4 ms·

It’s funny how economists never talk about this (women in the workforce). Its adding 50% more people to the workforce. Yes, it’s less because women might work l

by zpeti 6y ago

It’s funny how economists never talk about this (women in the workforce). Its adding 50% more people to the workforce. Yes, it’s less because women might work less or part time, buts it’s an insanely high number in terms of market effects. I wouldn’t be surprised if one of the reasons you simply can’t survive on one person per household working, as in the 60s and 70s, is simply that two people are willing to work now and spend all their free cash on mortgage payments. No one talks about this. I’d love to hear the debates. I’d love to be proved wrong.

VRay 6y ago
Man, I'd like to see some more info on the whole housing industry in general It seems to be completely FUBAR to me. In Japan, housing ISN'T a glamorous investment, and I think that helps the house pricing situation a lot.. You can get a nice apartment in the fanciest part of downtown Tokyo for cheaper than a dangerous hole in the wall in San Jose
- JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
  It's cultural. Americans generally have lower savings rate (when compared to other nations) and a home is one place where 'investing' and spending can overlap in a fairly bespoke way compared to anything else you spend money on. You can't live in a share of stock, though it may appreciate faster than a house. (You also generally speaking can't use leverage to purchase shares). But even if shares appreciate faster than homes, they don't feed into conspicuous consumption: and that matters to some segment of the population.
- vladTheInhaler 6y ago
  The housing market in Japan is very different, for better or worse. As a consequence of the fact that houses aren't seen as investments, people...don't invest in their houses. They don't make necessary repairs, so the next owner would rather knock it over and rebuild than risk living in a rotting deathtrap [1]. From a macroscopic level, this is an enormous waste, because society is investing all these resources just to tread water, instead of accumulating wealth and resources over generations. [1] Raze, rebuild, repeat: why Japan knocks down its houses after 30 years: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/16/japan-reusable-housing-revolution https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/16/japan-reusabl...
- aaronblohowiak 6y ago
  Nothing can be both affordable and a good investment. (If it is a good investment, then its value relative to other things increases. If the value relative to other things goes up, then it ceases to be affordable.) Housing programs were a short-term boost to the wealth of the people that could access house lending (see redlining and the impact on Black wealth) but ultimately encouraging private ownership _as primary savings vehicle_ is a failed economic policy, and as things are often the case, the only thing worse than this policy is possibly the repercussions of unwinding it.
pm90 6y ago
It’s not funny and it has been reported on, but you seem unwilling to see it (wonder why). Eg https://equitablegrowth.org/womens-history-month-u-s-womens-labor-force-participation/ https://equitablegrowth.org/womens-history-month-u-s-womens-....
JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
The 70's, into the 80's, more or less began the long-term decline of interest rates in general, but also specifically for the 30 year mortgage. With multiple factors influencing what people are willing to pay for a home, I question how much we can separate out the dual-income household effect. I wouldn't say it has no influence, but it's probably difficult to state with much precision how great the effect is.
vladTheInhaler 6y ago
Elizabeth Warren is talking about it. In fact, she literally wrote the book about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two-Income_Trap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two-Income_Trap
robertlagrant 6y ago
> I’d love to be proved wrong. Why would you love that? It's 100% a factor. One of the key drivers of house price increases has been two-income households, with the nice double personal tax allowances, that allow much higher offers. Additionally in the UK I think it became illegal for mortgage companies to offer a lower multiplier on the second income, so it's a huge boost.

by zpeti 6y ago

VRay 6y ago

Man, I'd like to see some more info on the whole housing industry in general It seems to be completely FUBAR to me. In Japan, housing ISN'T a glamorous investment, and I think that helps the house pricing situation a lot.. You can get a nice apartment in the fanciest part of downtown Tokyo for cheaper than a dangerous hole in the wall in San Jose

JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
It's cultural. Americans generally have lower savings rate (when compared to other nations) and a home is one place where 'investing' and spending can overlap in a fairly bespoke way compared to anything else you spend money on. You can't live in a share of stock, though it may appreciate faster than a house. (You also generally speaking can't use leverage to purchase shares). But even if shares appreciate faster than homes, they don't feed into conspicuous consumption: and that matters to some segment of the population.
vladTheInhaler 6y ago
The housing market in Japan is very different, for better or worse. As a consequence of the fact that houses aren't seen as investments, people...don't invest in their houses. They don't make necessary repairs, so the next owner would rather knock it over and rebuild than risk living in a rotting deathtrap [1]. From a macroscopic level, this is an enormous waste, because society is investing all these resources just to tread water, instead of accumulating wealth and resources over generations. [1] Raze, rebuild, repeat: why Japan knocks down its houses after 30 years: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/16/japan-reusable-housing-revolution https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/16/japan-reusabl...
aaronblohowiak 6y ago
Nothing can be both affordable and a good investment. (If it is a good investment, then its value relative to other things increases. If the value relative to other things goes up, then it ceases to be affordable.) Housing programs were a short-term boost to the wealth of the people that could access house lending (see redlining and the impact on Black wealth) but ultimately encouraging private ownership _as primary savings vehicle_ is a failed economic policy, and as things are often the case, the only thing worse than this policy is possibly the repercussions of unwinding it.

pm90 6y ago

It’s not funny and it has been reported on, but you seem unwilling to see it (wonder why). Eg https://equitablegrowth.org/womens-history-month-u-s-womens-labor-force-participation/ https://equitablegrowth.org/womens-history-month-u-s-womens-....

JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago

The 70's, into the 80's, more or less began the long-term decline of interest rates in general, but also specifically for the 30 year mortgage. With multiple factors influencing what people are willing to pay for a home, I question how much we can separate out the dual-income household effect. I wouldn't say it has no influence, but it's probably difficult to state with much precision how great the effect is.

vladTheInhaler 6y ago

Elizabeth Warren is talking about it. In fact, she literally wrote the book about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two-Income_Trap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two-Income_Trap

robertlagrant 6y ago

> I’d love to be proved wrong. Why would you love that? It's 100% a factor. One of the key drivers of house price increases has been two-income households, with the nice double personal tax allowances, that allow much higher offers. Additionally in the UK I think it became illegal for mortgage companies to offer a lower multiplier on the second income, so it's a huge boost.