The State of the Economy Thread - “Falling inflation, rising growth give U.S. the world’s best recovery”

[skinsmarydu]

My friend with a one-bedroom apartment in the same complex I moved out of to buy my first house that I spoke of earlier pays almost what I pay for my mortgage on a 3-bedroom home on about 3/4 of an acre.  (my roommate there was a Vietnam Marine, I never felt more safe.)  Our rent then was about half of what she's paying now.  

 

And she doesn't have to worry about the yard, gutters, or anything else.  So why is she paying out the ass for an apartment where someone next door could leave their X-mas lights on and burn her stuff down?  It's the sole reason I haven't downsized. 

[tshile]

1 hour ago, Fergasun said:

How is it that I can buy a 3 bedroom townhome with 10 percent down (around 2018), and even with PMI my mortgage and insurance is $300 less than a 2-bedroon rent?  Just because I could put 10 percent down.  

Yup. 
 

that’s exactly it. You have to come up with the money and credit rating for a down payment. 
 

but that’s not all. Now every time there’s a problem with anything - you call yourself to get it fixed. 
 

Renters live in the fantasy land where they should have exactly what they want, pay what works for them, and not have to take care of anything. 
 

owning a house is expensive and it’s beyond just your mortgage payment.  This idea that your rent is about the mortgage and that’s unfair is nonsense. 
 

and I say all that to simply break down the argument about ownership vs renting. I agree both are too high. And I have ideas on how to solve that. And smarter people than me probably have better ideas. 
 

and our political leaders aren’t interested in any of it. They say they are but we never get anything other than basic changes that don’t change the structural issues that have created the problem. 
 

i realize the green deal took flack but the reality is we’re kinda of in that early 1900’s place where it’s time for something big and radical that acknowledges serious structural issues and addressed them. 
 

one of my ideas is making childcare free. Figure something out for everyone. Maybe 1 mil a year and over are on their own. But even people making 6 figures are living in expensive areas that pay that and daycare is even more there. This is a fundamental problem and it drives decisions about peoples careers. And that seems like an inefficiency to me. The high cost of daycare should not translate into career choices and lesser contribution to the overall economy. 
 

the government needs to spend less time trying to fix problems with minimum wage hikes and tax credits, and more time fixing structural expenses we have. And for most people - if the daycare money was back in their pockets it’d be spent immediately. The money would still move around the economy just in a slightly different way. 
 

my daughter costs 19k a year. When she goes to public school it’s like we get a serious raise. At one point our son was still there. And I’m not doing anything special - they all cost that around here. 

Edited May 27, 2023 by tshile

[PeterMP]

11 hours ago, tshile said:

Yup. 
 

that’s exactly it. You have to come up with the money and credit rating for a down payment. 
 

but that’s not all. Now every time there’s a problem with anything - you call yourself to get it fixed. 
 

Renters live in the fantasy land where they should have exactly what they want, pay what works for them, and not have to take care of anything. 
 

owning a house is expensive and it’s beyond just your mortgage payment.  This idea that your rent is about the mortgage and that’s unfair is nonsense. 
 

and I say all that to simply break down the argument about ownership vs renting. I agree both are too high. And I have ideas on how to solve that. And smarter people than me probably have better ideas. 
 

and our political leaders aren’t interested in any of it. They say they are but we never get anything other than basic changes that don’t change the structural issues that have created the problem. 
 

i realize the green deal took flack but the reality is we’re kinda of in that early 1900’s place where it’s time for something big and radical that acknowledges serious structural issues and addressed them. 
 

one of my ideas is making childcare free. Figure something out for everyone. Maybe 1 mil a year and over are on their own. But even people making 6 figures are living in expensive areas that pay that and daycare is even more there. This is a fundamental problem and it drives decisions about peoples careers. And that seems like an inefficiency to me. The high cost of daycare should not translate into career choices and lesser contribution to the overall economy. 
 

the government needs to spend less time trying to fix problems with minimum wage hikes and tax credits, and more time fixing structural expenses we have. And for most people - if the daycare money was back in their pockets it’d be spent immediately. The money would still move around the economy just in a slightly different way. 
 

my daughter costs 19k a year. When she goes to public school it’s like we get a serious raise. At one point our son was still there. And I’m not doing anything special - they all cost that around here. 

 

From an economic stand point, I suspect the government getting (more) involved in paying for child care would be inefficient.  You'd essentially be eliminating or even more drastically altering the market with respect to child care costs.  And generally the most efficient thing (given current economic thinking) is to let the free market work.  Child care costs 19K where you live because that's what the market will support.  

 

From there, you have choices.

