Trump trying to push 50 year mortgages & 15 year car loans on us bruhs

Remote

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Aug 29, 2013
Messages
84,621
Reputation
26,252
Daps
378,761
There have been a bunch of social media posts about this.
The examples show that on average, Americans would save about $200 per month in their mortages....and will end up spending $400,000 more in interest payments.
 

CopiousX

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Dec 15, 2019
Messages
15,226
Reputation
5,308
Daps
75,024
I think it would be more efficient for him to pressure employers to lower salaries and simultaneously allow remote work. The issue wasn't a shortage of houses , but it's a poor distribution of workers.

This method allows both the business community and regular people get a win. Employers will no longer have to pay premium for getting employees in expensive cities and workers will be able to shop the entire national market of homes.

The key here is that you should be able to live anywhere in America and still have a good job. housing isn't that big of an issue because there are big houses which are only 150k in St Louis or desmoines or Gatlinburg or Las Cruces. The issue is that employers are hoarding all the jobs in a few select cities, which require high salaries AND prevents their employees from buying property there.
 
Last edited:

CopiousX

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Dec 15, 2019
Messages
15,226
Reputation
5,308
Daps
75,024
I think it would be more efficient for him to pressure employers to lower salaries and simultaneously allow remote work. The issue wasn't a shortage of houses , but it's a poor distribution of workers.

This method allows both the business community and regular people get a win. Employers will no longer have to pay premium for getting employees in expensive cities and workers will be able to shop the entire national market of homes.

The key here is that you should be able to live anywhere in America and still have a good job. housing isn't that big of an issue because there are big houses which are only 150k in St Louis or desmoines or Gatlinburg or Las Cruces. The issue is that employers are hoarding all the jobs in a few select cities, which require high salaries AND prevents their employees from buying property there.
Now quote the rest of it. :usure:


Out here taking one sentence out of a 3 paragraph, well thought out post.:skip:
 

Remote

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Aug 29, 2013
Messages
84,621
Reputation
26,252
Daps
378,761
Now quote the rest of it. :usure:


Out here taking one sentence out of a 3 paragraph, well thought out post.:skip:
The issue is absolutely a shortage of housing.
And depressing wages doesn't solve anything when you already have a huge wealth gap and income disparity.

Why would you think lowering the buying power of people already stretched thin is a good idea?
:gucci:
 

CopiousX

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Dec 15, 2019
Messages
15,226
Reputation
5,308
Daps
75,024
The issue is absolutely a shortage of housing.
And depressing wages doesn't solve anything when you already have a huge wealth gap and income disparity.

No there isn't. There are plenty of reasonably priced houses as I cited below.




The key here is that you should be able to live anywhere in America and still have a good job. housing isn't that big of an issue because there are big houses which are only 150k in St Louis or desmoines or Gatlinburg or Las Cruces. The issue is that employers are hoarding all the jobs in a few select cities, which require high salaries AND prevents their employees from buying property there.
The issue is a poor distribution of workers because a small number of cities are hoarding most of the good jobs. You must consider the entire American housing market before you say there is a shortage.


The salary adjustment is the incentive for the employer to allow this . Their corporate boards have a fiduciary responsibility to accept such a proposal if it brings value to the corporation.


And these would work for most of the corporate jobs because there is no reason [a corporate attorney ,or software engineer, or HR representative , or csuite team ,or middle mgmt ,or call center representative ,or financial broker or b2b salesperson or bussiness analyst] needs to be in New york or California or Seattle or chicago or Atlanta or miami or Boston





Why would you think lowering the buying power of people already stretched thin is a good idea?
:gucci:


Quite the opposite . you would actually have far more left over. The real wages would actually be higher after relocation and a cola adjustment because the vast majority of this person's income in their high cost city went toward housing.

As a case study take an inhouse first-year attorney or first-year engineer living in san jose, both working at general dynamics or Cisco. Look at the massive change in savings using their original 150k salary. Keep in mind starter homes in that same city are starting at $700,000.

If the employer were to reduce the 150k salary to 120k, and allow the same employee to move to kansas city or Albuquerque where a starter home may be only 150,000 they would see their mortgage dropped from $4,800 to $990. This is the equivalent of a $15,000 raise even when you account for the 30k salary reduction.
(Assuming today's 7% interest rate)

This is what I'm talking about. My proposal raises the buying power of the average American.
 
Last edited:
Top