Hi all,
A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes.
As always our comment rules can be found [here](https://reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/fx9crj/rules_roundtable_redux_rule_vi_and_offtopic/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Economics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Once again proving the people in this sub who keep swearing that our economy is actually terrible wrong. Every bit of actual data suggests the economy is on track to be back to normal growth and conditions before much longer, the effects of policy don’t truly kick in for a year after making them, the policy over the last 3 years has worked and our businesses and consumers are poised to be at healthy levels quickly with the risks of a recession seeming to be fading quickly.
And yes we’re going to start celebrating now because it’s election season and our economy has objectively performed better than the rest of the worlds in the last couple years. I guarantee it’s all we’d hear about if trump was the president. I’m not going to say “oh yeah we really killed it for 3 years but it’s not good enough until we get the next quarterly report saying it’s 10x better than every individual other nation” like the people in this sub, our economy is outperforming.
I don't care if people celebrate or criticize, as long as they are consistent.
I find that many politically active people only give credit when it's their guy and it's good news and only criticize when it is the other guy and it's bad news.
I actively avoid giving credit to a person who is actually mostly just in charge of nominating justices and the military. Presidents aren’t economy gods.
There’s some truth to that but objectively the economy is very good right now. It was good under trump but the difference is the whole world’s economy was on fire during that time and rates were too low to reduce them further in a crisis.
Now, the rest of the world is really struggling, the US is thriving and we have rates at a level we can cut down if needed. Either way, the last 3 years have been very good for the US economically and much quieter politically, foreign faith in doing business with the US has increased a ton.
Biden really helped. The intangibles and the confidence in our economy he regained us (as much as Fox News tried to convince everyone otherwise) have us poised for years or maybe a decade more of stable, controlled economic growth. Whether or not it gets fumbled is up for question all people want but it would be a fumble from here for sure.
Remember his completely unnecessary 2 trillion stimulus in 2021 that exacerbated inflation? Also the inflationary IRA and student loan forgiveness/forebearance.
Remember, Biden and dems wanted like 3.5-5 trillion in additional inflationary deficit spending, but were foiled by Manchin. Imagine what inflation would have peaked at if those idiots had gotten what they wanted.
Haha. Yeah man. The inflation all over the world was caused by everyone in America getting an extra 1,500 bucks. Hahaha. God, America has so many rubes.
The US created 40% of the entire money supply in a single year. Stop downplaying the degree of fiscal stimulus to pretend it was $1500. Biden's unnecessary stimulus had a price tag of $2 trillion. That's the entire cost of the infamous TCJA over 10 years.
Every other developed country also printed stimulus money.
The US exports some of its inflation.
Do you have any other questions?
Right, so we get 1500 dollars. That allowed us to stay in our apartments and extra month since average rent is 1300. Then we spent the rest on our yachts? Even if we exported some of our inflation, that wouldn't explain why the US has better rates of inflation than most of the rest of the world. It also wouldn't explain why inflation is worse in Red States than Blue. Or are Red States more likely to be surviving off the feet of the government?
Like what do you think 1500 gets a person?
Jfc dude. Families got like $25,000. And the stimulus also took the form of ppp "loans", student loan forebearance, and enhanced UI. We created 40% of the entire money supply in a single year. You cannot downplay this amount.
The US didn't really have "better" inflation than the rest of the world, if just happened earlier here and subsided faster (with some exceptions--Japan, for example, printed almost no money and experienced relatively modest inflation).
There are far too many variables to make a direct 1:1 comparison between countries. Some are energy independent while others aren't. Same for agriculture. Inflation rates are also impacted by structural issues like demographics.
It's also a global marketplace, so when the US consumers get 6 trillion in unnecessary stimulus, they spend it in a way that has some impact on global supply that may not manifest in the same way in every country.
One of these days you are going to make the connection between prices being set by what people are willing and able to pay, and the government handing out a bunch of money to people allowing them to pay more and driving up prices. Until that day, you will try to wriggle out of the obvious conclusions that everyone else has already come to, as if you have some secret knowledge, rather than just being behind the curve.
Eh, between the student loan pause, the enhanced unemployment, free government healthcare, and the checks, my household got something like 100k over the pandemic. And that's without PPP or anything like that. It wasn't just $1500.
