Raped is a strong word. They prefer unconsentually copulated.

One of the ways the government has tried to reduce the social security burden and the burden of other recurring obligations has been through devaluation of the dollar. If the government has obligated itself to pay an individual $1,200 a month and the currency is devalued such that it is only worth $1,000, the government wins by $200 in actual original value.

 

Joe, I understand your concerns with the values of residential real estate undergoing a correction. The prices definitely do get inflated artificially when individuals who should not be buying houses are buying houses. From 2001 to 2006 it was people that did not qualify for a mortgage being given a mortgage. That spike and the subsequent return to mean is obvious in the attached chart. Also easily visible in the attached chart is the more recent bubble and deviation from the mean which is by many accounts related to the rapid influx of illegal individuals needing housing, H1B Visa holders being granted FHA loan guarantees, and large corporate interest buying large numbers of residential properties to rerent in perpetuity. The additional demand from home buyers that did not exist previously have spiked the market and with the deportation of many, those values will move back towards the trend line. Additionally, new housing starts were very high for the last 5 years, saturating the market and driving the price back down to the previous trend line.

 

And down here in SE FLA, it was some of what you posted but mostly all the people leaving states with draconian laws that were being paid very well over there and were now going to get paid the same, but working remote living in a much freer state with much better weather, and the people buying them for BNB investments.

I'm not a fan of vacation rentals in residential neighborhoods, nor am I a fan of all the national migrants, especially the locust-like ones for obvious reasons.

I could not afford to buy my house today, making double the income when I bought it in 2010. It has more than tripled in price because it was a bargain compared to those liberal hell-holes these people moved from. So imagine being a young person who was born here trying to move out of their parents home and buying a house instead of renting. It's heartbreaking.

 

It's the devaluation of the dollar that counts. I'm pretty sure Joe would not be happy if his house was valued in Zimbabwe dollars (Eleventy Quadzillion dollars, double that tomorrow). That was the gift of Joe Biden, which DJT is trying to fight every day.

 

 

Orange Man Bad...

 

Honest question: who gets to decide who should and should not be buying houses? If government, does that apply regardless of which political party holds a majority share at any given time?

Does this apply to a family which owns two houses and rents one out?

Or a family which has invested in residential real estate as a form of generational wealth?

What other sorts of things should government allow certain people or entities to own, but deny the right of ownership to others?

 

FFS, Joe. The answer is obviously 42.

The “government” in its many forms may not directly dictate that stuff already, but has its outsized influence on everything through taxes, regulations and just plain old incompetence. Intentionally or not, it decides through its proxies(for lack of a better word).
I know that you’re smart enough to know how monetary policy, loan incentives(and subsequent defaults - see 2008), zoning, municipal NIMBYism, environmental regulations, etc. all affect pricing and availability of housing - mostly making it scarcer and thus more expensive. “The market” basically decides who can buy and sell and for how much.

 

The government pushed banks to loan for houses to unqualified people in the 2000s. They shouldn't have been buying.

The government was subsidizing and guaranteeing h1b visa holders and they should not have.

There were/are millions of illegal people here who should not be and that artificially inflated home values. Yes, most of them rent but still take up housing.

People who really don't pass the previous income versus home purchase price calculation but they have relaxed the standard over the years and people can't really afford the houses they are buying.

Data:
>1950s-1960s
Housing payment: ~20-25% of gross income
Total debt: ~30% Very conservative lending, large down payments expected.

>1970s
Housing payment: ~25-28%
Total debt: ~33-35% Slight loosening, but high inflation and rising rates limited borrowing.

>1980s
Housing payment: ~25-28%
Total debt: ~33-36% Rates were extremely high, so affordability remained tight.

>1990s
Housing payment: ~28%
Total debt: ~36% The classic "28/36 rule" became standardized nationwide.

>Early 2000s (2000-2007 bubble era)
Housing payment: ~30-35%
Total debt: ~45-55% (often higher) Subprime lending and weak documentation pushed ratios upward.

>Post-Crisis (2008-2013)
Housing payment: ~28-30%
Total debt: ~36-43% Rules tightened after the financial crash.

>2014-Present
Housing payment: ~30-35%
Total debt: ~43-50% common FHA and automated underwriting often allow 50%+ for strong borrowers.

 

X - Formerly Twitter

Here's the REAL Epstein story.

 

From the blog UNLICENSED PUNDITRY by MICHAEL SMITH

https://open.substack.com/pub/michae...hy-as-a-weapon

Modern political persuasion increasingly bypasses deliberation by targeting the emotional circuitry of the brain directly. The strategy is simple: trigger empathic distress first, then insert policy while judgment is impaired.

More at link

Flooded minds don't ask about incentives, second-order effects, or long-term consequences. They ask a single question: how do we stop this feeling right now? That's when urgency and moral absolutism enter. Action must be immediate. Hesitation becomes cruelty. Nuance becomes complicity. Disagreement is reframed as a character defect: if you don't agree, you lack empathy. Deliberation is replaced by moral pressure.

This is where arrested adulthood becomes politically useful. People who never fully developed emotional regulation respond to distress the way children do: urgently, absolutely, and without proportional reasoning.

