SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Ish who wrote (241904)3/25/2002 7:13:53 PM
From: joseph krinsky  Read Replies (3) of 769670
 
Let's start over. people said that the tariffs would cost the homeowner an extra 1500. If that's the case, then it means nothing. 1500 over thirty years is a minor amount.

Saying that there shouldn't be tariffs because they raise the cost of housing and prevents people from owning is an argument that doesn't work, because it can be shown mathmatically that it doesn't work.

Interest rates are one thing, principle is another.

You used 7& vs 10% in your example, and that's not correct. The correct way is to use 100,000 vs 101,500 and then use whatever rate you want, but you have to use the same rate for both.

If you use different rates, then you can contruct your argument any way you want. Why not use 3% vs 23%?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News