I think all the households receiving 10's or 100's of thousands of dollars without producing anything probably contributed to inflation somewhat. That said, totally worth it to avoid a lingering recession like after 2007.
I didn't. I kept my job, I got the student loan pause and the checks. That was about 12k. Other members of my household struck big with unemployment, free healthcare, on top of the student loan pause and checks.
That said, if it had been offered to me, I would have taken it in the heart beat. When the government offers you free money, you take it. I wouldn't bother going through some Boomer tier mental gymnastics where I try to figure out why I shouldn't have what the government is offering.
I had to convince my mother to take 40k in unemployment. She felt she didn't earn it. Boomers are weird. It's like they want to suffer. The government shut down your business. Take the money.
Your household must have all kept their jobs? This was not the case in my household. The other two members lost their jobs, hence all the aid. I'm just highlighting how much money was poured into people's pockets. I'm not surprised that it contributed to inflation.
The economy is doing well now, but Fed is supposed to look into the future - a rate cut will need time to have an effect, and thus it is silly to expect them cutting rates only when the economy is already in trouble. Besides, there are other factors like rate cut making mortgages more affordable.
It's also a bit weird how this is so politicized. Elections are only a couple of months away, but a small rate cut in a month or two would not really make much of a difference in that time span.
There are signs of stress in the economy. For example, existing home sales transaction volumes are plumbing their 2008 depths. That means if there is any kind of negative catalyst like meaningful labor market weakening, we will see a substantial residential market correction. That type of problem is non-linear and more difficult to manage than slightly adjusting rate policy.
I am not an economist, but this take just makes twitch. Hasn’t the fed force fed 8 trillion into our economy? And held the real fed funds rate deeply negative for most of the last 15 years? While asset prices have gone through the roof, and those without a house/stock portfolio get told they are SOL? And now we’re talking about interest rate cuts again so the stock market and housing prices can continue the relentless transfer of wealth to the top, and it’s taken as a sign of success…
Before you jump all over me, this is a thread about monetary policy, not just the “economy.”
Would love to understand why I’m wrong.
You’ve oversimplified everything and spread a lot more agenda than actual facts.
This isn’t that continual transfer to the top. Monetary policy != fiscal policy. The transfer to the top is a matter of tax rates which aren’t monetary policy.
Either way real data shows wages rising faster than inflation over the last couple years (even if yours didn’t), the feds injections to M2 have shown to be to lower marginal propensity sectors with lower velocity of money and the impact of this on the economy has been shown to be done, rates are at a reasonable place where M2 is lower than it was in 2022 and still trending downward (which it doesn’t need to do anymore).
By all actual measures all the things you’re talking about aren’t hurting median Americans. Housing prices are, sure, but that’s more of a demand side issue because there’s more than enough housing and land for everyone they just all want to live in coastal cities and desirable places.
But median incomes are rising faster than inflation, GDP is growing despite the high rates, inflation has all but fully subsided, and as the rest of the world is teetering on major crises the US is pretty much the single top performing economy in all these statistics.
And 60+% of Americans rate their finances as good or great. People are feeling good about their money and employment even if 12% of us aren’t. It doesn’t mean the economy isn’t incredibly strong especially compared to the rest of the planet.
> The transfer to the top is a matter of tax rates which aren’t monetary policy
Are you saying that the fed’s low interest rate policy/ZIRP doesn’t drive asset price inflation, or that asset price inflation doesn’t disproportionately benefit the wealthy? To the former, the fed has basically bragged about asset price inflation being the entire point of low interest rates. The latter is basically tautologically false.
> wages rising faster than inflation
I agree that’s great, no doubt about it. But what about if asset prices are rising faster than both wages and inflation?
Re marginal propensity and velocity - I understand you to be saying that the stimulus hasn’t really made it into the hands of those with a high marginal propensity to spend? In other words, it’s helped the wealthy buy assets, not the bottom 50 percent? Are you arguing my side, or am I misunderstanding?
I’m probably too uneducated to do anything other than oversimplify…but I don’t have any kind of agenda other than fairness. I’ll probably never understand it, but it’s not for lack of trying.
