Political Posts

[Castanza]

57 minutes ago, Cigarbutt said:

With a rough comparison adjusting only for interest rates and choosing two specific points in time (1985 and 2025), you show that mortgage payments could be considered comparable.

Ok but does that mean that houses are just as affordable now versus most of the time?

Here's a typical mortgage payments picture over time, for Canada, but most developed countries show a comparable picture, including the US. (there are some differences)

So based on mortgage payments alone, recently, like in some specific earlier times, housing is quite unaffordable for new buyers entering the market.

Also, those who spend time on this issue tend to consider non-mortgage costs which are significant. Non-mortage costs are not correlated to interest rates but are directly correlated to housing price inflation, a key variable now that makes the present unaffordability situation even more salient.

-----

Back to anecdotal, in 1996, as a result of the affordable appeal of the housing market, instead of facing an unaffordable monthly payment, there was an affordable monthly payment which (as allowed by the mortgage contract) allowed me to double the monthly payment helping to extinguish mortgage debt within seven years. At least, it (market affordability of housing) made an anecdotal difference to my household then, an opportunity that my offsprings, now, don't have (yet).

 

Not that this changes the inflated cost of housing we are seeing comparatively; but one thing that always gets lost in these broad comparisons is the amount and quality of house you are getting now. At least in the US a normal house was like 1600sqft vs ~2300sqft today. Also worth noting the energy efficiency, and modern amenities of todays homes vs then (well maybe not 1980s homes). And not everything is better...but you get the point. Another thing is the average age of first time buyer has gone way up since 1950. I think it was early 20's then and now early o mid 30's. But what has changes? Without spending a lot of time on numbers I think i's fair to say from a high level the delay increase in age for "first time buyer" could at leas in part be attributed to some of the following: Globalization or freedom of movement, undergrad and post grad education, average marriage age, and general cultural changes/values. I think it's fair to say that in 1950 people viewed their 20's very differently than people today. 

 

Edit: Also housing affordability should not be viewed in a vacuum. I think you also need to see where and how people are spending money elsewhere as this also affect what you can afford. Purely anecdotal (seems we're doing that) but I know a lot of people in their early 30's with 1300/m new vehicle payments, mountains of student debt, and also pretty liberal lifestyle budgets (food/entertainment/fashion). My quick blunt take (as someone who avoided these things) is that a change in some of the above personal finances would change in no small amount the number of people who could now "afford" a new home.  

 

Just some thoughts....

 

Edited October 9, 2025 by Castanza

[DooDiligence]

 

[cubsfan]

1 hour ago, Sweet said:

 

This cuts both ways, those who hate him and can't see straight are just as bad, and I reckon there are far more of them.

 

 

Oh, the TDS is incurable around here. Border Closed, Tariffs working, DC crime gone, Israel/Hamas moving to peace

 

TDS is a the disease of fanatics.

[Gregmal]

12 hours ago, Cigarbutt said:

i assume this goes in my direction...

Yeah, putting too much weight on the 'anecdotal' comes with the very real risk of being irrelevant to others. But now is such an anecdotal era.

My three older offsprings will likely do well financially, with or without my help (despite of?). Contrary to what was politically suggested in above post, they are GenZs but not really whiners and quite hard-working and all holders of university degrees in useful fields. 

-----

So going from anecdotal to collective legacy, i'll try to take care of my own but can't help but feel some shame in the collective legacy that 'we' are leaving:

I definitely agree with the sentiment it’s important to teach kids in a way that is long term productive. I’ve seen both cases in regards to the instance that probably relates to most on this board. Let them work hard, and “earn it” on their own, and then of course the “do it for em” approach. If they’re good kids and have the right wiring or life skills…I’ve largely seen that the “do it for them” approach makes a far larger impact on quality of life than “letting them earn it”. That’s all I was really insinuating.
 

Being privileged, we can in many instances buffer out the difficulties of the world for our family members. As a parent of three that is probably the position I’ll take. I’ve seen plenty of kids from good families do it the “on their own” way, and honestly, I can’t think of one who deep down, when being honest, didn’t envy their friends whom had the house and big ticket stuff taken care of a decade earlier just cuz they were lucky. It’s very meaningful in terms of alleviating the coming of age stresses and focus on “making it”. Of course “making it” is largely why we keep seeing the ages at which people settle down or start having families continue to creep back towards 40 vs traditional being the later 20s.

