Youtube hearted comments of Daniel Bradford (@Falconlibrary).

  1. 437
  2. 308
  3. 272
  4. 200
  5. 129
  6. 129
  7. 122
  8. 88
  9. 80
  10. 73
  11. 71
  12. 67
  13. Very few people will read this comment because of its length, but here goes anyway: The same economists who just a few months ago told us: 1. There will be only modest inflation; 2. Inflation will be short-lived; 3. Housing prices are going to go up 20% in 2022 Are now telling us that it'll either be no recession or a brief, mild one. Here's the five biggest problems: 1. Americans have no cash reserves. 61% of Americans can't cover a $1000 emergency in the "richest country on earth". 2. Inflation is mostly supply-side, not demand side. Fed raising interest rates will crush wage growth more than the inflation rate because interest rate rises are meant to fight demand-side inflation. Supply-side inflation caused by material shortages and supply chain disruptions isn't being dealt with by our government. 3. As Michael and Nick pointed out (and also Elon Musk), many badly-run, unprofitable companies have been keeping themselves going with free money. Free money train has been derailed by the Fed and now we may see a lot of companies large and small failing. 4. Housing is in a bubble and when that bursts, it's going to burn a lot of speculators (20% of all houses were bought by investors, aka speculators aka riverboat gamblers) who are going to lose possibly hundreds of billions overnight. 5. Americans not only have no savings, but high debt: the average US household holds debt equal to 129% of its annual gross income. You don't need to be Dave Ramsey to know that ain't good. I think all of these things added together, plus a government run by clueless people who live in a bubble of their own (elderly millionaires), is going to result in a collapse that will be different in some ways from 2008, but actually worse, because there's no clear path to getting out of it. 2022 doesn't look so bad; 2023 looks stormy, indeed.
    64
  14. 56
  15. 53
  16. 53
  17. 51
  18. 50
  19. 45
  20. 35
  21. 35
  22. 33
  23. Big institutional investors can tap limitless funds to buy houses--I don't call them "homes" unless they're owned by individuals--and can and will swoop in and increase their holdings during this crisis. It's exactly what happened in 2010-2012, when they went as far as rigging bids in the Bay Area. Unless our government intervenes to secure housing for individuals, which it has shown zero inclination to do, by 2026, the share of houses sold to investors will go from 20% to 50% (and higher in the most desirable areas). This is demonstrably bad, since owning a house is the best route for people to build wealth for retirement. What's more, people owning their own homes provides much-needed social stability. I live in a neighborhood of duplexes that are 100% rentals and the neighborhood is constantly in flux. Nobody knows their neighbors, so nobody looks after one another. I've owned homes in the past where everyone was an owner and knowing that your neighbor is there for the long haul makes it more likely you'll befriend them. People need those social bonds; we're individuals, but we're also tribal animals and being isolated is bad for us. American society is already under severe strain not just from the pandemic but by the wage gap, and shutting people out of owning their homes may be good for investors' profits, but it's harmful for our society overall. And no, I do not want to debate anybody who bleats about the magic of the market or other Ayn Rand BS. That stuff is a fantasy. We have local, state, and federal government agencies for a reason: they're supposed to intervene and manage our society to make it as fair as possible. If you want to live in a country where there's no government, try living in Somalia for a year and then check back with me if you're still alive at the end of it.
    31
  24. 30
  25. 28
  26. 26
  27. 25
  28. 22
  29. 21
  30. 21
  31. 19
  32. 19
  33. 19
  34. 18
  35. 18
  36. 18
  37. 17
  38. 16
  39. 15
  40. 13
  41. 13
  42. 13
  43. 13
  44. 12
  45. I wouldn't say sellers are "slashing" their listing prices. When you bought the house as an investment 2 years ago, demand double or triple what you paid for it, and then cut your asking price by 10% after sixty days...that's not much progress. Here's an example from the Midwest, using price history from the listing: 2019: Purchased for $80,000 March 2022: Listed for $210,000 June 2022: Price reduced to $195,000 That's with no improvements, either cosmetic or structural. The house needs new windows, a complete bathroom and kitchen remodel, roof is 15 years old...no garage, area is so-so. I would buy the house for what they paid for it, but no more. It's a long way from $195,000 to $80,000. Anybody who pays more than $80,000 and isn't a deep pockets investor is an idiot. You'll have to buy and hold for a decade to recover your investment (but if you're looking to take a loss or stash some cash, it's a "buy"). The seller is apparently heavily indebted with lots of "investment properties" but sellers haven't adjusted to reality yet: people are either getting laid off or afraid of layoffs, inflation is destroying income gains and then some, banks aren't writing new loans, companies are putting an end to remote work, which means Californians who work in tech aren't going to swoop in and rescue property values with their high salaries. And the president can't get up a flight of stairs on his own. No one in Washington is doing anything. Janet Yellen and Jerome Powell have that deer in the headlights look and the president, well, let's just say he might not be a big help here and leave it at that. Will that $195,000 house drop belong six figures? Depends on how long and how deep that recession is. If I were the seller, I'd drop the price to $120,000 for a quick sale and hope some dumb fish takes the bait. But dreams die hard and greedy ones die harder. To answer your question: Yes, I'm fun at parties.