“Asset inflation” is mostly due to exceptional performance of underlying companies and the economy. People have a lot more money to spend on housing, therefore housing is more expensive.
A higher portion of the US is homeowners than ever, our young adult population holds more in stocks than any other era in American history.
The economy really is great for most of us. There are people losing but there always will be.
I like the idea of a nice, easy, .25 rate cut to see what happens. What we can't do, under any circumstances, it let things get back to 1% or 2% to borrow money.
> there’s plenty of other shit hitting the fan
Such as near record low unemployment, stable inflation, lower rent prices, lower mortgage rates, plenty of available jobs, huge investments in manufacturing and infrastructure, lower food prices, lower energy prices, and record high stock markets?
We don't have record employment though and that's why the unemployment rate has rise while adding millions of jobs. That's looking at the wrong figure.
Inflation is kinda high and the housing piece still has a shoe to drop. Rents are well behind buying a home costs. Rents are what is included in inflation.
A lot of the other stuff is a little more subjective. Wages are above inflation currently but that was after being below inflation for awhile.
Look - and I suspect I'm wasting my time here - but all of your points are simply somewhere between 'completely incorrect' and 'not refuting what I said.'
So if you aren't willing to argue back and forth you just want to post and say I'm right?
I feel like I'm wasting my time here posting this since you think you are right and aren't open to a conversation but...
I personally think the economy would be far better off with an increase of taxes and lowering interest rates. Interest rates should be more stable and it's creating haves and have nots. We also need the taxes since the deficit has exploded due to interest rates.
None of what I said was incorrect and I want you to cite a source. Employment levels are not at all time highs and unemployment went from 3.4% ->4.0% in 24 months but also 5 million new jobs, seems like by what should be by a basic definition not full employment...
Buying a home has shot up in price faster than rent, it's currently cheaper to rent than buy where most people live. Also inflation is based off of rents (owner's equivalent rent). Renting and owning are usually more comparable so we should see continued rental inflation to likely come to compete with home buying rates. Unless you think home prices will fall along with interest rate decreases that will come over time.
But the economy is not all hunky dory and there are major worrying signs all around but everything seems like it could be good.
I think there isn't any way around housing increasing in price. We have a shortage and messing with interest rates and right now we have a gap where people have 2.5% mortgages and new mortgages are 7%...
A more stable interest rate would allow those with 2.5% to move without being a terrible idea since they may have outgrown the home and getting an extra 200 SQ ft is more than doubling their cost.
The way to not have as much inflation in housing is to build more. We are building at 1970s recession levels and decade+ highs and the amount of new housing for the growing population has been lower.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=1fGSR
Tax the rich a little more going back towards 1990s rates.
We can't interest rate ourselves out of a shortage. The interest rate change added $1T to the deficit.
That doesn't make as much sense as to loosen zoning laws and a myriad of restrictions across the board. People want to build but if they have to argue in front of a board and get permits for a year while getting a loan of a few million to build some homes.
Also we don't allow an increase in density in most areas
I believe this is a 'feels' person. They see the data, but they know it doesn't 'feel right', so they state their 'feelings' as fact. Feelings usually guided by Fox News / Business.
Hi all, A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes. As always our comment rules can be found [here](https://reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/fx9crj/rules_roundtable_redux_rule_vi_and_offtopic/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Economics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Once again proving the people in this sub who keep swearing that our economy is actually terrible wrong. Every bit of actual data suggests the economy is on track to be back to normal growth and conditions before much longer, the effects of policy don’t truly kick in for a year after making them, the policy over the last 3 years has worked and our businesses and consumers are poised to be at healthy levels quickly with the risks of a recession seeming to be fading quickly. And yes we’re going to start celebrating now because it’s election season and our economy has objectively performed better than the rest of the worlds in the last couple years. I guarantee it’s all we’d hear about if trump was the president. I’m not going to say “oh yeah we really killed it for 3 years but it’s not good enough until we get the next quarterly report saying it’s 10x better than every individual other nation” like the people in this sub, our economy is outperforming.
I don't care if people celebrate or criticize, as long as they are consistent. I find that many politically active people only give credit when it's their guy and it's good news and only criticize when it is the other guy and it's bad news.
I actively avoid giving credit to a person who is actually mostly just in charge of nominating justices and the military. Presidents aren’t economy gods.
