Still an issue with Doug's "corrected" graph. It is comparing the price of a home with an annual income. The home is not paid for in one year, typically. And note that the annual cost of a mortgage, assuming a person carries one, is highly dependent on mortgage rates. So a better comparison is annual income compared to annual cost of a home; I'm sure that info is available. Having said that, Bernie's graph is an attempt at making a point that doesn't actually make a point, but most of his readers aren't aware enough to figure it out. Just read an article that, in Seattle, it costs $300K for a lot and $200K for permits and regulation on a city lot, so the ultimate home will cost $500K before any concrete is even poured. Seems like there is a possibility to reduce some of those permitting costs.
Its tiring dealing with the verbal extremists all the time. Sanders has a point though - the US is rather rich, yet the homeless population is hundreds of thousands. Is this the society we want? Tax breaks for the billionaires has not helped much over the past few decades. The Sanders's graph is not very helpful.
Casey's graph is more useful, and his observation that the inflection points suggest that government intervention may not help could well be valid. But Casey rants that Sanders is a socialist (he is a social democrat - which is different that no-one in the US cares to explain), and presumes that Sanders advocates more governement intervention which the Sanders tweek does not.
The housing situation (lack thereof) is a tricky problem. It would be helpful to have valid discussions as to how to address rather than the extremists ranting at each other.
Not only is Bernie a socialist — he’s a self-described one. He’s been using that label since the ’70s. Later he leaned more on “democratic socialist” to distance himself from failed experiments, but he never denied being just a “socialist.” He’s even said more than once, “I am a socialist and proud of it.”
This is also the guy who honeymooned in the Soviet Union and heaped praise on their system. And now he’s throwing his support behind Zohran Mamdani, the socialist/communist running for mayor of New York City. I mean, come on.
Another problem with Comrade Bernie's graph is that most people don't pay cash up-front for a home; they usually pay for their home across 15 or 30 years. Because of this, he doesn't show any of the other expenses associated with living in a home.
Also, his graph is so expanded that his income line doesn't make sense.
But he's just an illiterate political hack. I didn't expect anything different from him.
I think dumping 100 million animals from the third world into the US since 1965 and the abused H1B program have been the primary weapons used to wipe out America’s middle class
Still an issue with Doug's "corrected" graph. It is comparing the price of a home with an annual income. The home is not paid for in one year, typically. And note that the annual cost of a mortgage, assuming a person carries one, is highly dependent on mortgage rates. So a better comparison is annual income compared to annual cost of a home; I'm sure that info is available. Having said that, Bernie's graph is an attempt at making a point that doesn't actually make a point, but most of his readers aren't aware enough to figure it out. Just read an article that, in Seattle, it costs $300K for a lot and $200K for permits and regulation on a city lot, so the ultimate home will cost $500K before any concrete is even poured. Seems like there is a possibility to reduce some of those permitting costs.
Its tiring dealing with the verbal extremists all the time. Sanders has a point though - the US is rather rich, yet the homeless population is hundreds of thousands. Is this the society we want? Tax breaks for the billionaires has not helped much over the past few decades. The Sanders's graph is not very helpful.
Casey's graph is more useful, and his observation that the inflection points suggest that government intervention may not help could well be valid. But Casey rants that Sanders is a socialist (he is a social democrat - which is different that no-one in the US cares to explain), and presumes that Sanders advocates more governement intervention which the Sanders tweek does not.
The housing situation (lack thereof) is a tricky problem. It would be helpful to have valid discussions as to how to address rather than the extremists ranting at each other.
Bernie Sanders is not a socialist. He's a Social Democrat at best, and is not proposing any socialist solutions.
Not only is Bernie a socialist — he’s a self-described one. He’s been using that label since the ’70s. Later he leaned more on “democratic socialist” to distance himself from failed experiments, but he never denied being just a “socialist.” He’s even said more than once, “I am a socialist and proud of it.”
This is also the guy who honeymooned in the Soviet Union and heaped praise on their system. And now he’s throwing his support behind Zohran Mamdani, the socialist/communist running for mayor of New York City. I mean, come on.
"We need major investments in affordable housing"
That's rich, coming from a guy who's on the opposite end of so called affordability.
Another problem with Comrade Bernie's graph is that most people don't pay cash up-front for a home; they usually pay for their home across 15 or 30 years. Because of this, he doesn't show any of the other expenses associated with living in a home.
Also, his graph is so expanded that his income line doesn't make sense.
But he's just an illiterate political hack. I didn't expect anything different from him.
Median home prices were nowhere near $200,000 in 1967. Where did Bernie get this number?
That's in real prices... adjusted for inflation.
He stuck his thumb up his rear end.
I think dumping 100 million animals from the third world into the US since 1965 and the abused H1B program have been the primary weapons used to wipe out America’s middle class