[thepupil]

6 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

I definitely agree with the sentiment it’s important to teach kids in a way that is long term productive. I’ve seen both cases in regards to the instance that probably relates to most on this board. Let them work hard, and “earn it” on their own, and then of course the “do it for em” approach. If they’re good kids and have the right wiring or life skills…I’ve largely seen that the “do it for them” approach makes a far larger impact on quality of life than “letting them earn it”. That’s all I was really insinuating.
 

Being privileged, we can in many instances buffer out the difficulties of the world for our family members. As a parent of three that is probably the position I’ll take. I’ve seen plenty of kids from good families do it the “on their own” way, and honestly, I can’t think of one who deep down, when being honest, didn’t envy their friends whom had the house and big ticket stuff taken care of a decade earlier just cuz they were lucky. It’s very meaningful in terms of alleviating the coming of age stresses and focus on “making it”. Of course “making it” is largely why we keep seeing the ages at which people settle down or start having families continue to creep back towards 40 vs traditional being the later 20s.

 

yea...my longtime friend who i went to undergrad with is extremely hardworking and holds an advanced medical degree. after a million years of training, he's probably making >$500K...starting a family in mid 30's...and all that. 

 

the thing is I know, confidentially, that his dad's biz clears $5-10mm of EBITDA per year and that he owns the whole thing and has no obvious vices to absorb that. his home is probably worth $1.5mm.

 

And yet...his dad lent him money to buy a house. I'm kind of of the view that he should have just given him a few million by now. it's not like he's gonna suddenly become a leech...as a married 35 year old anesthesiologist...

[73 Reds]

13 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

I definitely agree with the sentiment it’s important to teach kids in a way that is long term productive. I’ve seen both cases in regards to the instance that probably relates to most on this board. Let them work hard, and “earn it” on their own, and then of course the “do it for em” approach. If they’re good kids and have the right wiring or life skills…I’ve largely seen that the “do it for them” approach makes a far larger impact on quality of life than “letting them earn it”. That’s all I was really insinuating.
 

Being privileged, we can in many instances buffer out the difficulties of the world for our family members. As a parent of three that is probably the position I’ll take. I’ve seen plenty of kids from good families do it the “on their own” way, and honestly, I can’t think of one who deep down, when being honest, didn’t envy their friends whom had the house and big ticket stuff taken care of a decade earlier just cuz they were lucky. It’s very meaningful in terms of alleviating the coming of age stresses and focus on “making it”. Of course “making it” is largely why we keep seeing the ages at which people settle down or start having families continue to creep back towards 40 vs traditional being the later 20s.

As a parent of [now older children] it was important to me to provide my kids with what I felt was lacking as a child but at the same time provide an example of a proper work ethic.  The most important part was giving them a good foundation, i.e., education, support with hobbies and endeavors, access to other families with solid morals and with whom they could develop good friendships, and perhaps most important of all - taking sufficient time so that they always knew we were there for them as parents.

Edited October 9, 2025 by 73 Reds
missed line

[Sweet]

2 hours ago, Cigarbutt said:

With a rough comparison adjusting only for interest rates and choosing two specific points in time (1985 and 2025), you show that mortgage payments could be considered comparable.

Ok but does that mean that houses are just as affordable now versus most of the time?

Here's a typical mortgage payments picture over time, for Canada, but most developed countries show a comparable picture, including the US. (there are some differences)

So based on mortgage payments alone, recently, like in some specific earlier times, housing is quite unaffordable for new buyers entering the market.

Also, those who spend time on this issue tend to consider non-mortgage costs which are significant. Non-mortage costs are not correlated to interest rates but are directly correlated to housing price inflation, a key variable now that makes the present unaffordability situation even more salient.

-----

Back to anecdotal, in 1996, as a result of the affordable appeal of the housing market, instead of facing an unaffordable monthly payment, there was an affordable monthly payment which (as allowed by the mortgage contract) allowed me to double the monthly payment helping to extinguish mortgage debt within seven years. At least, it (market affordability of housing) made an anecdotal difference to my household then, an opportunity that my offsprings, now, don't have (yet).

I suspect the biggest issue is the deposit nowadays.

[Gregmal]

26 minutes ago, thepupil said:

 

yea...my longtime friend who i went to undergrad with is extremely hardworking and holds an advanced medical degree. after a million years of training, he's probably making >$500K...starting a family in mid 30's...and all that. 

 

the thing is I know, confidentially, that his dad's biz clears $5-10mm of EBITDA per year and that he owns the whole thing and has no obvious vices to absorb that. his home is probably worth $1.5mm.

 

And yet...his dad lent him money to buy a house. I'm kind of of the view that he should have just given him a few million by now. it's not like he's gonna suddenly become a leech...as a married 35 year old anesthesiologist...

