets at whatever price necessary; the acquisition is what matters to them, the price is a footnote. But every time they push asset valuations instead of taking the L on the auction, that's a signal to everyone else to push their own valuations up commensurately. Contrarily, the ultra-wealthy are disproportionate CONTRIBUTORS to asset inflation.

>>61001257
That weird thing where the conservative correctly ascertains the cause ("Regulatory capture by big businesses") but gives a batshit solution ("Keep letting rich people consolidate wealth").

>>61001257
Yea, but that's the corporations just using the government as a tool.
t. attacked, literally attacked for 25 years in e-commerce so that Lowe's/HD/WM can have every listing and ranking even though I've been here longer, have a better price, have a better rating.
I was kicked off of Amazon for being too cheap nearly 15 years ago. It's all blatant racketeering with gov. guns.

>retards preaching gommunism

>>60997177

>Home prices are never going down because Fed will always intervene to keep pumping them higher?

...or die trying, yeah. If housing prices perma-collapse you basically have societal breakdown. This is the double-edged sword to the whole "affordable housing" push- you can't actually lower or even flatline existing home prices without mega collapse.

>>60998448
>Nobody in their right mind will buy a cardboard box built in 1965 for a million dollars. It's just not happening. The mortgage rates must go into negatives for me to even begin to consider that.
Boomers seem to have large houses, but not many kids, so naturally they should just have kids live with them, there would be even enough room for grandkids, in some cases.

>>60998780
Nah, I have been following that field for a while, and sadly there is not as much progress as people think. Humanity is retarded and would rather ignore death than at least try do something about it.
Their best bet is still cryonics.

>>60999966
Imagine those digits...

>>60997177
>houses aren't selling because hardly anyone can afford them
>we are going to intervene to prevent housing prices from going down
I don't understand

>>60997189
>boomers can never lose
they can if the majority just jumps into crypto
they can't fix rates on a distributed ledger virtual machine
they could try to make it illegal, only to find out how impossible that is

>>61001976
>If housing prices perma-collapse you basically have societal breakdown
I'm reminded of when they discovered that "Lord of the Flies" had actually happened irl, except the marooned teenagers banded together and rode it out until they were discovered. (Depending on who you ask, the main ingredient for their success was either "survivalist training built into their day-to-day culture" or "not being poisoned by classist/racist notions of natural hierarchy".)

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/may/09/the-real-lord-of-the-flies-what-happened-when-six-boys-were-shipwrecked-for-15-months

A lot of people want collapse. The question is if they want it so that they can actively replace it with something better, or if they're simply lookingto immanentize the eschaton, in which case chaos and destruction isn't a means but an end.

>>61002117

Most people's wealth is tied up in their homes. Most of the banking system is tied up in mortgages. Any government that allows a housing price collapse will lose the support of the people.

And even though boomers are dying off they are still a large voting block and every party understands that telling boomers their houses are worthless is a quick way to get voted out of office.

>>60997195
The real reason they haven't lowered them to 0 already. They know it would makes things worse.
Let's see it, I say that as a homeowner it will be a much needed cleanse.

>>60997177
>The entire government will mobilize to protect boomer investments
That was 2020. They can't print their way out of the mess anymore.

>>60997892
Every advanced economy reaches this stage of capture and rent seeking before stagnating and declining it's fascinating psychologically

File: 1749184895970825.jpg (120 KB, 1024x576)

120 KB JPG

>>61004652
so they pajeet their way out instead.

>>61001257
The biggest exploiters are small business owners. Restaurants, hotels and kulak shit like that. Fuck your small business.

Everyone is so stupid and thinks they're right about the economy.

I hate all you.
You're not going to tax me more, you're not going to debase me by bailing out the banks, fuck all of this.

I don't own a house and if these fuckers make it any harder on me I'm going to explode.

>>61004652
>They can't print their way out of the mess anymore.
lol, lmao even.
why do you think trump criticizes the fed so much?

>>60997177
Demand is way beyond supply and will likely stay that way because of reasons. Fiat USD speeding deeper into the ditch worth less everyday.
Sure we could have a dip in housing price for a short time but nothing lasting unless we get total collapse of something.

>>61004652
"We spent our way into this mess, and we'll spend our way out of it."

- G.W. Bush