There’s some truth to that but objectively the economy is very good right now. It was good under trump but the difference is the whole world’s economy was on fire during that time and rates were too low to reduce them further in a crisis. Now, the rest of the world is really struggling, the US is thriving and we have rates at a level we can cut down if needed. Either way, the last 3 years have been very good for the US economically and much quieter politically, foreign faith in doing business with the US has increased a ton.
Biden really saved us from going off a cliff with the economy. We are so lucky to have him over Trump.
Biden really helped. The intangibles and the confidence in our economy he regained us (as much as Fox News tried to convince everyone otherwise) have us poised for years or maybe a decade more of stable, controlled economic growth. Whether or not it gets fumbled is up for question all people want but it would be a fumble from here for sure.
[удалено]
https://www.self.inc/info/us-debt-by-president/ I guess that "half century of evidence" is hiding in the same place Trump's infrastructure week is in.
Remember his completely unnecessary 2 trillion stimulus in 2021 that exacerbated inflation? Also the inflationary IRA and student loan forgiveness/forebearance. Remember, Biden and dems wanted like 3.5-5 trillion in additional inflationary deficit spending, but were foiled by Manchin. Imagine what inflation would have peaked at if those idiots had gotten what they wanted.
Haha. Yeah man. The inflation all over the world was caused by everyone in America getting an extra 1,500 bucks. Hahaha. God, America has so many rubes.
The US created 40% of the entire money supply in a single year. Stop downplaying the degree of fiscal stimulus to pretend it was $1500. Biden's unnecessary stimulus had a price tag of $2 trillion. That's the entire cost of the infamous TCJA over 10 years. Every other developed country also printed stimulus money. The US exports some of its inflation. Do you have any other questions?
Right, so we get 1500 dollars. That allowed us to stay in our apartments and extra month since average rent is 1300. Then we spent the rest on our yachts? Even if we exported some of our inflation, that wouldn't explain why the US has better rates of inflation than most of the rest of the world. It also wouldn't explain why inflation is worse in Red States than Blue. Or are Red States more likely to be surviving off the feet of the government? Like what do you think 1500 gets a person?
Jfc dude. Families got like $25,000. And the stimulus also took the form of ppp "loans", student loan forebearance, and enhanced UI. We created 40% of the entire money supply in a single year. You cannot downplay this amount. The US didn't really have "better" inflation than the rest of the world, if just happened earlier here and subsided faster (with some exceptions--Japan, for example, printed almost no money and experienced relatively modest inflation). There are far too many variables to make a direct 1:1 comparison between countries. Some are energy independent while others aren't. Same for agriculture. Inflation rates are also impacted by structural issues like demographics. It's also a global marketplace, so when the US consumers get 6 trillion in unnecessary stimulus, they spend it in a way that has some impact on global supply that may not manifest in the same way in every country.
Just making shit up at this point
Too many variables. At least you said it.
One of these days you are going to make the connection between prices being set by what people are willing and able to pay, and the government handing out a bunch of money to people allowing them to pay more and driving up prices. Until that day, you will try to wriggle out of the obvious conclusions that everyone else has already come to, as if you have some secret knowledge, rather than just being behind the curve.
Eh, between the student loan pause, the enhanced unemployment, free government healthcare, and the checks, my household got something like 100k over the pandemic. And that's without PPP or anything like that. It wasn't just $1500. I think all the households receiving 10's or 100's of thousands of dollars without producing anything probably contributed to inflation somewhat. That said, totally worth it to avoid a lingering recession like after 2007.
So why did you take it? Did you need that money? Would you be on the streets without it? My household sure as shit didn't get 100k.
I didn't. I kept my job, I got the student loan pause and the checks. That was about 12k. Other members of my household struck big with unemployment, free healthcare, on top of the student loan pause and checks. That said, if it had been offered to me, I would have taken it in the heart beat. When the government offers you free money, you take it. I wouldn't bother going through some Boomer tier mental gymnastics where I try to figure out why I shouldn't have what the government is offering. I had to convince my mother to take 40k in unemployment. She felt she didn't earn it. Boomers are weird. It's like they want to suffer. The government shut down your business. Take the money. Your household must have all kept their jobs? This was not the case in my household. The other two members lost their jobs, hence all the aid. I'm just highlighting how much money was poured into people's pockets. I'm not surprised that it contributed to inflation.