 

23 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

As a parent of [now older children] it was important to me to provide my kids with what I felt was lacking as a child but at the same time provide an example of a proper work ethic.  The most important part was giving them a good foundation, i.e., education, support with hobbies and endeavors, access to other families with solid morals and with whom they could develop good friendships, and perhaps most important of all - taking sufficient time so that they always knew we were there for them as parents.

Yup on both. We moved for a reason, largely being the environment and quality of people we want our kids to grow up around.
 

But generally speaking, checking off the “shelter” box as early as possible is imo so crucial for so many reasons. Peace of mind, wealth building, family planning, relationship

building community wise, etc.  Of course, I guess the million dollar question is “are they ready?”. The 20s can be wild, 30s…everyone’s settled down by then. But generally speaking, if they’re ready…I don’t see the benefit in making them spend 5-10 years earning it….cuz….especially as I get older, I’m realizing those years and all years are pretty precious and wasting ages 25-35 running in the hamster wheel and stressing about money and student loans…not what I want for my kids nor is it what I personally worked hard for.

[Mephistopheles]

2 hours ago, cubsfan said:

 

Oh, the TDS is incurable around here. Border Closed, Tariffs working, DC crime gone, Israel/Hamas moving to peace

 

TDS is a the disease of fanatics.

 

Totalitarian Derangement Syndrome is not really a disease I'd say!

 

But to your and @Sweet's point, we never Trumpers view it as the Buffett quote about a track record with a 0 at the end. No matter how good the good is, you times it by zero, and you're at nothing.

 

Loving the tax cuts and nice to see them freeing FNMA. How's that for deranged?

 

Sadly he's still a dictator.

[Red Lion]

11 hours ago, Parsad said:

 

Yes, he's stupid, pushes the boundaries of the Constitution and is a narcissistic fool, but he's been running the Dems and his haters in circles making them look even more stupid!  I don't like the guy, can't understand how the world ended up here, but we all know there were real problems that kept getting pushed down the line...by everyone...Democrats and Republicans.

 

I remember Larry Sarbit talking about a book he read, can't remember the name...but basically the author said that America gets the politician they need in the times they need it.  Somehow, the voters pick and choose the guy the country needs, rather than the guy the country really wants.  America picked this stupid idiot because the smart guys kept doing nothing and pushing problems to the next guy.  

 

If Dems and Republicans really want to know who is stupid, well:

 

 

And that's how America got this guy as President!  Cheers!

+1

[LC]

12 minutes ago, Red Lion said:

I don't like the guy, can't understand how the world ended up here

 

People find it easier to join the cult of personality rather than doing some critical thinking themselves.

[73 Reds]

1 hour ago, Gregmal said:

 

Yup on both. We moved for a reason, largely being the environment and quality of people we want our kids to grow up around.
 

But generally speaking, checking off the “shelter” box as early as possible is imo so crucial for so many reasons. Peace of mind, wealth building, family planning, relationship

building community wise, etc.  Of course, I guess the million dollar question is “are they ready?”. The 20s can be wild, 30s…everyone’s settled down by then. But generally speaking, if they’re ready…I don’t see the benefit in making them spend 5-10 years earning it….cuz….especially as I get older, I’m realizing those years and all years are pretty precious and wasting ages 25-35 running in the hamster wheel and stressing about money and student loans…not what I want for my kids nor is it what I personally worked hard for.

The deal I made with my kids when they were in high school was they could go to college anywhere they wanted as long as they applied themselves and earned a marketable degree.  For the last one I had to adjust the terms b/c he initially wanted to go to Harvard and I refused to pay for an ideology I didn't support even long before Oct. 7 (I told him he could go there if he paid for it or got a full ride but he made the right decision - he earned a partial scholarship somewhere else, started a business and worked for the school, all while competing in a variety of national sporting events).   I suppose the moral of the story is try to get kids to develop good habits early on - makes the job of being a parent a lot easier.

[cubsfan]

1 hour ago, Mephistopheles said:

 

Totalitarian Derangement Syndrome is not really a disease I'd say!

 

But to your and @Sweet's point, we never Trumpers view it as the Buffett quote about a track record with a 0 at the end. No matter how good the good is, you times it by zero, and you're at nothing.

 

Loving the tax cuts and nice to see them freeing FNMA. How's that for deranged?

 

Sadly he's still a dictator.

 

He has the same level of power that Biden had owning the Presidency, House and Senate.  Sorry you don't like it - it's going to be a long 3 years for you.

 

And he's kicking ass in the Supreme Court unfortunately for you.

[Parsad]

35 minutes ago, LC said:

 

People find it easier to join the cult of personality rather than doing some critical thinking themselves.

