4 ms·

You can buy a home with 3% down and a government guaranteed mortgage. Lending standards were much higher in 1965, with LTV limited to about 50%, meaning you nee

by rsj_hn 5y ago

You can buy a home with 3% down and a government guaranteed mortgage. Lending standards were much higher in 1965, with LTV limited to about 50%, meaning you needed a 50% downpayment. Mortgage rates were also around 6% then. Obviously what you can afford with 50% down and a rate of 6% is very different than what you can afford with 3% down and a rate of 3%. That extra borrowing power meant house prices were bid up, and with that houses became much bigger[1], roughly twice the size today than in 1965, and with more features (more bathrooms, more bedrooms, better wiring, more forced A/C, better insulation, etc). I really wish people's knowldege of U.S. history would go a bit beyond civil rights. For example, in inflation adjusted terms, new automobiles cost $23K in 1965 (today's dollars) but today it's about 40K, or nearly twice as much. I am hoping that this is also not explained in terms of the civil rights act, but rather it's understood that cars have a lot more features today than in 1965 and it is much cheaper to obtain credit for buying them. [1] https://www.newser.com/story/225645/average-size-of-us-homes-decade-by-decade.html https://www.newser.com/story/225645/average-size-of-us-homes...

Lammy 5y ago
> I really wish people's knowldege of U.S. history would go a bit more beyond civil rights. Have you ever heard anybody talk about how the 13th Amendment (outlawing slavery) has the exception for prisoners, and how our prison population is totally coincidentally comprised of one certain group of people over all others? https://sites.lib.jmu.edu/civic/2020/09/17/slaves-of-the-state-13th-amendment-mass-incarceration-and-the-prison-industrial-complex/ https://sites.lib.jmu.edu/civic/2020/09/17/slaves-of-the-sta... The 1973 Equal Credit Opportunity Act has an exception where it's still totally legal to deny someone a home loan if they're judged incapable of affording the home: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Credit_Opportunity_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Credit_Opportunity_Act I would love to believe the modern day state I call home doesn't still reflect all of its founders' beliefs, but idk the more I learn about this stuff the worse it gets. It's pretty wild to read California's first gubernatorial address where they take the entire last third of the speech to basically say "no darkies tho": https://governors.library.ca.gov/addresses/s_01-Burnett1.html https://governors.library.ca.gov/addresses/s_01-Burnett1.htm... =============================================================== "Our Constitution has wisely prohibited Slavery with the State; so that the people of California are once and for ever free from this great social and political evil. But the Constitution has made no provision in reference to the settlement of free people of color within our limits, but has left the Legislature to adopt such legislation upon this delicate and important subject as may be deemed most essential to the happiness of our people. The Constitution excludes this class of persons from the right of suffrage, and from all offices of honor or profit under the State." "For some years past I have given this subject my most candid and serious attention, and I most cheerfully lay before you the result of my own reflections. There is, in my opinion, but one of two consistent courses to take in reference to this class of population, – either to admit them to the full and fee enjoyment of all the privileges guaranteed by the Constitution to others, or exclude them from the State. If we permit them to settle in our State, under existing circumstances, we consign them, by our own institutions, and the usages of own society, to a subordinate and degraded position, which is in itself but a species of slavery. They would be placed in a situation where they would have no efficient motives for moral or intellectual improvement, but must remain in our midst, sensible of their degradation, unhappy themselves, enemies to the institutions and the society whose usages, have placed them there, and for ever fit teachers in all the schools of ignorance, vice, and idleness." "Our position upon the Pacific, our commercial and mineral attractions, would bring swarms of this population to our shores. Already we have almost every variety of human race among us; a heterogeneous mass of human beings, of every language, and of every hue. That period is rapidly approaching, when the natural increase of population in the States East of the Rocky Mountains will render Slave labor of little or no value, and when investments in that species of property will cease to be remunerative. If measures are not early taken by this State, Slaves will be manumitted in the Slave States, and contracts made with them to labor as hireling for a given number of years, and they will be brought to California, in great numbers. Our State is now in a position to take an efficient stand upon this subject. A few years’ delay will make it