That is true.....I guess I should send my kids to Rice, because of all the clout it has right ? Do they play 6-man football there ???? Some Texas High schools are bigger and well known than that one room school house. :P
Here's how I see it. ca. 45 years ago my grandfather bought a nice 2200 sq ft ranch for approximately 3x his annual salary. Today, the average house in my area (which is roughly the same as his area) is about 10x my average salary. That same middle class ranch that cost 25K is now worth about 600K. All I can reasonably afford is a condo with dubious appreciation potential, or a house a 2 hour each-way commute from work. It's not like I am in Manhattan. Again, all I said is that I will take those ratios over what I see today.
Standards of living entail a lot more than income and household gadgets.
And indeed, the student loan burden is a necessity. I still have a couple loans out...but I consolidated them at something like 3.35 or 3.5%...so I have no incentive to pay them off early, heck, I have money in an ING savings account bringing 4.4%.
Why would anyone in Michigan send their kids to UMich and be charged out-of-state tuition? That makes no sense. BTW, $40k is the tuition for out-of-state MBA program, not undergrad. Full time undergrad tuition is $4767 per semester. Generous grants are available on need-base allocation:
is, you seem to have an excuse for everything. You can't go to college cause it's just to expensive, you can't work for GM like your Dad, and everyone else in your family, because they pay a crap wage, and it's consumer reports fault. The Aliens abducted you, and their anal probes gave you blurry vision, and a propensity to sweat in public.
Are you sure you don't do PR for GM?
Don't you live in the panhandle? Lot's of economic growth and job potential there.
1. 45 years ago was 1951, a low point in housing market cycle; whereas right now we are looking at the peak of a housing market cycle.
2. 1951 was before even I-90 was built. What may look like a nice location close to the city today that your grandfather bought was practically in the middle of nowhere, with hardly any road leading to it; certainly no 65mph (really 90mph ;-) highway. The development I'm in was built around that same time. I happened to talke to a neighbor last year, who happened to be the third family that moved into the development back in 1952. He was reluctant to divulge how much he paid for the house until realizing how clueful I was about an executive pay in 1952 was only about $8k. After that, he told me all about how much capital appreciation he had and what a gamble that was when highways were being built :-) So in other words, for comparable location in relative market terms, you should look to the new developments being built outside the third ring of beltway today, not the house your grandfather bought right off the first beltway that was the frontier of metro area back 45 years ago.
3. Don't mean to be offensive, but perhaps your relative income level is not as high as what your grandfather had. $8-10k was an executive pay back in 1951. Officers with Colonel ranks coming back from WWII only made about $8k when they joined private companies and become upper management; you can see that both in statistics and in old movies from that era. Today, the equivalent executive pay is about $150-200k.
Math check. 2006-45 = 1961. You might want to re-work your thoughts. There was quite a bit of inflation during that decade, and gramps was just a midlevel paper pusher.
Google earth doesn't give info on demographics and development patterns. Take it easy.
But feel free to give a careless and credibility-free lecture on "missing points"....
hmm, brain fart :-) Mea Culpa. Still, the same scenerio more or less applies for 1961. Real inflation started taking off in the second half of the 1960's. Not sure what you are talking about google earth. Midlevel paper pursher made a lot more money, relatively speaking, than today's midlevel paper pushers :-) Because there are more skilled specialists in our economy above the paper pushers and less blue-collar grunts below the paper pushers. And most Metro areas have expanded greatly. What used to be periphery in 1961, where ranches were worth building, are now being rapidly torn down and replaced by McMansions. I'm living in a 2200 sq.ft raised ranch built in 1953. There is no frigging way anyone would build such a dinky little thing on half an acre where I'm living now. 2200 sq.ft raised ranches are perhaps suitable for new construction 1.5 hours further from the city nowadays.
One clear indication of rising living standards, even in housing, is the fact that houses, even counting new constructions only, are getting bigger and bigger.
Yes the Panhandle is growing and yes there are some good job oppertunity's here. They are still living in the 70's and 80's here though. The people are friendly for the most part but most have very poor work ethics and tell you what you want to hear instead of following through with it.
is, you seem to have an excuse for everything. You can't go to college cause it's just to expensive, you can't work for GM like your Dad, and everyone else in your family, because they pay a crap wage, and it's consumer reports fault. The Aliens abducted you, and their anal probes gave you blurry vision, and a propensity to sweat in public.
