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.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: shades who wrote (46946)1/11/2006 1:19:58 PM
From: gpowellRead Replies (2) | Respond to of 306849
 
You say it should be evident - but it is not evident to me.

If households are directly investing and creating the capital goods that produce housing services because of their desire to consume those services in the future, then it cannot be a misallocation of resources.

If you buy coast soap or ivory soap and pay for it by selling off your farm as Buffet claims we are doing - isn't that a foolish action long term? How is it leading to socialism when buffet says that buying 200 dollar nike shoes and 10 dollar starbucks coffee by selling off our farm is stupid? The last time I went to buy a TV - all made overseas - same for most of the stuff in my house and car. I dont think buffet is saying you are an idiot because you buy bud lite over michelob - but that you are paying for it by going deeper and deeper into debt and that is dumb.

Net worth, exclusive of housing equity and corporate equities, are higher than they have ever been and are on the same growth trend they have been since 1952.

i10.photobucket.com



To: shades who wrote (46946)1/14/2006 12:51:44 PM
From: gpowellRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 306849
 
Shades said:
Those slant guys are really smart - all the cool gadgets are made in asia eh? how did they pump hundreds of millions of dollars into that development and then no one moved into it - the demand was there right? how did things get so misallocated? did socialism come in and fix the misallocations of capitalism?

There is still the matter of entrepreneurial error. Perhaps those investing in making there homes bigger and better will find future generations will prefer smaller, sparser homes. That is the nature of business: it is a continuing exercise in error.

Stiglitz said:
In US, at least, 2006 is likely to be another year in which stagnant real wages freeze, or even erode, the living standards of those in the middle.

I can’t square Stiglitz’s view with reality. Maybe Stiglitz should look at the upward bias in the CPI measurement and realize that real wages have risen nearly every year in the US. How can American’s net worth be climbing if real wages are stagnant? Ah, maybe rising foreign investment pushing asset prices higher? Roach’s so called asset economy? Too bad net worth is still showing little to no deviation from past growth even when excluding housing and corporate equities.

The main risk in 2006 is that America’s long-brewing problems come to a head globally: investors, finally taking heed of the large structural fiscal deficit, the yawning trade gap, and the high level of household indebtedness, may pull money out of the US in a panic.

Both public private debt levels are consistent with rising income and net worth. It also appears that Stiglitz is looking at nominal levels of debt and not the magnitude of the future obligation.

And, everywhere, it is likely to be another year in which the gap between the haves and the have-nots will widen.

Here is Stiglitz’s real concern, i.e. that a recession will hurt those at the bottom of the ladder. He reasoning is: if Federal debt levels were lower our government could add fiscal stimulus to protect the wages of those at the lowest end of the wage scale.