almost, if not quite, impossible to do that which can be so easy accomplished now. If California will take a decided stand now, and firmly maintain it, a few years’ experience will demonstrate the practical utility of the measure. That weak and sickly sympathy – that misplaced mercy – that would hesitate to adopt a salutary measure to-day, but would suffer all the inevitable consequences of to-morrow, may consider the policy I propose as harsh in its character; but if it is calculated to produce the greatest good to the greatest number, it is the best humanity." "It could be no favor, and no kindness, to permit that class of population to settle in the State under such humiliating conditions, although they might think otherwise; while it would be a most serious injury to us. We have certainly the right to prevent any class of population from settling in our State, that we deem injurious to our society. Had they been born here, and had acquired rights in consequence, I should not recommend any measures to expel them. They are not now here, – except a few in comparison with the numbers that would be here, – and the object is to keep them out. I, therefore, call your most serious attention to this subject, believing it to be one of the first importance."
- Lammy 5y ago
  > "Our position upon the Pacific, our commercial and mineral attractions, would bring swarms of this population to our shores." RE: this, check out the cover story of the 1954 edition of the The Negro Travelers' Green Book travel guide, "The Golden Gate": https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/The_Negro_Travelers'_Green_Book_1954.pdf#page=13 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/The_Negr... "San Francisco however, is fast becoming the focal point of the Negroes’ future. Before World War II this city had fewer than 5,000 Negroes. High war wages attracted these people from all over the country to this boom town. More than 45,000 Negroes are squeezed into two areas of, San Francisco today, with an estimated thirty-five percent unemployed." And then check out the inflection point on this graph: https://www.forbes.com/sites/priceonomics/2016/05/11/the-african-american-exodus-from-san-francisco/?sh=2b6ce465595a https://www.forbes.com/sites/priceonomics/2016/05/11/the-afr...
- newfriend 5y ago
  > how our prison population is totally coincidentally comprised of one certain group of people over all others? Criminals?
  - DeathArrow 5y ago
    If anything, the crime rate in US is worrying.
- Zpalmtree 5y ago
  > The 1973 Equal Credit Opportunity Act has an exception where it's still totally legal to deny someone a home loan if they're judged incapable of affording the home: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Credit_Opportunity_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Credit_Opportunity_Act I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. We should force loans to be given to people who can't afford their homes? Wasn't that a big contributor to the 2007-8 crash?
  - Lammy 5y ago
    > I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. We should force loans to be given to people who can't afford their homes? If you have a segregated population, make housing really expensive, and set up the tax laws to incentivize people to pass down housing to their kids and/or never ever ever sell, then what do you get except Segregation With Extra Steps? http://radicalcartography.net/index.html?bayarea http://radicalcartography.net/index.html?bayarea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_California_Proposition_13 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_California_Proposition_13 Some of this did change very recently with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_California_Proposition_19 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_California_Proposition_19 to be fair
emodendroket 5y ago
I'm surprised the figure is so high because an economy car is closer to the $23k figure and if you go up to like 35 you're well into what I'd consider pretty nice territory. Obviously one can spend much more but I'd say you're getting to the point of diminishing returns already at that average price.
- rsj_hn 5y ago
  Yeah, it's crazy. https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/average-new-car-price-2020/ https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/average-new-car-price-202... But this is new cars, and you do get a lot -- collision detection, blind spots, adaptive cruise control, etc. And this includes all the SUVs as well as luxury cars, all going into "average".
DeathArrow 5y ago
Extra borrowing power means that more people can be slaves to the banks for a longer time. They realized how lucky they are and they exercised their freedom to be enslaved while also helping the prices to raise. But prices, borrowing power are just relative. What matters, if you want to do a comparison, is how many houses or how large of a house could an average person buy in his productive adult life in 1965 compared with what can he afford now. So if the average person can buy in 40 years a larger home than in 1965, we are better. If not, not.