Why send to a place where they obviously sock it to the out-of-staters? In any case, you are obviusly no longer talking about the hardship faced by Michigan residents when you talk about out-of-state tuitiion at UMich. You can't have it both ways.
...that you've got here. Not sure how automotive this will be, but I'll make an effort:
-On one hand, I'm not sold on cheerleading for the service-based economy. The fact that the US is effectively outsourcing much of its production through imports is an indicator that we are effectively exporting much of the potential benefit that is derived from the value add, as well as exporting the cash needed to pay that markup.
-By shipping jobs elsewhere, you are ensuring that the middle-aged assembly worker without skills or education is consigned to the bottom of the ladder. The country benefits from having a working class that can buy products, move money around the economy and support itself. If I need to subsidize a former factory worker with food stamps and WIC payments, then I lose.
-On the other hand, the line between domestic and import is obviously blurred. The US worker, and I as a taxpayer, get more benefit from a Kentucky-built Toyota than a Mexican-built Ford. The talk about "profits" is misguided, as profits get reinvested throughout the system. Buy a Toyota, it invests its profits in building a new factory in San Antonio; buy a Chevy, and you can bet that they'll use those profits to expand production in Korea and China. I don't get any benefit from the latter.
-And a consumer, it is fair to expect the best products that I can get for my money. If I buy an inferior "domestic" (and don't deny it, they largely are inferior), that only encourages the Big 3 to stay fat and lazy, while they keep exporting jobs, anyway. Why should I buy a third-rate car to support factory construction in China, when I can buy a car that supports a company that will invest its cash and spread it around to workers and suppliers where I live?
I may one day flow back to Michigan, with my family. My wife is from Texass, but even she has said at times she would like to move to Michigan, where things at least happen.
7 out of 10 auto jobs are still being provided by the Big 3. Until the Japanese can remotely even come close to that and # and support that many americans in our workforce buying there product isn't as american as buying a domestic product from the big 3 no matter how you like to twist the facts. Y'all like using the fusion made in mexico statement way to often. I bet that Mexican assembled fusion has more domestic content than than half the japanese cars made today. Toyota, has a mexico plant in Tijuana, but nobody mentions that do they. It kills me how some of you are so biased and love to throw the fusion statement up in my face to "prove" your point. I am consistent and believe the fusion should be tariffed.
My grandparents bought a smaller house in the city of Seattle for 9K around 1950. Not as large as the 1960s house, but a whole lot cheaper. Today even it is worth maybe 450-500K. There was indeed some inflation. Car prices almost doubled over that decade. Overpaid execs were not making 8500/yr in 1961.
Google earth, wikipedia, it's all good. You're not from here and have likely never spent more than a couple days here...yet you seem like you think you can educate me on the demographics and development of the area. Sorry.
Houses are getting bigger, maybe not better. Big and cheap isn't a way to go. Quality is better than quantity. Some of these McMansions are quite unimpressive under the skin. There's another standard of living issue.
Rocky, you have a dozen years to make up your mind if you want to enjoy UMich's in-state tuition. The funny thing about wives is that they tend to make you move much earlier than you have to. Sometimes I wonder why the heck am I living here, subsidizing other kids' education when my kid is not even old enough for school for another half decade :-)
In any case, by the time you move to Michigan, chances are that the Toyota and/or some other manufacturer will have shops there. The governor there seems to be actively courting replacement carmakers.
Yeah she is desperate to get transplants into Michigan. I personally would rather them stay out of my home state. It would be like a slap in the autoworker vets face to see japanese cars rolling down the assembly line in michigan. I am leaning torwards the 08' CTS more and more after seeing that Lincoln might replace the MKS with the ugly MKR. Hell I should buy a GM, over a ford anyways since my family did/does work for GM/Delphi.
7 out of 10 auto jobs are still being provided by the Big 3.
I'd like to verify that figure (although I can believe it), but the trend is for the Big 3 to be firing and the "imports" to be hiring. Rick Wagoner doesn't want to hire Americans, he'd prefer to expand production in China first.