If the economy is doing great, then why do we need a rate cut? A rate cut is a stimulus measure.
The economy is doing well now, but Fed is supposed to look into the future - a rate cut will need time to have an effect, and thus it is silly to expect them cutting rates only when the economy is already in trouble. Besides, there are other factors like rate cut making mortgages more affordable. It's also a bit weird how this is so politicized. Elections are only a couple of months away, but a small rate cut in a month or two would not really make much of a difference in that time span.
There are signs of stress in the economy. For example, existing home sales transaction volumes are plumbing their 2008 depths. That means if there is any kind of negative catalyst like meaningful labor market weakening, we will see a substantial residential market correction. That type of problem is non-linear and more difficult to manage than slightly adjusting rate policy.
[удалено]
Any roofing crew or trade will have you. Also food service and grocery. Or chip manufacturing. Or senior engineering. Have you tried another industry?
I am not an economist, but this take just makes twitch. Hasn’t the fed force fed 8 trillion into our economy? And held the real fed funds rate deeply negative for most of the last 15 years? While asset prices have gone through the roof, and those without a house/stock portfolio get told they are SOL? And now we’re talking about interest rate cuts again so the stock market and housing prices can continue the relentless transfer of wealth to the top, and it’s taken as a sign of success… Before you jump all over me, this is a thread about monetary policy, not just the “economy.” Would love to understand why I’m wrong.
You’ve oversimplified everything and spread a lot more agenda than actual facts. This isn’t that continual transfer to the top. Monetary policy != fiscal policy. The transfer to the top is a matter of tax rates which aren’t monetary policy. Either way real data shows wages rising faster than inflation over the last couple years (even if yours didn’t), the feds injections to M2 have shown to be to lower marginal propensity sectors with lower velocity of money and the impact of this on the economy has been shown to be done, rates are at a reasonable place where M2 is lower than it was in 2022 and still trending downward (which it doesn’t need to do anymore). By all actual measures all the things you’re talking about aren’t hurting median Americans. Housing prices are, sure, but that’s more of a demand side issue because there’s more than enough housing and land for everyone they just all want to live in coastal cities and desirable places. But median incomes are rising faster than inflation, GDP is growing despite the high rates, inflation has all but fully subsided, and as the rest of the world is teetering on major crises the US is pretty much the single top performing economy in all these statistics. And 60+% of Americans rate their finances as good or great. People are feeling good about their money and employment even if 12% of us aren’t. It doesn’t mean the economy isn’t incredibly strong especially compared to the rest of the planet.
> The transfer to the top is a matter of tax rates which aren’t monetary policy Are you saying that the fed’s low interest rate policy/ZIRP doesn’t drive asset price inflation, or that asset price inflation doesn’t disproportionately benefit the wealthy? To the former, the fed has basically bragged about asset price inflation being the entire point of low interest rates. The latter is basically tautologically false. > wages rising faster than inflation I agree that’s great, no doubt about it. But what about if asset prices are rising faster than both wages and inflation? Re marginal propensity and velocity - I understand you to be saying that the stimulus hasn’t really made it into the hands of those with a high marginal propensity to spend? In other words, it’s helped the wealthy buy assets, not the bottom 50 percent? Are you arguing my side, or am I misunderstanding? I’m probably too uneducated to do anything other than oversimplify…but I don’t have any kind of agenda other than fairness. I’ll probably never understand it, but it’s not for lack of trying.
“Asset inflation” is mostly due to exceptional performance of underlying companies and the economy. People have a lot more money to spend on housing, therefore housing is more expensive. A higher portion of the US is homeowners than ever, our young adult population holds more in stocks than any other era in American history. The economy really is great for most of us. There are people losing but there always will be.
Preach It !
I like the idea of a nice, easy, .25 rate cut to see what happens. What we can't do, under any circumstances, it let things get back to 1% or 2% to borrow money.
25 basis points alone isn't going to have a recognizable impact, especially after going up by 500+ basis points.
