1 - 10 Next
And the increase in the price of housing is due to libbewwal-lefty urban planning policies!!!! In most countries these policies are explicitly central planning policies. In the USA it is more complex, but the fact remains that the political freedom to develop housing on legally bought rural land just about anywhere, without central planners forbidding you, is what keeps housing systemically affordable.
Lies go several times around the world while the truth is still getting its boots on. "Capital is not back: A comment on Thomas Piketty’s ‘Capital in the 21st Century’ Odran Bonnet, Pierre-Henri Bono, Guillaume Camille Chapelle, Étienne Wasmer 30 June 2014 ABSTRACT "Thomas Piketty’s claim that the ratio of capital to national income is approaching 19th-century levels has fuelled the debate over inequality. This column argues that Piketty’s claim rests on the recent increase in the price of housing. Other forms of capital are, relative to income, at much lower levels than they were a century ago." http://www.voxeu.org/article/housing-capital-and-piketty-s-analysis
Exactly! Even "white flight" has always been socio-economic flight. People of colour flee locales with crime and failing schools as soon as they are able to, too. In the UK there are white-trash neighbourhoods from which upwardly mobile hard-working Indians flee as soon as they are able. Glaeser and Vigdor's "The End of the Segregated Century" is well worth reading. Guess why there are no major racial tensions in modern automobile-dependent suburbs in the late-growing sunbelt cities, even when there are substantial minority populations as there now are in many such locations? Those minority populations are those who have self-selected to move away from the problem locations, which are now overwhelmingly correlated with legacy urban cores, breakdown in marriage rates and increases in fatherlessness, and libbewwal-Democrat local administration. A similar situation exists in the UK's white-trash neighbourhoods, which are lefty-Labour strongholds.
We also need to be awake to crony rentier gains in urban land. Paul Cheshire and various colleagues have been calculating the factor by which land prices per square foot in UK cities, have inflated since the 1947 Town and Country Planning Act, relative to US cities that have no fringe growth constraints. In 1984 the factor ranged from 120 to 320. By 1999 the high end of the range was 700. The latest figures from Cheshire et al has the high end (London, of course) at 900. Of course there is so much "equity" to be wiped out by reforming the urban planning system, that reform is absolutely impossible. Like with smoking, the Surgeon-General's Warning for "smart growth" should be: "DON'T START"!
Paui Revere never SAID "The British are Coming". He said "The Redcoats are coming"!!!!!! These days we would say "The Feds are coming".
Oh, for goodness sake. When "The British were coming". the inhabitants of America WERE "the British". It was "their own government" that was "coming"!!!!!!!!
".....the world’s inability to trust that the UN inspectors could ever realistically certify Saddam clean of his nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs......" And they never did. Every report they issued right up till the invasion, listed numerous points on which Saddam was non-compliant, failures to account for known purchases of WMD ingredients, and known previous quantities of manufactured WMD's. There are UN weapons inspectors such as Tim Trevan, Rolf Ekeus, and Demetrius Perricos who have written and spoken out on this point for years. The Reports were on the UN's website for years for all to see. It is the MSM that has been lying all along. The chant should be "People died as the media lied about the basis for war"
Steve Sailer did some interesting comparisons along these lines in the past, and may be still doing them. In a 2005 essay entitled "The Dirt Gap", he outlined some very pointed statistics about the differences between States in the USA; listing the States in order of house price inflation from 1980 to 2004, and fertility rates among white women; in the 2004 elections, sitting President George W. Bush, won all of the first 26 States with the lowest inflation in house prices and the all of the first 19 States with the highest fertility rates. The statistical significance of this is enormous. He has written more since that essay, pointing out how the thesis still holds up. Eg "The Dirt Gap Validated", and "Affordable Family Formation the Neglected Key to the GOP's Future" It would seem that if you want higher birth rates (eg for reasons of fiscal sustainability), one thing you have to do is ensure that urban growth constraint does not make housing unaffordable to the cohort most likely to procreate. One writer (Jennifer Morse Roback, possibly?) recently called massive mortgages "the new contraceptive". Mike Shedlock is absolutely correct that regulatory rationing of urban land is the culprit - of course "liberal" cities all do this. It is a politically correct article of faith for them. There was a furore over a study a few years ago, "Economic Enlightenment in relation to college-going and other variables"; Buturovic and Klein. Question 1 in their survey was something like "Restricting the supply of housing will tend to inflate house prices, true or false"? Of course one of the correlations found in their study was that self-identified liberals had a very poor understanding of basic economics. But liberal opinion writers and academics protested that the study's authors "setermined what were the right answers to each question". How dare they mark someone wrong for answering "false" to the question that restricting the supply of housing will tend to inflate house prices..... and so on with all the questions. Tends to illustrate the problem with "liberals", huh?
Who pays the taxes that the government uses to build whatever it builds? The bottom 50% of Americans? HAH! I hope this is the moment Hilary blew any chance of ever winning the Presidency. If not, I weep for America.
In response to:

The Price of Papal Popularity

Phil from NZ Wrote: Oct 21, 2014 5:36 PM
What is "the abomination of desolation standing where it should not"? "He that reads, let him understand" - perhaps when it is actually happening.....no-one in earlier times would have even imagined such a thing.......not in ANY cultures, let alone Christendom........
1 - 10 Next