In any case, if the Big 3 are serious about increasing US employment, then the simple answer is to build better vehicles. If they make cars that people want, then people will buy them.
The "domestics" have only themselves to blame for their problems, they were arrogant to believe that the American consumer was too stupid to appreciate quality or a well-packaged car. Companies such as Toyota simply took advantage of their arrogance. Had the Big 3 made better products, Toyota would still be a tiny company trying to make headway here and not getting very far.
I do not need google earth or wikipedia to tell me economic history of much of the country. My "adoptive parents" had a flat in lower Manhatten that they bought for $10k in the early 1970's, and sold for well over $1.5 mil a couple years ago. That was their retirement money. Housing market simply goes in cycles, overlaid on top of the inflation trajectory. The warehouse flat fetched much more than $10k years before they bought, and probably will drop below $1.5mil in the years to come.
After filtering out the cyclical aspect, places like NYC and Seattle have become more important to the national (and world) economy, just as other places like Rochester, NY and Detroit have become less. So housing prices in these locations all adjust accordingly; the former rising in price, the latter stagnating and even dropping when inflation adjusted. It simply reflects people moving in search of economic opportunities. Real estate in city center of booming towns rise faster than inflation simply because of zoning restrictions causing supply/demand imbalance. When boom turns to bust, the price decrease faster too. For example, Houston still have not recoverred from its early to mid 1980's high, after two decades!
Yes, "overpaid" executive pay in 1961 was more than $8500/yr, but "overpaid" executives get more than $200k today too. Besides, 1961 was before the Kennedy tax cut, so the top marginal tax rate was a whopping 91%! So the after-tax income was much lower.
I can certainly agree with you to a degree on the questionable construction quality of some of the McMansions. However, people seem to have taken a different attitude towards house construction, both due to higher labor cost (elaborate crown molding with hand carving for example is no longer practiced), and perhaps due to a change in value judgement. People used to build houses to last generations; nowadays, many seem to have realized that if the assessed value of the McMansion is only $300k, and the land it sits on is assessed over $1mil, so what building a house to a different taste in a couple decades. Amenities like Jaccuzzi, three-car garage and inground pool have become more important.
7 out of 10 auto jobs are still being provided by the Big 3
But as recent events show the detroiters don't need those 7 workers to make the volume they have now. Actually with Ford's cutbacks of 50% and Gm's of 40% they only need 4 out of those 7 workers, machines do the rest.
Productivity.
Real ratio: detroiters - 4 jobs transplants - 3 jobs robots - 10 jobs.
They have our government to pass alot of blame on to.
Why? Did a government official require Ford to make a lousy Five Hundred, or specifically instruct GM to make sure that Cobalts were unreliable and lacking in basic features?
No, but both GM and ford are in the buisness of making a profit and had to cut corners in area's of overall quality to remain competitive in price. They don't have the Japanese luxury's that has been handed to them on a silver platter.
We're not talking about the country, we were talking about my locale.
I simply said I wish we had past real estate to income ratios. Stop spinning everything off into a tangent. With all the desperate creative financing on the market these days, it is obvious that younger people everywhere are less able to purchase a home than at any time in recent history, necessitating bizarre and dangerous financing options. Around here, you need two very healthy incomes to purchase any detached property within a reasonable distance of workplaces.
I can't look at larger houses/mcmansions as relating to a better standard of living. Bigger isn't better. I'd rather have the beautifully crafted 1600 sq ft brick tudor my parents lived in when I was born than a 5000 sq ft mcmansion. We have a lot more amentities than in the past, but it's all very hollow. Things can't easily be called 'better'.
They don't have the Japanese luxury's that has been handed to them on a silver platter.
The domestics got the benefit of quotas that protected the US market, and CAFE rules that exempted trucks from meeting the same fuel economy standards as were required for cars, among other things.
Ford, and in particular GM, blew their profits on buying companies that have proven to be losing investments, from Fiat to Saab to Isuzu, and by managing too many nameplates, most of which aren't worth the cheap plastic on the dash.