 

I think housing expenses is where you could maybe see the government do something, and I think housing expenses are largely associated with the artificial system by which we run and fund schools.  There's a huge inefficiency associated with people not being able to afford to live near where they work.  That then creates the need for our extensive transportation system and traffic where we lose who knows how many people hours of labor a year in traffic.  Plus you get the individual costs assocatied with transportations (car maintenance, gas, insurance etc.)  The government working to force a more mix of housing options and expenses so more people could afford to live and have options of how they live in different areas might make more sense.

 

But then people scream, their ruining the schools/community. 

 

Where I live people want a variety of restaurants, grocery stores, etc to be close by.  And they want the things in those places to be cheap which requires cheap labor.  They also don't want more traffic or larger roads.  But they also scream when they build low income housing in the area.  Somethings got to give there.

 

(I did want to add from a libertarian/conservative perspective, much of your child care costs is likely already being driven by government actions.  The need for licensing, background checks, insurance, (Daddy Daycare anybody?) and lawsuits has almost certainly driven up the costs of childcare.  When I was young, it wasn't uncommon for a stay at home parent (a mom in every case that I knew of) to take on two or three other children to make some extra money.  To my knowledge today, that's unheard that's essentially unheard.  The one family that I know of that has done something similar the dad had a somewhat flexible job.  They pieced together having different people come in different times and different days to watch their kids at their home, and then if there was a day/time that they couldn't fill, he'd go home and watch them.  If you want to lower your child care costs, try talking to a few friends and see if you can't get a couple of kids together at one house and then use one of the online "sitter" sites to see if you can piece together childcare at that house for your kids.  Though if you do it at your house and initiate it, you might want to worry about how that would impact your insurance/liability if something happens and somebody sues.)

[Larry]

My city has come up with a notion to "stimulate affordable housing". 
 

They want to eliminate all "single family zoning" in the city. 
 

Single family neighborhood I live in. A half mile from the UF campus. The real estate speculators who have probably bought half the houses in the subdivision, are now free to convert every house to duplex or 4Plex. 

[Dr. Do Itch Big]

I watched a video on virtual layoffs and am I thinking okay whatever. 
 

I don’t see what the big deal is personally. If I’m being fired I could care less if it’s in person or through an email. Especially if I work remotely. 

[tshile]

2 hours ago, Larry said:

My city has come up with a notion to "stimulate affordable housing". 
 

They want to eliminate all "single family zoning" in the city. 
 

Single family neighborhood I live in. A half mile from the UF campus. The real estate speculators who have probably bought half the houses in the subdivision, are now free to convert every house to duplex or 4Plex. 
 

 

I’m not sure I like this idea. 
 

I think I’d be a bit irritated if I bought a house in an area and suddenly tons of houses are converted into duplexes and 4plexes

[Larry]

Just now, tshile said:

 

I’m not sure I like this idea. 
 

I think I’d be a bit irritated if I bought a house in an area and suddenly tons of houses are converted into duplexes and 4plexes

 

Funny.  I felt exactly the same way.  

[tshile]

That sucks. 
 

especially when the real winner is the speculators. 
 

I have a group chat with a bunch of hard core progressives. One thing we constantly talk about is how housing shouldn’t be an investors market. It’s one thing for a family to buy a house and it be a significant and worthwhile investment for them (I believe for the vast majority it’ll be the biggest investment they have in life), it’s another for people with money to buy them simple as investments. 
 

I get someone has to own things that renters rent, and I’m not one to just trash land lords, but it’s out of whack

[PleaseBlitz]

I, for one, want to know more about @tshile’s group chat with many hard core progressives. 

[tshile]

22 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

I, for one, want to know more about @tshile’s group chat with many hard core progressives. 

tech people tend to be very liberal/progressive. 
 

there’s trans people and gay people and most of them think capitalism sucks and the government should fix everything 🤷‍♂️ 

[PleaseBlitz]

Is there a snoring emoji?  😴 

[tshile]

I mean idk what you want you said you want to know more about them 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

8 minutes ago, tshile said:

I mean idk what you want you said you want to know more about them 

I’m pretty sure he was more interested in the hardcore part of the progressive chat. Break out the furry costumes.

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by CousinsCowgirl84

[Jabbyrwock]

14 minutes ago, tshile said:

tech people tend to be very liberal/progressive. 
 

there’s trans people and gay people and most of them think capitalism sucks and the government should fix everything 🤷‍♂️ 

 

5 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

I’m pretty sure he was more interested in the hardcore part of the progressive chat. 

 

Example:

 

tech people tend to be very liberal/progressive. There’s trans people and gay people and most of them think that the government should spank capitalism like the naughty little optimization algorithm it is.

 

Obviously just a working draft.  Follow me at "SexualizeThisGPT" for more professional writing flairs.

[tshile]

You all are weird 

[EmirOfShmo]

I don't have access to the WSJ article but interesting...China bought Smithfield 10 years ago and is the largest pork processor in the US. 