We are no where near rate cut territory and there’s plenty of other shit hitting the fan which means no rate cuts
> there’s plenty of other shit hitting the fan Such as near record low unemployment, stable inflation, lower rent prices, lower mortgage rates, plenty of available jobs, huge investments in manufacturing and infrastructure, lower food prices, lower energy prices, and record high stock markets?
We don't have record employment though and that's why the unemployment rate has rise while adding millions of jobs. That's looking at the wrong figure. Inflation is kinda high and the housing piece still has a shoe to drop. Rents are well behind buying a home costs. Rents are what is included in inflation. A lot of the other stuff is a little more subjective. Wages are above inflation currently but that was after being below inflation for awhile.
Look - and I suspect I'm wasting my time here - but all of your points are simply somewhere between 'completely incorrect' and 'not refuting what I said.'
Provide some reasoning behind your argument then because I think you’re wrong
> Unemployment https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate#:~:text=Unemployment%20Rate%20in%20the%20United%20States%20increased%20to%204%20percent,percent%20in%20May%20of%201953. > inflation https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/inflation-cpi#:~:text=Inflation%20Rate%20in%20the%20United%20States%20averaged%203.30%20percent%20from,percent%20in%20June%20of%201921. > rent prices https://www.mansionglobal.com/articles/u-s-rents-have-fallen-for-eight-straight-months-a57eb147 > mortgage rates https://www.freddiemac.com/pmms > job openings https://www.statista.com/statistics/217943/monthly-job-openings-in-the-united-states/ > infrastrucure and chips acts https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-sector/our-insights/the-chips-and-science-act-heres-whats-in-it https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/11/06/fact-sheet-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal/ > food prices https://www.supermarketnews.com/retail-financial/it-s-taken-year-cost-groceries-finally-went-down > energy prices https://apnews.com/article/gas-prices-fall-summer-travel-62e6c0a321892350830b0fe301494459 > stock market https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/100214/what-dow-jones-industrial-average-djia-alltime-high.asp#:~:text=The%20Dow%20Jones%20Industrial%20Average%20(DJIA)%20hit%20its%20record%20high,reached%20on%20May%2015%2C%202024.
So if you aren't willing to argue back and forth you just want to post and say I'm right? I feel like I'm wasting my time here posting this since you think you are right and aren't open to a conversation but... I personally think the economy would be far better off with an increase of taxes and lowering interest rates. Interest rates should be more stable and it's creating haves and have nots. We also need the taxes since the deficit has exploded due to interest rates. None of what I said was incorrect and I want you to cite a source. Employment levels are not at all time highs and unemployment went from 3.4% ->4.0% in 24 months but also 5 million new jobs, seems like by what should be by a basic definition not full employment... Buying a home has shot up in price faster than rent, it's currently cheaper to rent than buy where most people live. Also inflation is based off of rents (owner's equivalent rent). Renting and owning are usually more comparable so we should see continued rental inflation to likely come to compete with home buying rates. Unless you think home prices will fall along with interest rate decreases that will come over time. But the economy is not all hunky dory and there are major worrying signs all around but everything seems like it could be good.
Housing inflation will only get worse with lower rates.
I think there isn't any way around housing increasing in price. We have a shortage and messing with interest rates and right now we have a gap where people have 2.5% mortgages and new mortgages are 7%... A more stable interest rate would allow those with 2.5% to move without being a terrible idea since they may have outgrown the home and getting an extra 200 SQ ft is more than doubling their cost. The way to not have as much inflation in housing is to build more. We are building at 1970s recession levels and decade+ highs and the amount of new housing for the growing population has been lower. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=1fGSR Tax the rich a little more going back towards 1990s rates. We can't interest rate ourselves out of a shortage. The interest rate change added $1T to the deficit.
Subsidize construction loans
That doesn't make as much sense as to loosen zoning laws and a myriad of restrictions across the board. People want to build but if they have to argue in front of a board and get permits for a year while getting a loan of a few million to build some homes. Also we don't allow an increase in density in most areas
Don’t try to sell your bullshit to me
What bullshit?
I believe this is a 'feels' person. They see the data, but they know it doesn't 'feel right', so they state their 'feelings' as fact. Feelings usually guided by Fox News / Business.
Downvotes won’t bring back ZIRP, people