The best thing that could have happened to GM would have been to fire its executive team, and replace it with Toyota's top managers to run the place. They don't need tariffs, they need competent people at the top.
Well, once we realize that what one buys in housing is the right to exclude others from the property, it should be easy to understand much of the issue is double-edged sward, for example:
1. Would you rather have slower rising housing price than inflation? That could mean either your area is in a prolonged economic deccline and people are moving out; or the school system has gone to hell; or that the zoning is so relaxed that existing owners would find the place a bad investment.
2. Creative financing actually makes it easier for lower income households to get into a house, but whether they can keep it in the long run is a different story. And in the process, they bid each other into bankruptcy. When the bankruptcy finally comes, and houses have to be liquidated, there will be an opportunity for the patient. Heck, this is a three-edged sword :-)
That's why the speculative and right-of-exclusion nature of real estate makes it hard to be used as a guage of living standard, especially at market extremes. In the massive boom of of Japan of the 1980's, real estate rose much much faster than income or inflation; in the 1990's, their receission caused the real estate market to lose 80% of peak value. If you go by income-to-real-esate-value ratio, you'd have the boom and bust exactly backwards.
If you are finding yourself less able to exclude others in the same locale compared to your grandfather, that just means he was doing better compared to his peers. Either that, or your peers are taking more risks than you are. ie. the exclusive and speculative nature of real estate.
GM, has a very competent leader at the top in Rick Wagoner. The turn-around won't happen over night and will take at least 2-3 years to fully complete. who is worth hirring from Toyota ????? I wouldn't mind Jim Press replacing Putz.
The Houston housing market in the inner loop anyway, has been on the rise since the mid 90's. It's slowed some in the last couple of years, but it continues to rise.
From everything I've read it's passed it. Especially inside the loop. This is the same in almost every major city as baby boomers down size due to kids leaving the nest, and wanting to be closer to their downtown jobs, orchestra tickets, sports teams.
The mid 90's high, here in the Heights where I live, was the biggest yet in Houston I believe.
My 1037 square foot house, built in 1913, original hardwoods, and windows [terrible weatherproofing] 3 bedrooms, 1 bath, is worth a little over 200k now.
I don't doubt that. I've seen population density's for the area and boy they are connecting up. Hell dallas and austin are even joining up. Amarillo Tx our metro has several hundred years before it joins up with Lubbock
Metropolitan Houston and Metropolitan Dallas are each already bigger than the State of Rhode Island. It will be quite exciting to see the two of them growing into each other. Is that where they are proposing a new private highway? Houston and Dallas really prove that sprawl works :-) Massive population growth without the massive housing price increase or massive crime rate increase.
How about instead of thinking up more government programs that are doomed to failure, try lower taxes and less regulations? So that capitals of the world will flock to the US, just like British capital flocked here when British government levied too high a tax to maintain their empire; and Dutch capital fled from French government predation to Britain (much of the source of capital for British Industrialization to begin with) ?
There is no "Big 3." Chrysler is part of a German company. Bringing people back to GM and F is not nearly as interesting as turning Toyota or one of the future Chinese or Indian carmakers into an American company because we offer much more stable political environment and less predatory government. It's already happening in the PC industry, Lenovo (the company that bought IBM PC division) is moving its headquaters to the US and becoming a US company because it likes the less regulated US envrionment better than Chinese red tapes.
Big changes like national healthcare will take a long time, much longer than the time left for GM and F. We need to keep our eyes on the bigger fish and higher stakes.
The money collected on the toll road will go to china on the new highway going from Dallas to Houston. I guess they are the ones who have invested the money to make it happen so I read in our newspaper.
Another piece of sensationalist news reporting. By that logic, you may as well argue that the US government is owned by Japan, China and the oil sheiks because they are the primary buyers of US government bonds. Obviously false logic. Lenders do not own the property, at least not until foreclosure . . . and who is going to foreclose a highway??
I'd rather just have housing be affordable to a moderate single income. As it was in most of the country in modern times. That's a decent standard of living gauge...realistic/responsible access to home ownership. No interest only/50 year mortgage garbage either. People today do not have higher standards of living simply because they have more electronics, bigger (shoddier) houses, and eat more.
