TRUMP 2024

484,752 Views | 6216 Replies | Last: 8 hrs ago by Werewolf
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You fix housing buy building more housing. The biggest issue to me is zoning laws that limit the types of construction you can have. That has had severe consequences with affordability and clear red lines for things like schools and overall neighborhood safety.

Offering incentives to include 20% affordability or for the local government to step in and build affordable housing without changing the single family zoning and other restrictions will never fix the situation.

The quickest way to affordable housing is to build more housing. It's amazing to me how much elected officials try to game that simple principle to appease the masses.


Also, what ever happened to the 2bed 2 bath starter home? That size home has been stagnant in the market since the 60s. Adding those at a higher rate to the housing stock would dramatically improve affordability
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

hokiewolf said:

SmaptyWolf said:

hokiewolf said:

Economic populism is a disease


You guys love to bawl about the details of Kamala's economic plans... but when are you going to seriously talk about all of the stuff that Trump is proposing? Or do you just assume he's lying about all of it?

His current plans would add $7.5 TRILLION to the debt. Even hardcore Marxists are like "Jesus, dude, settle down!".
I believe I've been pretty clear I don't like much of Trumps economic plans. Tariffs don't work in most industries except maybe steel with respect to protecting jobs.

Neither candidate has a plan that address true economic issues. Harris thinks building g an extra million homes while giving away more incentives to buy homes is going to fix the problem.

We have 6th graders throwing **** on the wall to see if it sticks to get votes. It's ridiculous

Hokie you're commercial construction right?

Probably a two-beer conversation but I'd love your thoughts on housing. It's a tough nut to crack at least quickly and I don't think much or at least most of the problem is on the buy-side, which is what Harris' incentives attempt to address. That would improve access to the market (while also driving up the cost of the home commensurately) but so much of the problem remains unaddressed or under-addressed on the supply side.

One of the biggest things I think we can do is incentivize/value community college and vocational educations that train skilled trades and craftsmen to help ease the labor shortage.

Deleting tariffs on Canadian lumber would help.

The NAHB and their local arms work extensively lobbying local, state, and federal government for common-sense development permitting and zoning regulations that facilitate density and smart urban growth, which is absolutely necessary.
Civ, I think your post is a good one for conversation…. As much as you get criticized my some, including me, this is where I appreciate your involvement. So, I'd like for this to continue in a reasonable conversation. Folks, let's try to engage here and talk constructively…

So, Civ… what macro housing issue are we trying to solve?
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

Civilized said:

hokiewolf said:

SmaptyWolf said:

hokiewolf said:

Economic populism is a disease


You guys love to bawl about the details of Kamala's economic plans... but when are you going to seriously talk about all of the stuff that Trump is proposing? Or do you just assume he's lying about all of it?

His current plans would add $7.5 TRILLION to the debt. Even hardcore Marxists are like "Jesus, dude, settle down!".
I believe I've been pretty clear I don't like much of Trumps economic plans. Tariffs don't work in most industries except maybe steel with respect to protecting jobs.

Neither candidate has a plan that address true economic issues. Harris thinks building g an extra million homes while giving away more incentives to buy homes is going to fix the problem.

We have 6th graders throwing **** on the wall to see if it sticks to get votes. It's ridiculous

Hokie you're commercial construction right?

Probably a two-beer conversation but I'd love your thoughts on housing. It's a tough nut to crack at least quickly and I don't think much or at least most of the problem is on the buy-side, which is what Harris' incentives attempt to address. That would improve access to the market (while also driving up the cost of the home commensurately) but so much of the problem remains unaddressed or under-addressed on the supply side.

One of the biggest things I think we can do is incentivize/value community college and vocational educations that train skilled trades and craftsmen to help ease the labor shortage.

Deleting tariffs on Canadian lumber would help.

The NAHB and their local arms work extensively lobbying local, state, and federal government for common-sense development permitting and zoning regulations that facilitate density and smart urban growth, which is absolutely necessary.
Civ, I think your post is a good one for conversation…. As much as you get criticized my some, including me, this is where I appreciate your involvement. So, I'd like for this to continue in a reasonable conversation. Folks, let's try to engage here and talk constructively…

So, Civ… what macro housing issue are we trying to solve?

