Here's How We Fix the Housing Crisis
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 окт 2024
- An interview with Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, Wally Adeyemo, about how we fix the housing crisis.
Blog: kyla.substack.com
Linkedin:
TikTok: / kylascan
Twitter: / kylascan
Instagram: www.instagram.....
All materials in these videos are used for educational purposes and fall within the guidelines of fair use. No copyright infringement intended. If you are or represent the copyright owner of materials used in this video and have a problem with the use of said material, please send me an email, kyla.scanlon@outlook.com
DISCLAIMER: This video does not provide investment or economic advice and is not professional advice (legal, accounting, tax). The owner of this content is not an investment advisor. Discussion of any securities, trading, or markets is incidental and solely for entertainment purposes. Nothing herein shall constitute a recommendation, investment advice, or an opinion on suitability. The information in this video is provided as of the date of its initial release. The owner of this video expressly disclaims all representations or warranties of accuracy. The owner of this video claims all intellectual property rights, including copyrights, of and related to, this video.
thanks for watching everyone
Thank you for existing
So… where does MMT fit in to all this?
Seems to me that, since the FED’s target inflation rate is 2%, for no explicit reason, and politicians seem more inclined to tax vices rather than consider taxes to be a revenue stream, it’s quite clear that MMT IS the modus operandi these days.
Would it not be beneficial, therefore, to raise awareness of this policy shift, thereby offering a counter to the “how will we pay for this” policy argument?
Simple. Rather than banning vices, legalize, regulate, and tax them out of existence.
Ah yes my time for my favorite internet yap session
I work on these issues every day and I'm impressed by this very sophisticated take, the best I have seen yet 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
thank you!
Kyla, you should seriously consider running for political office. You definitely have the requisite body of knowledge of economics and domestic policy. You know how to reach and retain a substantial audience. You seem to genuinely care about educating people on how to build a better tomorrow for all Americans. I don't know if you would be up for it, but I think it's attainable if you set realistic goals (i.e. school board, city council, etc.) Just a thought!
They will never reduce the price of housing because it's against the interests of everyone in power to do so. They probably have specialists and economists working on figuring out how many houses they can build so that it sounds impressive but it makes absolutely no difference in terms of real prices.
In Cincinnati there is plenty of affordable housing, provided you're not worried about living in a safe area or having a good school district. I wish you would address those two issues as they relate to housing. I really appreciate the education you're providing!
i think that ties into the concept 'where people want to live'
In summary we are running a growth based ponzi monetary system that requires constant injection of money to not collapse into hyperdeflation and since we can't print more land property prices are going up at the exponential rate of currency debasement. We must now all live on top of each other in pods like an ant colony so we can keep the grift going a little longer. We must also undermine labor with immigration in order to keep service inflation under control for the medical care & nursing homes otherwise cost of care would skyrocket as labor demands higher wages. Suppressing labor allows the retired old to never have to sell property leading to the young families living in million dollar shacks while empty nest elders live in empty 3500 sq/ft homes they purchased with mortgages that got erased by currency debasement for 50 years.
Nailed it
Well SAID. My only contribution is that this modern civilization wont last because as you said our society demands constant growth on a finite world, one of the most important finite resources being crude oil which we use for pretty much everything. Once oil "runs out" or at least becomes too expensive to harvest and transport, billions of people are more than likely going to die.
A lot of us in the west grew up during a time of immense prosperity that the world had never known before. For us it was normal, expected, we can't really comprehend that the way we live is a complete abnormality historically. This idea that everyone can have their own house, giant suv, air conditioning, tvs in every room, hot meals all the time, it's all unfortunately rare and not sustainable, in fact it consumes resources INSANELY fast. We have only been in this modern experiment for under 100 years really, and I doubt it will last 100 more.... Within the past 200 years humanities population skyrocketed from under 1 billion to 8 billion..... All research I have done seems to suggest that once oil runs out we are going back hundreds of years technologically speaking, billions will most probably die...
We have the same discussions in Germany. It is interesting how similar it all sounds.
its a worldwide problem!