"When the bankruptcy finally comes, and houses have to be liquidated, there will be an opportunity for the patient."
That's exactly what I am hoping for...give me (not literally, just have it be affordable) a condo or a townhouse with a 2 car garage, and I'll be a happy camper. I know some people who have taken out very risky financing, and I doubt their income will be able to keep up.
I like you am not asking for the moon. I'd like to own a 1800-2000 sq ft. home with 3-4 bedrooms, 2 baths, and not have to pay through the roof for it. It's basically $100-130 a sq. ft. even here in the panhandle. What surprising is in suburbs of dallas, housing is way cheaper than here in the Tx Panhandle. I suppose all the california folks moving here has kept housing price artificially high. Not until recently that I've seen the same homes stay on the market thsi long. However anyone selling there home under $100 a sq. ft. will have lotsa interest buyers.
only about 1/3 of the undergrads at UofM are michigan residents. my high school senior has submitted an application there. when we went to took a tour of notre dame, they started out by saying 'you are probably wondering what you get for your 200k'.
Comments
Rocky
Standards of living entail a lot more than income and household gadgets.
And indeed, the student loan burden is a necessity. I still have a couple loans out...but I consolidated them at something like 3.35 or 3.5%...so I have no incentive to pay them off early, heck, I have money in an ING savings account bringing 4.4%.
http://www.umich.edu/~regoff/tuition/full.html#Lower_Gen
As mentioned before, the expected loan load is $3500 per year for undergrads. It makes no sense for universities to lend more money for unergrads.
Are you sure you don't do PR for GM?
Don't you live in the panhandle? Lot's of economic growth and job potential there.
1. 45 years ago was 1951, a low point in housing market cycle; whereas right now we are looking at the peak of a housing market cycle.
2. 1951 was before even I-90 was built. What may look like a nice location close to the city today that your grandfather bought was practically in the middle of nowhere, with hardly any road leading to it; certainly no 65mph (really 90mph ;-) highway. The development I'm in was built around that same time. I happened to talke to a neighbor last year, who happened to be the third family that moved into the development back in 1952. He was reluctant to divulge how much he paid for the house until realizing how clueful I was about an executive pay in 1952 was only about $8k. After that, he told me all about how much capital appreciation he had and what a gamble that was when highways were being built :-) So in other words, for comparable location in relative market terms, you should look to the new developments being built outside the third ring of beltway today, not the house your grandfather bought right off the first beltway that was the frontier of metro area back 45 years ago.
3. Don't mean to be offensive, but perhaps your relative income level is not as high as what your grandfather had. $8-10k was an executive pay back in 1951. Officers with Colonel ranks coming back from WWII only made about $8k when they joined private companies and become upper management; you can see that both in statistics and in old movies from that era. Today, the equivalent executive pay is about $150-200k.
Google earth doesn't give info on demographics and development patterns. Take it easy.
But feel free to give a careless and credibility-free lecture on "missing points"....
One clear indication of rising living standards, even in housing, is the fact that houses, even counting new constructions only, are getting bigger and bigger.
Well if you want a good education you are better of sending your kids to the north.
Rocky
My God man, you are the most frustrating person on earth to have an intelligent conversation with.
is, you seem to have an excuse for everything. You can't go to college cause it's just to expensive, you can't work for GM like your Dad, and everyone else in your family, because they pay a crap wage, and it's consumer reports fault. The Aliens abducted you, and their anal probes gave you blurry vision, and a propensity to sweat in public.
All I can do is laugh with you on that.
Rocky
Rocky
-On one hand, I'm not sold on cheerleading for the service-based economy. The fact that the US is effectively outsourcing much of its production through imports is an indicator that we are effectively exporting much of the potential benefit that is derived from the value add, as well as exporting the cash needed to pay that markup.
-By shipping jobs elsewhere, you are ensuring that the middle-aged assembly worker without skills or education is consigned to the bottom of the ladder. The country benefits from having a working class that can buy products, move money around the economy and support itself. If I need to subsidize a former factory worker with food stamps and WIC payments, then I lose.
