Nearly 50% of Millennials Reject Capitalism

2001400ex said:

RaceBannon said:

And builders don't need incentives to make money. That's hondo fucking stupid

Congrats

He didn't say builders needed incentives to make money. Read his quote again.

Race just likes to argue for the sake of arguing, and not necessarily because he actually belives what he says.

RaceBannon said:

BearsWiin said:

2001400ex said:

BearsWiin said:

RaceBannon said:

WilburHooksHands said:

RaceBannon said:

WilburHooksHands said:

RaceBannon said:

I don't agree with @Sledog . The millennials I have worked with lived n the film room and are more than willing to do what it takes to win. Nothing has changed

I graduated high school in 1974 as America was descending in to hell. Guess what? Hard work still worked. Always has, always will

its idiots like mooster running around saying all is lost that need to get a fucking clue

Best thing I ever did was walking away from a career and starting over and working with millennials. We both benefited from it

That's why I defend them here.

I have a 6 figure salary and work in arguably the highest demand industry (tech). My partner (who has a higher 6 figure salary than me) and I can't even dream about buying a home within 30 miles of our workplace. Granted, I don't consider myself a millennial (I'm 36), but if we can't buy a house, things have just changed.

You can buy a McMansion in Houston for 400K

Even in Cali you can get a nice house at your income levels.

When we bought our house the interest rate was double digits

What has changed is the banking laws after the crash. 20% down as a hard number is hard to come up with unless you bank most of your income for a year or two

Fuck McMansions. I would live in Houston if there were any tech jobs there worth a shit.

The Bay Area is a hard one but not impossible at your level. Probably will need some kind of commute

Or work from home.

Even in the early 1990's when I was working for the studios, most guys I worked with owned in Canyon Country, or further out in Palmdale/Landscatter because they preferred to have a 3000sqft home over a smaller Toluca Lake townhouse. That said, the Bay Area does a pretty pisspoor job of creating higher-density housing. Generally not as profitable as single-family homes, so it's up to local govt. to step in and create incentives for builders and developers to build housing that takes some pressure off of the transportation networks. Plus, sitting in traffic sucks.

Right about there, doogie, Pawz, sledog, and Race just started screaming communist!!!!!

I knowingly put that dog whistle in there

It's not a dog whistle

Local Cali government makes housing more expensive. That's what they're good at.

LA wants to tax home builders for affordable housing. Making housing more expensive to make it affordable

That's only part of the issue in the Bay Area. Like Seattle there's only so much room. Location will cost you

What “LA” are you referring to? The state CEQA law is a notorious tool for NIMBYs, and municipalities add layers to the bureaucracy builders go through (density, parking, transit, prevailing wage, and other environmental). The one scared cow has always been affordable housing however, especially within LA County and the 88 incorporated cities.

There’s a tax on affordable housing development?

WilburHooksHands said:

BearsWiin said:

As somebody who has taught both political theory and comparative politics at the university level, I always find these threads to be an absolute hoot.

I lived under communism in the 70's. Nothing special.

I didn't know Houston was Communist.

WilburHooksHands said:

BearsWiin said:

As somebody who has taught both political theory and comparative politics at the university level, I always find these threads to be an absolute hoot.

I lived under communism in the 70's. Nothing special.

I didn't know Houston was Communist.

Mosster47 said:

Millennials know:

20 years of pointless war that was costing over $1B a day at it's peak.

The housing bubble where rich people robbed the American public and the government paid them back 100 cents on the dollar for any short term loss.

Crippling student loan debt to get a job that previous generations never needed a formal education to do, yet still did the job equally well.

There is no more competition. Amazon, Google, eBay, and Netflix won. Seriously, what business are you going to start that some titan doesn't already have a complete monopoly on? A good capitalistic environment is supposed to motivate people to create a job instead of finding one, which went away 40 years ago.

We are generally viewed negatively by most of the established world.

We completely destroyed an entire continent in their lifetime and stirred up a hornets nest that brings terror to everyone's door step.

We can't spare $4M for Meals on Wheels but we need $65B more annually for defense. You know, cause the......fuck we're out of enemies.

The quality of life between working your ass off and not working at all is pretty similar.

Trying to save money with a meager salary to enjoy life when it's already over instead of using it while you can enjoy it is fucking stupid. All you are doing it making someone else rich.

If you work really hard you can be rich one day! 99.9% false.

I can keep going. Millennials are a lot of things, but stupid isn't one of them. They're the worst pussy faggots this nation has ever produced.

Question: Is there a giant "L" tattoo'd backwards on your forehead, or what? Grow some confidence, lame ass.

RaceBannon said:

2001400ex said:

RaceBannon said:

And builders don't need incentives to make money. That's hondo fucking stupid

Congrats

He didn't say builders needed incentives to make money. Read his quote again.

I didn't say he did. Incentives to put people in little boxes to ride the bus to their little job aren't needed. Builders build what people want. They make money without your fucking stupid incentives to build what people don't want.

I didn't think I needed to spell it out. I was wrong

For builders, single-family homes are profitable. High-density stuff like townhomes and condos are also profitable, but less so. Builders prefer to build single family homes for this reason; they're in business to maximize profit.

People want affordable housing. Builders want to maximize profit. This leads to a suboptimal aggregate outcome unless local govt. steps in to provide incentives for builders to build housing that people want, where people want it, for a price they can afford.

That liberal rag The Economist spelled it out pretty clearly many years ago, specifically in reference to Bay Area housing policy. I paid special attention to it at the time because it dealt with how Bay Area local govt. incentives affected the housing market in the Central Valley, and why my parents' efforts to become Modesto property barons in the early 1990's didn't work out the way they hoped.

BearsWiin said:

RaceBannon said:

2001400ex said:

RaceBannon said:

And builders don't need incentives to make money. That's hondo fucking stupid

Congrats

He didn't say builders needed incentives to make money. Read his quote again.

I didn't say he did. Incentives to put people in little boxes to ride the bus to their little job aren't needed. Builders build what people want. They make money without your fucking stupid incentives to build what people don't want.

I didn't think I needed to spell it out. I was wrong

For builders, single-family homes are profitable. High-density stuff like townhomes and condos are also profitable, but less so. Builders prefer to build single family homes for this reason; they're in business to maximize profit.

People want affordable housing. Builders want to maximize profit. This leads to a suboptimal aggregate outcome unless local govt. steps in to provide incentives for builders to build housing that people want, where people want it, for a price they can afford.

That liberal rag The Economist spelled it out pretty clearly many years ago, specifically in reference to Bay Area housing policy. I paid special attention to it at the time because it dealt with how Bay Area local govt. incentives affected the housing market in the Central Valley, and why my parents' efforts to become Modesto property barons in the early 1990's didn't work out the way they hoped.

Sounds like you’ve read a lot of Academics writing about building theory.