Affordability and access.

Relatedly, housing markets across the country are undersupplied. Some dramatically so.

Home ownership has traditionally been perhaps the single best way for Americans to grow wealth but so many younger Americans are priced out of the market.

How do we bridge that gap?
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

You fix housing buy building more housing. The biggest issue to me is zoning laws that limit the types of construction you can have. That has had severe consequences with affordability and clear red lines for things like schools and overall neighborhood safety.

Offering incentives to include 20% affordability or for the local government to step in and build affordable housing without changing the single family zoning and other restrictions will never fix the situation.

The quickest way to affordable housing is to build more housing. It's amazing to me how much elected officials try to game that simple principle to appease the masses.


Also, what ever happened to the 2bed 2 bath starter home? That size home has been stagnant in the market since the 60s. Adding those at a higher rate to the housing stock would dramatically improve affordability

Land prices have rendered that product completely unprofitable for developers and builders in urban and suburban markets. Also expectations have changed over the decades and everyone now thinks they need at least 3 BR.

Our land price to sale price ratio needs to be 4x. ~3x max. Meaning if we're building a $600k home we need to have not more than $150k in the lot; $200k developed lot cost would be bleeding edge.

Work that down to a 1500 SF 2 BD, 2 BA product that we can market in the $400k's. No chance of finding that land in or around Raleigh. We're doing a townhome deal now where our townhome product will be in the mid-4's sale price with a developed lot basis in the $125k range.

Our goal on this deal has been to bring workforce housing to market (defined as affordable for Raleigh residents making 80%-120% of median income in our area). We found land at value because it's brownfield and was purchased requiring a rezoning and is on a historically underdeveloped side of Raleigh. And we still need to build a 1700 SF, 3 BR unit to reach our target market.

I can't conceive of how you build single family product at that same price in Raleigh. We're only nominally able to do it because we're achieving fair density since this project is multi-family and our raw land basis was abnormally low given the challenged site.

There's just a huge disconnect right now between what it costs to buy land and build, and what folks can afford or expect.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

hokiewolf said:

SmaptyWolf said:

hokiewolf said:

Economic populism is a disease


You guys love to bawl about the details of Kamala's economic plans... but when are you going to seriously talk about all of the stuff that Trump is proposing? Or do you just assume he's lying about all of it?

His current plans would add $7.5 TRILLION to the debt. Even hardcore Marxists are like "Jesus, dude, settle down!".
I believe I've been pretty clear I don't like much of Trumps economic plans. Tariffs don't work in most industries except maybe steel with respect to protecting jobs.

Neither candidate has a plan that address true economic issues. Harris thinks building g an extra million homes while giving away more incentives to buy homes is going to fix the problem.

We have 6th graders throwing **** on the wall to see if it sticks to get votes. It's ridiculous

Hokie you're commercial construction right?

Probably a two-beer conversation but I'd love your thoughts on housing. It's a tough nut to crack at least quickly and I don't think much or at least most of the problem is on the buy-side, which is what Harris' incentives attempt to address. That would improve access to the market (while also driving up the cost of the home commensurately) but so much of the problem remains unaddressed or under-addressed on the supply side.

One of the biggest things I think we can do is incentivize/value community college and vocational educations that train skilled trades and craftsmen to help ease the labor shortage.

Deleting tariffs on Canadian lumber would help.

The NAHB and their local arms work extensively lobbying local, state, and federal government for common-sense development permitting and zoning regulations that facilitate density and smart urban growth, which is absolutely necessary.
Civ, I think your post is a good one for conversation…. As much as you get criticized my some, including me, this is where I appreciate your involvement. So, I'd like for this to continue in a reasonable conversation. Folks, let's try to engage here and talk constructively…

So, Civ… what macro housing issue are we trying to solve?

Affordability and access.

Relatedly, housing markets across the country are undersupplied. Some dramatically so.

Home ownership has traditionally been perhaps the single best way for Americans to grow wealth but so many younger Americans are priced out of the market.