 

I think that's too easy an explanation.  There are a lot of people who didn't buy into the cult but voted for Trump...why?  These are smart, intelligent, rational people...many who don't like him...why vote for him?

 

Underlying sentiment was that there were huge underlying problems that no one was fixing...not former Dems or Republicans.  The one guy who shook the boat served one term in 2016 and the problems didn't get better when the Dems took hold again. 

 

And then the dysfunction in that administration, the President's idiot son's escapades, his waning mental and physical state and then with three months left, they change who was running...went from old man winter to the young black empowered VP who had no track record in policy...so they voted again for the known, but least desirable choice.  At least he would shake the boat again!

 

Unless the Dem's field a really great candidate...Trump's idiot son or Rubio will probably get the job next time.  I don't think even Republicans like JD Vance...so they are going to have to field someone else as well!  Cheers!

[cubsfan]

2 minutes ago, Parsad said:

 

I think that's too easy an explanation.  There are a lot of people who didn't buy into the cult but voted for Trump...why?  These are smart, intelligent, rational people...many who don't like him...why vote for him?

 

Underlying sentiment was that there were huge underlying problems that no one was fixing...not former Dems or Republicans.  The one guy who shook the boat served one term in 2016 and the problems didn't get better when the Dems took hold again. 

 

And then the dysfunction in that administration, the President's idiot son's escapades, his waning mental and physical state and then with three months left, they change who was running...went from old man winter to the young black empowered VP who had no track record in policy...so they voted again for the known, but least desirable choice.  At least he would shake the boat again!

 

Unless the Dem's field a really great candidate...Trump's idiot son or Rubio will probably get the job next time.  I don't think even Republicans like JD Vance...so they are going to have to field someone else as well!  Cheers!

 

Perfectly said.

 

Unfortunately the Republican talent for President is deep, unlike the Democrats. 

 

In the end, the most important factor will be the next 3 1/2 years record, just as Biden's disastrous record destroyed Kamala.

[Buckeye]

Trump Jr. Positioned To Benefit From Drug Overhaul

https://www.wsj.com/health/pharma/trumprx-drug-companies-blinkrx-2b6e1761?mod=Searchresults&pos=1&page=1

 

It's interesting that none of the Hunter Biden whiners are up in arms about this.  It must be because Hunter was just a leach, POS who rode his father's coattails his entire life, versus Don Jr., who has clearly studied and worked very hard to earn everything on his own.  What a guy.

 

The country’s top drugmakers are set to meet in early December at the Four Seasons hotel in Georgetown with Donald Trump Jr. and senior Trump administration officials that regulate the pharmaceutical industry.

 

The host: BlinkRx, an online prescription-drug delivery company that in February installed Trump Jr. as a board member. The summit will conclude with a dinner at the Executive Branch, the exclusive new club founded by Trump Jr. and his close friends, according to people with knowledge of the event and a copy of the invitation viewed by The Wall Street Journal.

 

 

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s adult children are also positioned to profit from the administration’s overhauls to the drug industry. Cantor Fitzgerald—the financial-services firm that was led by Lutnick until he joined the Trump administration—took a financial stake in a company that is trying to make money by investing in bringing pharmaceutical manufacturers to the U.S.

 

Earlier this year, Lutnick handed his ownership of Cantor Fitzgerald to trusts benefiting his adult children, and his two eldest sons were named chairman and executive vice chairman of the firm.

 

A new special-purpose acquisition company called Drugs Made In America Acquisition II turned to Cantor Fitzgerald to handle its $500 million initial public offering, which occurred last month.

     

[Gregmal]

^^^ isn’t this just classic, stupid socialist thinking? The “dur let’s can something blatantly good because some rich people might benefit”? It’s pretty much the same reason NYC lost that huge Amazon HQ deal. 
 

Hate to break it to you, but the haves pretty much always benefit. Otherwise, yea, totally agree Lutnick’s firm (a financial services firm FYI) making investments in a secular theme is totally the same thing as a no experience drug addict getting a director seat on a foreign energy board…

Edited October 9, 2025 by Gregmal

[Gregmal]

I’ll also point out, because I’m sure you guys didn’t know this, but Cantor Fitzgerald is/was basically the go to for SPACs going back probably 10-15 years. They’re the clear market leader in the space, well before the product got super popular and then fizzled out in 2021. So a SPAC looking to go public and hiring Cantor? Lolz nice gotcha 

Edited October 9, 2025 by Gregmal

[dwy000]

20 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

Trump Jr. Positioned To Benefit From Drug Overhaul

https://www.wsj.com/health/pharma/trumprx-drug-companies-blinkrx-2b6e1761?mod=Searchresults&pos=1&page=1

 

It's interesting that none of the Hunter Biden whiners are up in arms about this.  It must be because Hunter was just a leach, POS who rode his father's coattails his entire life, versus Don Jr., who has clearly studied and worked very hard to earn everything on his own.  What a guy.