    12
  46. 12
  47. 11
  48. 11
  49. 10
  50. (Before I start, apologies for a long comment no one will read) People ask "Why haven't home prices collapsed yet?" Three reasons: 1. The recession is just starting. We haven't seen job losses yet--but Target just posted a 90% decline in profits, with many other companies to follow. Companies will stop hiring and/or lay off people, especially after the 2022 Christmas shopping season. 2. The Fed promised to sell off its MBS (mortgage backed securities) but instead is BUYING them. The Fed actually added $8 billion in MBS over last month instead of selling the $17.5 billion they planned. Mortgage lenders set their rates when financial markets open, and then they monitor MBS prices all day (or they pay a service to do this and alert them to significant changes). When MBS prices drop, lenders raise interest rates, and when prices rise, they drop their rates. The Fed is propping up MBS prices and keeping rates from rising. 3. Many sellers are trying to wait this market out. I was negotiating for a house this past week and in the middle of negotiations, my broker informed me that the seller had decided to pull the listing "until he figures things out". Figuring things out = why he can't dictate terms and demand twice what he paid for the house in 2019. How can this be? Ignore all the real estate industry shills (rhymes with "Bamsey") who assure us that home prices are just going to go up. They said the same thing before 2008. The inexorable principle of housing prices is this: when housing prices become disconnected from wages, housing prices will eventually correct back to their true value. A home at the top of the bubble in 2007 that was $250,000 is $475,000 today, while the average income went from $55,000 to $63,000 in that same time period. When people tell you "this isn't 2008", reply: "No, it's a far bigger bubble, much worse" and the coming recession of 2023-25 will be worse than 2008-11.
    10
  51. 10
  52. 9
  53. 9
  54. 9
  55. 9
  56. 9
  57. 8
  58. 8
  59. 8
  60. 8
  61. 8
  62. 8
  63. 7
  64. 7
  65. 7
  66. 7
  67. 6
  68. Most Americans are bad with money and worse at math, but are also perpetual optimists. If you understand this, it all makes sense. Story of my neighbors: the husband just got laid off, the wife is still working, so even with unemployment benefits, their household income has been reduced by a significant amount. They just bought a new 75 inch flatscreen tv. Because it was "on sale" and they're "saving money". They put their old 65 inch on the curb (still working) and some scavengers came and collected it (there's a good side hustle, collecting other people's castoffs). Oh, and the husband is sure he'll find a job "after the benefits run out". Going to take a long vacation until then! Saw it, wanted it, bought it, it's on the credit card, how will we pay it off? Who knows? My neighbors are NOT a unique case--I'd say most people are like that. Hell, people bought entire houses on impulse, what's a $1100 flatscreen tv or a $45,000 car compared to that? I'm no financial genius and not rich, but I never carry credit card debt, drive a well-maintained car that I paid off years ago with 0% financing and another one I inherited from my dad, and have cash on hand for emergencies. And my television is over a decade old, but it works just fine, so why get another one? I have no financial worries because I've always lived below my means. The materialism of Americans is one of the biggest problems in our society: it's the source of a lot of stress, and part of it (not all of it) self-inflicted.
    6
  69. 6
  70. 6
  71. 6
  72. 6
  73. 6
  74. 6
  75. 6
  76. 5
  77. 5
  78. 5
  79. 5
  80. 5
  81. 5
  82. 4
  83. 4
  84. 4
  85. 4
  86. 4
  87. 4
  88. 4
  89. 4
  90. 4
  91. 4
  92. 4
  93. 4
  94. 4
  95. 4
  96. 4
  97. 4
  98. 4
  99. 3
  100. 3
  101. 3
  102. 3
  103. 3
  104. 3
  105. 3
  106. 3
  107. 3
  108. 3
  109. 3
  110. 3
  111. 3
  112. 3
  113. 3
  114. 3
  115. 3
  116. 3
  117. 3
  118. 2
  119. 2
  120. 2
  121. 2
  122. 2
  123. 2
  124. 2
  125. 2
  126. 2
  127. 2
  128. 2
  129. Sounds like whoever wrote this affordable housing bill was watching your channel and reading the comments! Even if you're against government intervention on principle, remember: affordable housing is the basis for a stable, prosperous society. People who are always moving and are always under financial strain are stressed, unhappy people who don't have an emotional investment in our society. Incentives, rather than price controls, allows the market to work within limits. We have all kinds of limits on capitalism: OSHA health and safety regulations, speed limits on roads, hygiene standards for restaurants, child labor laws, pollution regulations, etc. Libertarians will tell you that we don't need any of those, but none of us would really want to live in a society where anyone could do anything they wanted without limits. I haven't read this bill in Florida, but from your summary, it seems the main thrust of it is to make housing more affordable for families and individuals, not to fatten up investors, and that's going to be a good thing for the people of Florida. If you have a nice house that you can afford, you'll stay there, your neighbors will stay there, and you'll build a stable community. I grew up in a neighborhood like that in Kansas, and I still keep in touch with people I knew as a kid because we were all part of a real community. That's what this country needs. By the way, are you the real Michael? Because I wasn't aware that he owns any long sleeve shirts. Just seems wrong.
    2
  130. 2
  131. 2
  132. 2
  133. 2
  134. 2
  135. 1
  136. 1
  137. 1
  138. 1
  139. 1
  140. 1
  141. 1
  142. 1