I love the accent on the words "sky high". I have those slip ups too as someone who has molded their accent between New York and Pennsylvania
The rich person buying a luxury space, opening up a space for someone else and then opening for another, reminds me of hermit crabs. When one feels they are getting too cramped in their shell, they follow another larger shell crab and wait for them to leave and then move in. It ends up being a conga line of swapping homes
Amazing video as always Kyla keep up the great work!!
thank you!
Impressive presentation, thank you Kyla
In my country, Canada, the PM recently said that house prices need to be maintained in order to fund retirements. I think this is tremendously short sighted of us to have done but, what do we do about it?
Thank you so much for all this valuable information!
Found your channel through the bankless interview and I’m really liking it! I hope your book is a success!
Had to look up these terms in case it helps anybody:
Downzoning- A local government changes the zoning of a property to a more restrictive district. For example, a commercial area might be rezoned to only allow single-family homes.
Upzoning- A local government changes the zoning of a property to a less restrictive district. For example, a single-family home area might be rezoned to allow multifamily units like duplexes or townhouses.
I love this topic! Thank you 🤗
thank you!
I appreciate you breaking down incredibly important issues that affect our generation. I swear the generations (boomers and X) that precede us are deliberately keeping us in the dark out of self-interest
Thank you for this. Every day I lose hope that my wife and I will ever have a house. Mortgage costs are fixed; rents are out of control. I'd do anything for a steady mortgage. But the costs are getting astronomical.
they are! but there are bright spots on the horizon
Very well researched and thorough video. If there were a sticky about this topic, this video should be it
wonderful reporting . genuinely good stuff
I think the computer language he was looking for was COBOL, not Cobalt, because I used to code in it. Cobalt is a metal.
Otherwise, a nice comprehensive video about the housing crisis.
I'm glad you mentioned missing middle-housing. I think that could help a lot of areas, such as California. I've seen huge swaths of nothing but single-family homes there. The cost of these is so high, people have to commute 15+ miles to areas where employers pay a high enough wage.
Little clusters of apartments, condos, and townhomes near the town centers, where retail and small offices abound, could really change the dynamic. Imagine being able to walk or bike to your job.
Capitalism will not follow this path unless guided. Local governments simply have to get involved and make the push.
Kyla video dropped! It's been a minute.
These videos are becoming a very pleasant appointment to looking forward to. Nice insights and analysis as always, thanks for sharing it.
Just a question if I may: even if they would be able to build a sufficient amount of new and more affordable housing, how are they going to deal with the next generation’s needs (let’s say 10-20years) and the innate greed of us all as species?
I’m referring to the paradox you were referring to at the beginning of the video: people want both a house for living in, as well as an investment and all combined with fair chance for the future generations to have affordable living.
Even with more building, how the government is preventing a consequential new influx of immigration, the rise of inflation, and an overall race to speculate over such new properties on the long run.
Wouldn’t be necessary to prevent speculation in the first place (that would most likely be not so welcomed by most of the citizens) in order to maintain prices on a “fair base”, and wouldn’t that drive the government to reduce the amount of private ownership? (That it was one of the supposed claim of the upcoming process of tokenization of assets)
Just asking out of curiosity, since I’m observing such “housing solutions” in other countries (with heavy public incentives and bailout), creating an immediate boost to the economy, a decrease in the lacking of housing and at the same time (since usually everything comes with pros and cons), a series of new issues and inequality (dormitory’s neighborhoods, higher demand of public services and amenities, issue to previous mortgages holders, and so on and so forth)😊.
Would you see more feasible to opt for duplex/triplex and apartment buildings or high rise’s complexes in order to avoid the decentralization of the urbanized area and a consequent reduction of need of logistical support and new infrastructures ?
The concept of the “15 minutes zones” recently brought up to the media attention by some policies (mainly European to the extend of my limited knowledge) was not exactly aiming to reduce to commuting issues, and the displacement of the working force into area where the living was not doable/affordable? all while reducing the need for a division between production areas and living ones (as stated by governor Burgum), the enormous costs and issues generated by the infrastructure required to keeping the cities zoned in that way, the need for such gigantic amount of cars, related pollutions and viability’s issues.
I would be most happy to know your opinions about that.
Once again thanks for making these video, most entertaining,
Miss Kyla I saw your interview with Galloway on the Public App RUclips channel, it was great.
Wondering if that was the appropriate place to see it?