-On the other hand, the line between domestic and import is obviously blurred. The US worker, and I as a taxpayer, get more benefit from a Kentucky-built Toyota than a Mexican-built Ford. The talk about "profits" is misguided, as profits get reinvested throughout the system. Buy a Toyota, it invests its profits in building a new factory in San Antonio; buy a Chevy, and you can bet that they'll use those profits to expand production in Korea and China. I don't get any benefit from the latter.
-And a consumer, it is fair to expect the best products that I can get for my money. If I buy an inferior "domestic" (and don't deny it, they largely are inferior), that only encourages the Big 3 to stay fat and lazy, while they keep exporting jobs, anyway. Why should I buy a third-rate car to support factory construction in China, when I can buy a car that supports a company that will invest its cash and spread it around to workers and suppliers where I live?
Rocky
7 out of 10 auto jobs are still being provided by the Big 3. Until the Japanese can remotely even come close to that and # and support that many americans in our workforce buying there product isn't as american as buying a domestic product from the big 3 no matter how you like to twist the facts. Y'all like using the fusion made in mexico statement way to often. I bet that Mexican assembled fusion has more domestic content than than half the japanese cars made today. Toyota, has a mexico plant in Tijuana, but nobody mentions that do they. It kills me how some of you are so biased and love to throw the fusion statement up in my face to "prove" your point. I am consistent and believe the fusion should be tariffed.
Rocky
Google earth, wikipedia, it's all good. You're not from here and have likely never spent more than a couple days here...yet you seem like you think you can educate me on the demographics and development of the area. Sorry.
Houses are getting bigger, maybe not better. Big and cheap isn't a way to go. Quality is better than quantity. Some of these McMansions are quite unimpressive under the skin. There's another standard of living issue.
In any case, by the time you move to Michigan, chances are that the Toyota and/or some other manufacturer will have shops there. The governor there seems to be actively courting replacement carmakers.
Rocky
I'd like to verify that figure (although I can believe it), but the trend is for the Big 3 to be firing and the "imports" to be hiring. Rick Wagoner doesn't want to hire Americans, he'd prefer to expand production in China first.
In any case, if the Big 3 are serious about increasing US employment, then the simple answer is to build better vehicles. If they make cars that people want, then people will buy them.
The "domestics" have only themselves to blame for their problems, they were arrogant to believe that the American consumer was too stupid to appreciate quality or a well-packaged car. Companies such as Toyota simply took advantage of their arrogance. Had the Big 3 made better products, Toyota would still be a tiny company trying to make headway here and not getting very far.
Dad, wouldn't care as long as they were american made pizza's and preferably owned by americans.
Rocky
After filtering out the cyclical aspect, places like NYC and Seattle have become more important to the national (and world) economy, just as other places like Rochester, NY and Detroit have become less. So housing prices in these locations all adjust accordingly; the former rising in price, the latter stagnating and even dropping when inflation adjusted. It simply reflects people moving in search of economic opportunities. Real estate in city center of booming towns rise faster than inflation simply because of zoning restrictions causing supply/demand imbalance. When boom turns to bust, the price decrease faster too. For example, Houston still have not recoverred from its early to mid 1980's high, after two decades!
Yes, "overpaid" executive pay in 1961 was more than $8500/yr, but "overpaid" executives get more than $200k today too. Besides, 1961 was before the Kennedy tax cut, so the top marginal tax rate was a whopping 91%! So the after-tax income was much lower.
I can certainly agree with you to a degree on the questionable construction quality of some of the McMansions. However, people seem to have taken a different attitude towards house construction, both due to higher labor cost (elaborate crown molding with hand carving for example is no longer practiced), and perhaps due to a change in value judgement. People used to build houses to last generations; nowadays, many seem to have realized that if the assessed value of the McMansion is only $300k, and the land it sits on is assessed over $1mil, so what building a house to a different taste in a couple decades. Amenities like Jaccuzzi, three-car garage and inground pool have become more important.
But as recent events show the detroiters don't need those 7 workers to make the volume they have now. Actually with Ford's cutbacks of 50% and Gm's of 40% they only need 4 out of those 7 workers, machines do the rest.
Productivity.
Real ratio:
detroiters - 4 jobs
transplants - 3 jobs
robots - 10 jobs.