by rsj_hn 5y ago

Lammy 5y ago

> I really wish people's knowldege of U.S. history would go a bit more beyond civil rights. Have you ever heard anybody talk about how the 13th Amendment (outlawing slavery) has the exception for prisoners, and how our prison population is totally coincidentally comprised of one certain group of people over all others? https://sites.lib.jmu.edu/civic/2020/09/17/slaves-of-the-state-13th-amendment-mass-incarceration-and-the-prison-industrial-complex/ https://sites.lib.jmu.edu/civic/2020/09/17/slaves-of-the-sta... The 1973 Equal Credit Opportunity Act has an exception where it's still totally legal to deny someone a home loan if they're judged incapable of affording the home: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Credit_Opportunity_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Credit_Opportunity_Act I would love to believe the modern day state I call home doesn't still reflect all of its founders' beliefs, but idk the more I learn about this stuff the worse it gets. It's pretty wild to read California's first gubernatorial address where they take the entire last third of the speech to basically say "no darkies tho": https://governors.library.ca.gov/addresses/s_01-Burnett1.html https://governors.library.ca.gov/addresses/s_01-Burnett1.htm... =============================================================== "Our Constitution has wisely prohibited Slavery with the State; so that the people of California are once and for ever free from this great social and political evil. But the Constitution has made no provision in reference to the settlement of free people of color within our limits, but has left the Legislature to adopt such legislation upon this delicate and important subject as may be deemed most essential to the happiness of our people. The Constitution excludes this class of persons from the right of suffrage, and from all offices of honor or profit under the State." "For some years past I have given this subject my most candid and serious attention, and I most cheerfully lay before you the result of my own reflections. There is, in my opinion, but one of two consistent courses to take in reference to this class of population, – either to admit them to the full and fee enjoyment of all the privileges guaranteed by the Constitution to others, or exclude them from the State. If we permit them to settle in our State, under existing circumstances, we consign them, by our own institutions, and the usages of own society, to a subordinate and degraded position, which is in itself but a species of slavery. They would be placed in a situation where they would have no efficient motives for moral or intellectual improvement, but must remain in our midst, sensible of their degradation, unhappy themselves, enemies to the institutions and the society whose usages, have placed them there, and for ever fit teachers in all the schools of ignorance, vice, and idleness." "Our position upon the Pacific, our commercial and mineral attractions, would bring swarms of this population to our shores. Already we have almost every variety of human race among us; a heterogeneous mass of human beings, of every language, and of every hue. That period is rapidly approaching, when the natural increase of population in the States East of the Rocky Mountains will render Slave labor of little or no value, and when investments in that species of property will cease to be remunerative. If measures are not early taken by this State, Slaves will be manumitted in the Slave States, and contracts made with them to labor as hireling for a given number of years, and they will be brought to California, in great numbers. Our State is now in a position to take an efficient stand upon this subject. A few years’ delay will make it almost, if not quite, impossible to do that which can be so easy accomplished now. If California will take a decided stand now, and firmly maintain it, a few years’ experience will demonstrate the practical utility of the measure. That weak and sickly sympathy – that misplaced mercy – that would hesitate to adopt a salutary measure to-day, but would suffer all the inevitable consequences of to-morrow, may consider the policy I propose as harsh in its character; but if it is calculated to produce the greatest good to the greatest number, it is the best humanity." "It could be no favor, and no kindness, to permit that class of population to settle in the State under such humiliating conditions, although they might think otherwise; while it would be a most serious injury to us. We have certainly the right to prevent any class of population from settling in our State, that we deem injurious to our society. Had they been born here, and had acquired rights in consequence, I should not recommend any measures to expel them. They are not now here, – except a few in comparison with the numbers that would be here, – and the object is to keep them out. I, therefore, call your most serious attention to this subject, believing it to be one of the first importance."

Lammy 5y ago
> "Our position upon the Pacific, our commercial and mineral attractions, would bring swarms of this population to our shores." RE: this, check out the cover story of the 1954 edition of the The Negro Travelers' Green Book travel guide, "The Golden Gate": https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/The_Negro_Travelers'_Green_Book_1954.pdf#page=13 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/The_Negr... "San Francisco however, is fast becoming the focal point of the Negroes’ future. Before World War II this city had fewer than 5,000 Negroes. High war wages attracted these people from all over the country to this boom town. More than 45,000 Negroes are squeezed into two areas of, San Francisco today, with an estimated thirty-five percent unemployed." And then check out the inflection point on this graph: https://www.forbes.com/sites/priceonomics/2016/05/11/the-african-american-exodus-from-san-francisco/?sh=2b6ce465595a https://www.forbes.com/sites/priceonomics/2016/05/11/the-afr...
newfriend 5y ago
> how our prison population is totally coincidentally comprised of one certain group of people over all others? Criminals?
- DeathArrow 5y ago
  If anything, the crime rate in US is worrying.
Zpalmtree 5y ago
> The 1973 Equal Credit Opportunity Act has an exception where it's still totally legal to deny someone a home loan if they're judged incapable of affording the home: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Credit_Opportunity_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Credit_Opportunity_Act I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. We should force loans to be given to people who can't afford their homes? Wasn't that a big contributor to the 2007-8 crash?
- Lammy 5y ago
  > I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. We should force loans to be given to people who can't afford their homes? If you have a segregated population, make housing really expensive, and set up the tax laws to incentivize people to pass down housing to their kids and/or never ever ever sell, then what do you get except Segregation With Extra Steps? http://radicalcartography.net/index.html?bayarea http://radicalcartography.net/index.html?bayarea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_California_Proposition_13 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_California_Proposition_13 Some of this did change very recently with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_California_Proposition_19 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_California_Proposition_19 to be fair

emodendroket 5y ago

I'm surprised the figure is so high because an economy car is closer to the $23k figure and if you go up to like 35 you're well into what I'd consider pretty nice territory. Obviously one can spend much more but I'd say you're getting to the point of diminishing returns already at that average price.

rsj_hn 5y ago
Yeah, it's crazy. https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/average-new-car-price-2020/ https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/average-new-car-price-202... But this is new cars, and you do get a lot -- collision detection, blind spots, adaptive cruise control, etc. And this includes all the SUVs as well as luxury cars, all going into "average".

DeathArrow 5y ago

Extra borrowing power means that more people can be slaves to the banks for a longer time. They realized how lucky they are and they exercised their freedom to be enslaved while also helping the prices to raise. But prices, borrowing power are just relative. What matters, if you want to do a comparison, is how many houses or how large of a house could an average person buy in his productive adult life in 1965 compared with what can he afford now. So if the average person can buy in 40 years a larger home than in 1965, we are better. If not, not.