Fun fact: ~2005 I did an ERP implementation at a pork & beef processor in Abbotsford, WI. My buddy (Canadian via Romania) was working with me. He's fluent in English with a slight Romanian accent. When we walked into the pork plant for the first time & talked to their team a woman asked my buddy where he was from. So he said "Canada but I was born in Romania." Genius woman replied, "Oh, you're from one of them Muslim countries." We had steak & a few drinks for dinner that night & laughed. 

 

 

[Simmsy]

Over three years ago I just stopped eating porkchops and never picked it back up again. I still eat ham, but I just tired of porkchops.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

1 hour ago, Simmsy said:

Over three years ago I just stopped eating porkchops and never picked it back up again. I still eat ham, but I just tired of porkchops.

You got to try ‘em with shake n bake!

 

 

[Captain Wiggles]

[Simmsy]

12 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

You got to try ‘em with shake n bake!

 

 

 

I've tried it a few times, it was ok, but I didn't do it quite right. Tried it with chicken, not pork chops.

[LD0506]

1 hour ago, Simmsy said:

 

I've tried it a few times, it was ok, but I didn't do it quite right. Tried it with chicken, not pork chops.

 

It's not you, that **** is made to be "not quite right'

[Ball Security]

On 5/27/2023 at 8:14 PM, tshile said:

 

I’m not sure I like this idea. 
 

I think I’d be a bit irritated if I bought a house in an area and suddenly tons of houses are converted into duplexes and 4plexes

And that’s why we have a lack of housing supply. Those of us who own homes tend to vote at higher percentages than renters and don’t want our neighborhoods to change. NIMBY.

[tshile]

53 minutes ago, Ball Security said:

And that’s why we have a lack of housing supply. Those of us who own homes tend to vote at higher percentages than renters and don’t want our neighborhoods to change. NIMBY.

That’s definitely a problem. 
 

and I try not to be like that. 
 

But there’s a difference (to me) between building different types of housing in areas near you (which I support as I recognize the need and value)

 

and what was described above. Which is speculators anticipating something buying up a bunch of homes in an area and converting them after getting rezoning through. 
 

to me building that kind of housing in an area is different than taking over a single family zoned area, pushing to get it rezoned, then converting SFH’s into 4plexes. A house is the single biggest and most significant investment the vast majority of people will ever make. And that screws that up for those people and it does so pretty seriously. And the ones that benefit are the speculators that are in tune with the local politics and part of a strategy to do this to make money, at the expense of the neighbors in the area. 
 

yes NIMBY is a problem but I think painting all the different scenarios as that is a bit silly. What was described isn’t in my back yard, it’s not even in my state, but I’m capable of understanding why that may be really unfair to those people and, without more details, I’d think there’s probably a better way to handle the issue than that. 
 

but the other ways probably don’t benefit the real estate speculators.

Edited May 29, 2023 by tshile

[China]

I'll be curious how this works out for her:

 

 

[China]

Private payrolls rose by 278,000 in May, well ahead of expectations, ADP says

 

The U.S. labor market posted another month of surprising strength in May as companies added jobs at a pace well above expectations, according to a report Thursday from payroll processing firm ADP.

 

Private sector employment increased by a seasonally adjusted 278,000 for the month, ahead of the Dow Jones estimate for 180,000 and a bit lower than the downwardly revised 291,000 in April. May’s increase took the payroll growth so far in 2023 to 1.09 million.

 

The ADP report noted that the distribution of job gains was “fragmented” for the month, as increases were concentrated in leisure and hospitality, which added 208,000 positions, and natural resources and mining, which saw a gain of 94,000.

 

Construction added 64,000 jobs, but multiple other categories had declines.

 

For instance, manufacturing saw a drop of 48,000, financial activities lost 35,000, and education and health services was off by 29,000. Trade, transportation and utilities posted an increase of 32,000 while the other services category added 12,000.

 

From a size perspective, companies with 500 or more workers lost 106,000 jobs. Small firms, with fewer than 50 workers, added 235,000 positions.

 

One area of note for ADP was a slowdown in the pace of wage gains, with annual pay up a still-robust 6.5% in May but down from the 6.7% increase in April. Those switching jobs reported an annual increase of 12.1%, off a percentage point from the month before.

 

“This is the second month we’ve seen a full percentage point decline in pay growth for job changers,” Nela Richardson, ADP’s chief economist said. “Pay growth is slowing substantially, and wage-driven inflation may be less of a concern for the economy despite robust hiring.”

 

The ADP count comes a day ahead of the Labor Department’s more closely watched nonfarm payrolls report, which is expected to show job growth of 190,000 in May following a gain of 253,000 in April.

 

Click on the link for the full article