Or, if they are using your content and I should be subscribing somewhere else to see you do more awesome long form interviews like that?
Great video and love the optimism at the end! Not to miss the forest for the trees, but I'd like to see the source on the Deputy Secretary's tax prep cost numbers at 28:45. My taxes are almost certainly more complex than average, but it takes me ~2-3 hours and costs me $15 with a popular online prep service. The most popular one used to cost me $30. What are people doing where their taxes take 13 hours and cost $240?
Regardless, it's absurd that people have to pay anything to do their taxes and the IRS free-file tool is much needed
Awesome vid about potentially buying a house.(I wanna buy one 😭)
Subsidize builders and give them cheap loans
At 25:42 I noticed the tiniest bit of an accent on the word "thrive" and now I can't unhear it. (Also, great video, as usual).
the kentucky comes out sometimes :)
The lack of housing where people want to live, is really about where they have to live to get a decent job. We've concentrated economic activity into a few landlocked supermetros. All the land in most of these is occupied, housing doesn't turn over that fast, and it turns over even slower when it's super expensive. We can loosen zoning and make other incentives and tweaks, but I'm guessing the effects will be marginal. Only a massive public housing build out, and/or a geographic reorganization of our economy, will get us the 10-20 million housing units that are really needed.
This was great!
Come to Nevada, they are building like crazy out here.
Can you elaborate on what you mean by the "inherent speculative nature" of housing?
Great information
STR’s reduce inventory and increase price.
Buffalo changed its entire zoning code in 2016. Has not resulted in proliferation of housing building. Basis of the problem is the area is too poor; and the cost to build too high. Especially a for-sale product. The federal government should look at such areas and create incentives on the development side - not just zoning - to balance the housing market.
God, she's Gorgeous 🥰
ok I'm on it.
Get government out of housing all together and get them to stop spending money they do not have. Inflation="inflating" money supply. Cut local property taxes (you never own your home and government raising property tax is passed on to renters). Its not housing that has gone up so much as the value of the dollar going down. There is a reason government took housing out of the CPI; they lie on the numbers.
What about disincentives for hoarding housing? Of course the admin has nothing to say about that because both parties have a vested interest in the investor class at the expense of everyone else.
This isn't real.
7:58 you say environmentalists are wrong but you don't say why. What makes environmentalists wrong about the cost of new housing?
If you just increase the supply then why wouldn't rich landlords just buy those as well? They have been hoarding all the money they get from renters so the renters still have no money, but the rich landlords have all the money. If a new housing asset is built why would the rich landlord just buy that one as well?
Less regulations? Smaller Hones?
There was a ballot measure to provide more affordable housing in my county recently. NIMBYism made it fail so we've already decided to leave in about a year. I hope things get so incredibly expensive for these dillholes that they tear each other apart trying to find reasonable cost labor.
Tenements didn’t have enough bathrooms, either. I’m not saying that’s a good enough excuse to start flipping unused commercial real estate as-is but we kind of need to start somewhere?
Also, holy shit they’re still using COBOL?!
Wale's great
Can this be condensed into 3 min or less?
three words - build more housing.
@KylaScanlon Can't do it without workers. 50 years of denigrating construction workers has gotten us here.
How many people here want to be construction workers????
Starting pay is now above $20 an hour with no experience. That's 40k a year. No one shows up for that. If we pay 50k still no one. Of the people that show up 2 out of 10 will still be working in 6 weeks and only 1 in 6 months. So 20k paying people that won't last 30 days to get 1 that will.
One of the reasons housing is expensive.
I'm a builder doing affordable. And there are ZERO affordable units long term from government programs. They provide billions in assistance and after 20 or 30 years it becomes market rate. Then they issue billions more for another new building for 20 years.
Licensed building contractor in CA, the beauracy involved to generate a set of plans to obtain a permit over a multi month period of time...the cost & time investment our clients have to endure prior to even knowing our project price to build...this makes most people uneasy to proceed. And therefore, only the most savvy & wealthy clients push forward with our projects. It's not a low income or even middle income process to engage in. Path forward? Cut regulatory costs & offer incentives for lower fees for lower & middle class citizens.
