3 ms·

Whether or not you support skilled immigration, the idea that we would change our stance on the matter because of home prices is absurd.

by johnrob 18y ago

byrneseyeview 18y ago
"Whether or not you believe X, the idea that we would change our stance on the matter because of new circumstances that make it a better idea is absurd." Or did I misread you?
- hugh 18y ago
  Whether or not you believe in burning criminals at the stake, the idea that we would change our stance on the matter because it's cold outside today is absurd. (The point being that X in this case is an important issue of policy and Y is a transient, small-beer problem that X wouldn't really solve much anyway.)
  - silverlake 18y ago
    Most people consider the real-estate bubble to be a massive shock to the financial system that could quite easily lead to a severe recession and the government takeover of $1 trillion in Fannie & Freddie debt (plus another few hundred billion for FDIC). You won't hear anyone in the know describe this as a "small beer problem".
geebee 18y ago
I'm through with Alan Greenspan. It may indeed be a good idea to increase skilled immigration; for all I know, it might even be a good idea to increase it specifically to support home prices. But I just can't stomach hearing this from the guy who probably did more than anyone else to inflate the housing bubble. This housing crisis wasn't some obscure, unexpected blow from an economic blind spot that surprised economists and policy makers alike. Greenspan didn't just ignore the concerns of a bunch of fringe doomsayers - he ignored obvious and well documented warning signs. Housing prices jumped, so Greenspan lowered interest rates. They jumped more, so Greenspan lowered the rates even more. They jumped again, and Greenspan lowered them to 40 year lows and started touting the benefits of exotic mortgages that could get them even lower. Now he suggests that we pursue a high population immigration strategy so that we can fill up those houses at their peak valuations? Good one. The funny thing is, I'm not really opposed to skilled immigration (provided it is done with freedom and is broad based, not through corporate indentured servitude targeting a small sector of the labor pool). But we need to hear it from someone other than Greenspan. He needs to hang out by the pool and play golf now, I'm not interested in hearing from him. Like Marcellus Wallace said to Butch: "you get gone, and when you gone, you stay gone, or you be gone. You lost all your LA privileges."

Whether or not you support skilled immigration, the idea that we would change our stance on the matter because of home prices is absurd.

by johnrob 18y ago

Whether or not you support skilled immigration, the idea that we would change our stance on the matter because of home prices is absurd.

byrneseyeview 18y ago

"Whether or not you believe X, the idea that we would change our stance on the matter because of new circumstances that make it a better idea is absurd." Or did I misread you?

hugh 18y ago
Whether or not you believe in burning criminals at the stake, the idea that we would change our stance on the matter because it's cold outside today is absurd. (The point being that X in this case is an important issue of policy and Y is a transient, small-beer problem that X wouldn't really solve much anyway.)
- silverlake 18y ago
  Most people consider the real-estate bubble to be a massive shock to the financial system that could quite easily lead to a severe recession and the government takeover of $1 trillion in Fannie & Freddie debt (plus another few hundred billion for FDIC). You won't hear anyone in the know describe this as a "small beer problem".

geebee 18y ago

I'm through with Alan Greenspan. It may indeed be a good idea to increase skilled immigration; for all I know, it might even be a good idea to increase it specifically to support home prices. But I just can't stomach hearing this from the guy who probably did more than anyone else to inflate the housing bubble. This housing crisis wasn't some obscure, unexpected blow from an economic blind spot that surprised economists and policy makers alike. Greenspan didn't just ignore the concerns of a bunch of fringe doomsayers - he ignored obvious and well documented warning signs. Housing prices jumped, so Greenspan lowered interest rates. They jumped more, so Greenspan lowered the rates even more. They jumped again, and Greenspan lowered them to 40 year lows and started touting the benefits of exotic mortgages that could get them even lower. Now he suggests that we pursue a high population immigration strategy so that we can fill up those houses at their peak valuations? Good one. The funny thing is, I'm not really opposed to skilled immigration (provided it is done with freedom and is broad based, not through corporate indentured servitude targeting a small sector of the labor pool). But we need to hear it from someone other than Greenspan. He needs to hang out by the pool and play golf now, I'm not interested in hearing from him. Like Marcellus Wallace said to Butch: "you get gone, and when you gone, you stay gone, or you be gone. You lost all your LA privileges."