How do we bridge that gap?
I know I've heard that large financial institutions are buying up residential real estate. Now, I don't know how much much that is truly going on. That, in my opinion, if true, creates a market supply issue where normal folks get priced out of the market.

The slogan "Easy Money" may have contributed to this phenomenon. This may have made it easier for the financial institution to create the competitive advantage, thus pricing normal folks out of the market.

"If" the above is true and "if" the above is impactful, then that genie is out of the bottle and short term solutions may be worse than doing absolutely nothing.
FlossyDFlynt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

Civilized said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

hokiewolf said:

SmaptyWolf said:

hokiewolf said:

Economic populism is a disease


You guys love to bawl about the details of Kamala's economic plans... but when are you going to seriously talk about all of the stuff that Trump is proposing? Or do you just assume he's lying about all of it?

His current plans would add $7.5 TRILLION to the debt. Even hardcore Marxists are like "Jesus, dude, settle down!".
I believe I've been pretty clear I don't like much of Trumps economic plans. Tariffs don't work in most industries except maybe steel with respect to protecting jobs.

Neither candidate has a plan that address true economic issues. Harris thinks building g an extra million homes while giving away more incentives to buy homes is going to fix the problem.

We have 6th graders throwing **** on the wall to see if it sticks to get votes. It's ridiculous

Hokie you're commercial construction right?

Probably a two-beer conversation but I'd love your thoughts on housing. It's a tough nut to crack at least quickly and I don't think much or at least most of the problem is on the buy-side, which is what Harris' incentives attempt to address. That would improve access to the market (while also driving up the cost of the home commensurately) but so much of the problem remains unaddressed or under-addressed on the supply side.

One of the biggest things I think we can do is incentivize/value community college and vocational educations that train skilled trades and craftsmen to help ease the labor shortage.

Deleting tariffs on Canadian lumber would help.

The NAHB and their local arms work extensively lobbying local, state, and federal government for common-sense development permitting and zoning regulations that facilitate density and smart urban growth, which is absolutely necessary.
Civ, I think your post is a good one for conversation…. As much as you get criticized my some, including me, this is where I appreciate your involvement. So, I'd like for this to continue in a reasonable conversation. Folks, let's try to engage here and talk constructively…

So, Civ… what macro housing issue are we trying to solve?

Affordability and access.

Relatedly, housing markets across the country are undersupplied. Some dramatically so.

Home ownership has traditionally been perhaps the single best way for Americans to grow wealth but so many younger Americans are priced out of the market.

How do we bridge that gap?
I know I've heard that large financial institutions are buying up residential real estate. Now, I don't know how much much that is truly going on. That, in my opinion, if true, creates a market supply issue where normal folks get priced out of the market.

The slogan "Easy Money" may have contributed to this phenomenon. This may have made it easier for the financial institution to create the competitive advantage, thus pricing normal folks out of the market.

"If" the above is true and "if" the above is impactful, then that genie is out of the bottle and short term solutions may be worse than doing absolutely nothing.
I only have anecdotal evidence, but when I was trying to get a condo for my mother (price range of roughly 100k to 120k in 2020ish), every single place I looked was under contract within hours of when I looked. The only place I actually put together an offer, I tripled my due diligence compared to when I bought my house in 2016, and I lost out to a cash offer. It was always implied I was up against corporate buyer for those places, but never got confirmation. My realtor knew one of the listing agents and was told our offer was adequate enough under normal circumstances, but they just couldnt refuse a cash offer, which I get.
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FlossyDFlynt said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

hokiewolf said:

SmaptyWolf said:

hokiewolf said:

Economic populism is a disease


You guys love to bawl about the details of Kamala's economic plans... but when are you going to seriously talk about all of the stuff that Trump is proposing? Or do you just assume he's lying about all of it?

His current plans would add $7.5 TRILLION to the debt. Even hardcore Marxists are like "Jesus, dude, settle down!".
I believe I've been pretty clear I don't like much of Trumps economic plans. Tariffs don't work in most industries except maybe steel with respect to protecting jobs.

Neither candidate has a plan that address true economic issues. Harris thinks building g an extra million homes while giving away more incentives to buy homes is going to fix the problem.