 

The country’s top drugmakers are set to meet in early December at the Four Seasons hotel in Georgetown with Donald Trump Jr. and senior Trump administration officials that regulate the pharmaceutical industry.

 

The host: BlinkRx, an online prescription-drug delivery company that in February installed Trump Jr. as a board member. The summit will conclude with a dinner at the Executive Branch, the exclusive new club founded by Trump Jr. and his close friends, according to people with knowledge of the event and a copy of the invitation viewed by The Wall Street Journal.

 

 

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s adult children are also positioned to profit from the administration’s overhauls to the drug industry. Cantor Fitzgerald—the financial-services firm that was led by Lutnick until he joined the Trump administration—took a financial stake in a company that is trying to make money by investing in bringing pharmaceutical manufacturers to the U.S.

 

Earlier this year, Lutnick handed his ownership of Cantor Fitzgerald to trusts benefiting his adult children, and his two eldest sons were named chairman and executive vice chairman of the firm.

 

A new special-purpose acquisition company called Drugs Made In America Acquisition II turned to Cantor Fitzgerald to handle its $500 million initial public offering, which occurred last month.

     

I saw the first line and assumed they were legalizing cocaine. 

[Mephistopheles]

41 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

He has the same level of power that Biden had owning the Presidency, House and Senate.  Sorry you don't like it - it's going to be a long 3 years for you.

 

And he's kicking ass in the Supreme Court unfortunately for you.

 

Well, 3 long years assuming there's an election in 28

[Gregmal]

4 minutes ago, Mephistopheles said:

 

Well, 3 long years assuming there's an election in 28

Hey sometimes the situation calls for buying boring blue chips, others it’s most advisable to flip ponzis or buy call options on shitcos, or maybe yea, occasionally ya gotta vote for a dictator….mental flexibility… 

[Mephistopheles]

35 minutes ago, Parsad said:

 

I think that's too easy an explanation.  There are a lot of people who didn't buy into the cult but voted for Trump...why?  These are smart, intelligent, rational people...many who don't like him...why vote for him?

 

Underlying sentiment was that there were huge underlying problems that no one was fixing...not former Dems or Republicans.  The one guy who shook the boat served one term in 2016 and the problems didn't get better when the Dems took hold again. 

 

And then the dysfunction in that administration, the President's idiot son's escapades, his waning mental and physical state and then with three months left, they change who was running...went from old man winter to the young black empowered VP who had no track record in policy...so they voted again for the known, but least desirable choice.  At least he would shake the boat again!

 

Unless the Dem's field a really great candidate...Trump's idiot son or Rubio will probably get the job next time.  I don't think even Republicans like JD Vance...so they are going to have to field someone else as well!  Cheers!

 

Yea the non cult voters probably a mix of financial incentives and poor weighing of the risks - normalization of the fascist behavior. And also short term memory. By then it had been 4 years since Jan 6, so I guess people forgot how much of a tyrant he is?

 

And of course you gotta blame Biden's idiotic policies towards business, student loans, immigration, sex change, mask mandates etc that swayed swing voters who failed to see the big picture. Totally agree with your second paragraph.

 

 

 

[Mephistopheles]

5 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Hey sometimes the situation calls for buying boring blue chips, others it’s most advisable to flip ponzis or buy call options on shitcos, or maybe yea, occasionally ya gotta vote for a dictator….mental flexibility… 

 

Hey if Trump was a Lee Kwon Yun I'd be all for him. Unfortunately he's more of a Hitler, totally agree with JD Vance on that.

 

Glad you admit that he's a dictator though 

Edited October 9, 2025 by Mephistopheles

[cubsfan]

23 minutes ago, Mephistopheles said:

 

Well, 3 long years assuming there's an election in 28

 

Just double down on the current Democratic Playbook - when you have NO political power - use violence, rioting and assassination culture. You almost got Trump, knocked off Charlie Kirk - so it does work sometime.

 

Why use peaceful political means when violence works wonders?

[LC]

1 hour ago, Parsad said:

I think that's too easy an explanation.  There are a lot of people who didn't buy into the cult but voted for Trump...why?  These are smart, intelligent, rational people...many who don't like him...why vote for him?

 

Ego and stupidity combined. Something the average republican voter has in spades.