 

Wells Fargo is a San Francisco-based company. Years ago, it located its "wealth management" division --the bank's group focusing on high-net-worth individuals-- in New York. This month, the division abruptly relocated to South Florida. The group explained that the move would position the firm's leadership closer to its "most significant clients" amidst a fast-growing South Florida wealth hub.

Florida has no personal income tax. Its corporate tax is one of the most limited in the country, and offers the most exemptions; for instance, S-corporations and LLCs are completely exempt.

Over the last few years, South Florida's millionaire population has doubled, as the region acquired the exciting title of "Wall Street South." Presumably, these new millionaires didn't just airboat in from the swamps or appear from thin air. They came from somewhere.

 

This week, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) introduced a bold new bill to finally shut down sanctuary states and cities for good. Such policies, adopted in about a dozen blue states and goofy progressive cities, limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement-- refusing to honor ICE detainers, cooperate with arrests, or share information about criminal suspects who may be in the country illegally.

Graham's bill would impose criminal penalties against any state and local officials who willfully obstruct federal immigration laws, aiming to eliminate what he calls a major source of chaos, fraud, and threats to public safety. Not civil penalties; criminal charges.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but currently, anyone willfully obstructing federal laws (any laws, not just immigration laws) is already subject to criminal charges. Why do we need a bill to go through congress to arrest people already doing something illegal? Just go in there and arrest the *******.

 

Agreed. We need to see some perp walks for these clowns.

 

In California, progressive groups have either qualified, or are close to qualifying, a 2026 "Billionaire Tax Act" ballot measure to impose a "one-time" 5% excise tax on individuals and trusts with a net worth of at least $1 billion, covering "all forms of personal property and wealth." Separate initiatives focus on a recurring wealth, and a general high-earner tax for health care funding, spurring organized opposition from the tech billionaires.

Last year, Maryland boosted income tax rates on residents earning more than $500,000, explicitly framed as a way to narrow that state's budget deficit.

In Connecticut, Democrat lawmakers are musing increased income tax rates on "rich people" earning $250,000 or more (or $500,000 for couples) to offset the expected federal funding cuts. The bills are under heated debate, but have not yet passed.

In Washington State, after adopting a capital-gains tax last year, Governor Bob Ferguson (D) now supports a new "millionaire's tax" of 9.9% on annual income above $1 million, with final details expected in the 2026 legislative session.

Rhode Island recently passed a new levy on vacation homes valued at $1 million or more, popularly dubbed the "Taylor Swift tax," aimed at raising revenue from luxury property owners and 'nudging' second homes back into the general housing market.

Tax the rich! The problem with this scheme, of course, is that rich people can move. The wealthy are the most mobile of all. They might not like moving --who does?-- but they can do it more easily.

 

This week, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) introduced a bold new bill to finally shut down sanctuary states and cities for good. Such policies, adopted in about a dozen blue states and goofy progressive cities, limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement-- refusing to honor ICE detainers, cooperate with arrests, or share information about criminal suspects who may be in the country illegally.

Graham's bill would impose criminal penalties against any state and local officials who willfully obstruct federal immigration laws, aiming to eliminate what he calls a major source of chaos, fraud, and threats to public safety. Not civil penalties; criminal charges.

 

Senator Lee and Representative Roy simultaneously reintroduced overhauled versions of the SAVE Act (Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act), now called the SAVE America Act. This key legislation aims at bolstering election integrity by requiring in-person documentary proof of U.S. citizenship --such as a passport or REAL ID-compliant birth certificate-- when registering to vote and voting in federal elections.

This would effectively end mail-in, online, or third-party (think DMV) voter registration, absent an in-person visit to election offices to complete the citizenship documentation step. Democrats complain it will "gut voter registration by mail and online."

Good.

 

Finally, in yesterday's Cabinet meeting, Secretary Kennedy reported to President Trump that over one hundred studies on the causes of autism are now underway.

Rather than relying on a handful of studies that could be dismissed or marginalized, RFK Jr. is redirecting the NIH's roughly $50 billion annual budget --historically skewed toward developing patented pharmaceutical treatments under the Bayh-Dole Act's royalty incentives-- toward independent research that identifies root environmental, dietary, and toxic causes of conditions like autism, obesity, and autoimmune disorders.

Specifically, he said that by commissioning a critical mass of around 100 rigorous studies, he can overcome the "Daubert standard" threshold used in federal courts for admissible expert evidence-- by creating an irrefutable body of peer-reviewed science strong enough to withstand scrutiny and enable large-scale litigation against responsible industries. He compared it to his successful campaign against Monsanto over Roundup, where roughly 20 studies eventually supported billions in settlements and regulatory changes.

In other words, he intends to hand lawyers the evidence they need to bring Big Pharma to heel.

This multi-year lawfare plan, executed "one tiny step at a time" without needing congressional approval, was explicitly echoed in his seemingly offhand Cabinet meeting announcement this week, when he said that over 100 such studies on autism and related chronic illnesses have already been commissioned.

https://open.substack.com/pub/coffee...anuary-30-2026

 

Where's the Democrat outrage that this happened under their watch?