We have 6th graders throwing **** on the wall to see if it sticks to get votes. It's ridiculous

Hokie you're commercial construction right?

Probably a two-beer conversation but I'd love your thoughts on housing. It's a tough nut to crack at least quickly and I don't think much or at least most of the problem is on the buy-side, which is what Harris' incentives attempt to address. That would improve access to the market (while also driving up the cost of the home commensurately) but so much of the problem remains unaddressed or under-addressed on the supply side.

One of the biggest things I think we can do is incentivize/value community college and vocational educations that train skilled trades and craftsmen to help ease the labor shortage.

Deleting tariffs on Canadian lumber would help.

The NAHB and their local arms work extensively lobbying local, state, and federal government for common-sense development permitting and zoning regulations that facilitate density and smart urban growth, which is absolutely necessary.
Civ, I think your post is a good one for conversation…. As much as you get criticized my some, including me, this is where I appreciate your involvement. So, I'd like for this to continue in a reasonable conversation. Folks, let's try to engage here and talk constructively…

So, Civ… what macro housing issue are we trying to solve?

Affordability and access.

Relatedly, housing markets across the country are undersupplied. Some dramatically so.

Home ownership has traditionally been perhaps the single best way for Americans to grow wealth but so many younger Americans are priced out of the market.

How do we bridge that gap?
I know I've heard that large financial institutions are buying up residential real estate. Now, I don't know how much much that is truly going on. That, in my opinion, if true, creates a market supply issue where normal folks get priced out of the market.

The slogan "Easy Money" may have contributed to this phenomenon. This may have made it easier for the financial institution to create the competitive advantage, thus pricing normal folks out of the market.

"If" the above is true and "if" the above is impactful, then that genie is out of the bottle and short term solutions may be worse than doing absolutely nothing.
I only have anecdotal evidence, but when I was trying to get a condo for my mother (price range of roughly 100k to 120k in 2020ish), every single place I looked was under contract within hours of when I looked. The only place I actually put together an offer, I tripled my due diligence compared to when I bought my house in 2016, and I lost out to a cash offer. It was always implied I was up against corporate buyer for those places, but never got confirmation. My realtor knew one of the listing agents and was told our offer was adequate enough under normal circumstances, but they just couldnt refuse a cash offer, which I get.
My daughter is a realtor in the Tampa, FL area and the corporate cash buyer has had a huge impact on home prices and availability. Probably a huge issue in any rapidly growing area.
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"white" men against Trump....

https://instagr.am/p/DBCUtE6S5nS
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A Uniparty icon.
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://instagr.am/p/DA_s4puJkK-
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
TheStorm
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GuerrillaPack said:

https://instagr.am/p/DA_s4puJkK-
That's pathetic.
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
By the way, remember the bulls$it in 2016? Some of you can't seem to ween yourself off it.

Oldsouljer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GuerrillaPack said:

"white" men against Trump....

https://instagr.am/p/DBCUtE6S5nS
This fellow is no slouch at word salads himself.
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
#devolution, it had to be this way.

Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
^ provides the foundational elements necessary for dramatic long-lasting corrections.


Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Werewolf said:

HAPPENING NOW: The Trump team went before the appeals court in the civil fraud trial with Letitia James in New York, and the Appeals judges couldn't understand why James brought this case in the first place.

They continuously asked her legal team for examples of anyone ever bringing a case like this before, and even insinuated it must be political. In closing arguments the James team spent a bulk of their time begging not to be sanctioned for weaponizing the Justice System.

Will the media report on this? Will democrats stop calling Trump a fraud and start calling James a fraud? Will the members of the DOJ who helped prosecute this case be investigated?

Once again, Trump was right and the democrats were crooked!


Explained for ya........

Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Asking a Q...........



Are we tracking resignations?

Trump predicted this would happen.

And I find it very interesting that Trump just announced a rally to be held at Madison Square Garden, just 9 days before election day.

#daNappy #daNewYorker ;-) oh yeh, #devolution
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Drip, drip, drip........ #Gobble, #Gobble, #Gobble
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is not just chest thumping and postering, this has real meat to it. #It had to be this way.

First Page Refresh
Page 178 of 178
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.