Excuse me it's 8 out of 10 :P
http://www.uaw.org/resrch/06/harbour_felax1006.pdf
Rocky
Rocky
Why? Did a government official require Ford to make a lousy Five Hundred, or specifically instruct GM to make sure that Cobalts were unreliable and lacking in basic features?
Rocky
I simply said I wish we had past real estate to income ratios. Stop spinning everything off into a tangent. With all the desperate creative financing on the market these days, it is obvious that younger people everywhere are less able to purchase a home than at any time in recent history, necessitating bizarre and dangerous financing options. Around here, you need two very healthy incomes to purchase any detached property within a reasonable distance of workplaces.
I can't look at larger houses/mcmansions as relating to a better standard of living. Bigger isn't better. I'd rather have the beautifully crafted 1600 sq ft brick tudor my parents lived in when I was born than a 5000 sq ft mcmansion. We have a lot more amentities than in the past, but it's all very hollow. Things can't easily be called 'better'.
The domestics got the benefit of quotas that protected the US market, and CAFE rules that exempted trucks from meeting the same fuel economy standards as were required for cars, among other things.
Ford, and in particular GM, blew their profits on buying companies that have proven to be losing investments, from Fiat to Saab to Isuzu, and by managing too many nameplates, most of which aren't worth the cheap plastic on the dash.
The best thing that could have happened to GM would have been to fire its executive team, and replace it with Toyota's top managers to run the place. They don't need tariffs, they need competent people at the top.
1. Would you rather have slower rising housing price than inflation? That could mean either your area is in a prolonged economic deccline and people are moving out; or the school system has gone to hell; or that the zoning is so relaxed that existing owners would find the place a bad investment.
2. Creative financing actually makes it easier for lower income households to get into a house, but whether they can keep it in the long run is a different story. And in the process, they bid each other into bankruptcy. When the bankruptcy finally comes, and houses have to be liquidated, there will be an opportunity for the patient. Heck, this is a three-edged sword :-)
That's why the speculative and right-of-exclusion nature of real estate makes it hard to be used as a guage of living standard, especially at market extremes. In the massive boom of of Japan of the 1980's, real estate rose much much faster than income or inflation; in the 1990's, their receission caused the real estate market to lose 80% of peak value. If you go by income-to-real-esate-value ratio, you'd have the boom and bust exactly backwards.
If you are finding yourself less able to exclude others in the same locale compared to your grandfather, that just means he was doing better compared to his peers. Either that, or your peers are taking more risks than you are. ie. the exclusive and speculative nature of real estate.
Rocky
Rocky
I'm only kidding !
The mid 90's high, here in the Heights where I live, was the biggest yet in Houston I believe.
My 1037 square foot house, built in 1913, original hardwoods, and windows [terrible weatherproofing] 3 bedrooms, 1 bath, is worth a little over 200k now.
Rocky
National Healthcare has been one off the top of my head.
What else ?????
Rocky
Big D and H-Town are megalopolis that when combined will be every bit as big as LA, NYC, Chicago.
Rocky
Rocky
IIRC, D and H are already among the biggest in terms of area.
Big changes like national healthcare will take a long time, much longer than the time left for GM and F. We need to keep our eyes on the bigger fish and higher stakes.
Rocky
Rocky
"When the bankruptcy finally comes, and houses have to be liquidated, there will be an opportunity for the patient."
That's exactly what I am hoping for...give me (not literally, just have it be affordable) a condo or a townhouse with a 2 car garage, and I'll be a happy camper. I know some people who have taken out very risky financing, and I doubt their income will be able to keep up.
I like you am not asking for the moon. I'd like to own a 1800-2000 sq ft. home with 3-4 bedrooms, 2 baths, and not have to pay through the roof for it. It's basically $100-130 a sq. ft. even here in the panhandle. What surprising is in suburbs of dallas, housing is way cheaper than here in the Tx Panhandle. I suppose all the california folks moving here has kept housing price artificially high. Not until recently that I've seen the same homes stay on the market thsi long. However anyone selling there home under $100 a sq. ft. will have lotsa interest buyers.
Rocky
my high school senior has submitted an application there.
when we went to took a tour of notre dame, they started out by saying 'you are probably wondering what you get for your 200k'.