I have to laugh when i see pics on line of boarded up houses in the midwest, what they dnt tell u, a lot of them are 100 year old houses, often the floors are shot and its not worth replacing floor joist and flooring eventho the rest of the house is ok, it funny 100-120 y.o. houses are every where in the mid west nowhere-ville , the peoplenow live in 200k house on a farm out side of town, its astonishing how many 200k-400k houses are everywhere in the country side in missouri, illinois, indiana, but yes, the little towns built 100 years ago are fullof rows of rotting old houses nobody bothers tear down, nobody wants to live "in town" 6feet from their neighbor, in a cramped littlehouse with 1- 6ft x 6ft bathroom thats a sign of the future of housing and zero lot line capitalism
Boomers : bootstraps!
Gen Z: ima do my own thing idc anymore
RIP boomers social security
They better hope Elon/ big tech gets the robots moving
(I love you kyla)
👏👏👏
For housing.
There is so much talk with little action.
1 in 4 gen Z own a home ? LMAO
Regulation, taxation, politicization...
Sure we need some regulation
And taxation pays for services... right?
Real estate has been a good long term investment, that is rear view.
Rent was what we left the old country for, even a century ago few Europeans would have dreamed of owning their own home.
The "garden sanctuary" or "royal forest" is actually the transplanting of old world feudalism, not new world liberty.
Eventually they will ban you from even visiting parks. To preserve them of course!
Where do you think the terms 'ranger' and 'warden' came from?
Yes much of this is true but I'm against 99% of laws taxes and regulations I like the idea of fair tax that's all we need
😊👍
I recommend doing a comparison between housing in Japan and the US. Their zoning laws system is very different and view on housing in general. (Japan’s view houses (not land) is a liability not asset)
a while, back, polymatter did a interesting video on it. ruclips.net/video/b1AOm17ZUVI/видео.htmlsi=4Gqytpw5vrVL39vb
she knows what tf is up
If only folks all around could have access to how she can often times put things so clearly instead of complicated.
hello
We gotta wait for Boomers to kick the bucket. I
I’m all for having enough housing but allot of people complaining about price couldn’t afford a $60,000 home even if you gave them one.
32 vacant homes for every 1 homeless person in the US. "building more" is probably not going to fix it.
This is precisely wrong. Housing needs to be where people are and want to be. And this is before you mention problems short of homelessness, namely the prices of housing. An empty unit in Nebraska doesn’t help the marginal young person in NYC, Austin, SF etc. The sort of “its a simple fix” type thinking, instead of thinking about big developments, wont solve nay problems, housing, climate, jobs and industry, you name it-we need to build build build.
@@kade3lt nope it is definitely also in every major city and all of the places that "people want to be"
@@morgan3896 no this is just wrong-it has been measured over and over again. This sort of thinking will leave people worse off. There are real fixes that entail development and policy.
All these people do is talk and push paper and act like that's work. I've helped build two houses and I'm now planning to build my own cabin. Without any experience, these people think like expectant children expecting policy changes to translate to more housing. Thinking that just because you reduce restrictions, spend tax payers money, and speaking about magically makes it happen. There has to be incentives for strong men to labor in a market. Biggest problem for me is starting pay for carpenters is just a little over minimum wage. And top scale is $25-30/hr. I'd only take the job now working outside with a crazy work schedule and a constantly varied commute was if I couldn't find anything else.
first
One Beautiful Woman with Gorgeous Eyes and Lovely jet black hair.
Why are you always reversed? 🙏
Totally missing the mark. You're talking around the issue instead of addressing it. Housing prices have gone up due to money printing and artificially low interest rates, period. They are unaffordable due to government manipulation and the federal reserve banking cartel
this is objectively untrue! but thanks for the input.
@@KylaScanlon Well of course you would have to say that because if you agreed, then you would get de-platformed and would no longer have a career in journalism. Objectively, there are people with many more years of experience, better read, and with more grey hair, that would disagree with you-because collectivism matters to you.
@@abrahamcale3659you don’t believe that price is determined by supply and demand? Ok…
You either didn't do well in economics or you didn't agree with it, lol. There are plenty of people on RUclips who blame money printing and low interest rates for a lot of things (grey haired or not), so no, she wouldn't get de-platformed.
Besides, why the personal attack? I don't see your detailed analysis on your channel.