4 ms·
You should have led with, “In my opinion,”, because it’s hard to take your remark at face value. For example, one could argue that by removing the incentives t
by dfee 9y ago
You should have led with, “In my opinion,”, because it’s hard to take your remark at face value.
For example, one could argue that by removing the incentives to lend to buyers with sub-prime credit, Obama actually hurt the ability for the lower and lower-middle class to buy a home.
But primarily, I don’t think the tax bill, a few weeks old at this point, and in effect for less than 10 days, has had its effects studied adequately enough to conclude that it is the largest problem with developing home ownership since GWB.
- emodendroket 9y ago> But primarily, I don’t think the tax bill, a few weeks old at this point, and in effect for less than 10 days, has had its effects studied adequately enough to conclude that it is the largest problem with developing home ownership since GWB. Not my claim, though -- rather my claim is that it is the latest signal of the intent to stop promoting home ownership, which was also signaled by Obama's murmuring about ending the 30-year mortgage and failure to prevent foreclosures despite avenues to do so. I think this paper was really compelling and it's a big part of the thinking I'm working out here: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2428&context=ulj http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=242...
- dfee 9y agoWell the raw data says that it wasn’t so peachy under Obama - home ownership fell significantly every year he was in office. I’m not a member of either party. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home-ownership_in_the_United_States#Historical https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home-ownership_in_the_United_S...
- emodendroket 9y agoI am saying that the Trump administration is continuing a policy begun under Obama, so that doesn't seem like a rebuttal really.