• Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      you replied to me defending their point

      No I didn’t. I specifically ended with, “Everyone hates everything.”

      Too much of anything is bad, just like too little is bad.

      Just like too little of anything is also bad.

      If the value tanks, homes are affordable.

      You can’t have it both ways.

        • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          So when I said “just like too little is bad”

          I was highlighting that you see the problem without acknowledging the hypocrisy.

          They. Are. Different. Problems

          One is oversupply causing lower prices. This helps new families at the expense of investors. The other is under supply. This hurts new families and helps investors. When housing crashed in 2008, new home buyers were happy while the media lamented the home owner investors who lost value. You can’t have lower prices without oversupply.

          It doesn’t matter if we don’t like China’s government. The math of supply and demand is the same.

          If this was 1935, you’d be posting that trains on time in Italy is bad but late trains in the US is different because “reasons”.

            • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              That China created the oversupply doesn’t change that it keeps housing cheap.

              You argue as if the reason for the oversupply supply is only thing that’s important. “Your honor, I murdered the victim using my democratic free market philosophy so the death is actually good. But that other murderer was a communist dictator so they should get the death penalty.”

              An oversupply keeps housing cheap. The US directly regulates the price of food by subsidizing farmers to maintain an oversupply that keeps food cheap. This hurts investors in futures markets but benefits all Americans. The Fed regulates interest rates to control inflation. This hurt stock market investors but benefits American consumers.

              Do you mock all regulation or only when it’s not the US?

                • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  oversupply is bad then an undersupply must be good,

                  My first statement was “everyone hates everything”

                  That is people criticize oversupply and undersupply. But it’s one of the other. Markets aren’t stable. It’s why the US subsidizes food to keep the market at oversupply.

                  You criticized China’s oversupply and ignored US’s undersupply. Even after you mentioned US’s undersupply in a reply, you still only criticized China’s oversupply.

                  overbuilding in the US would not be done with the money of retail investors

                  The 2008 real estate crash was not planned by the US government. The overbuilding was done with the money of retail investors.

                  Low income housing projects are subsidized by the government all the time.

                  My personal hot take is that oversupply is good for workers at the expense of investors. Investors are excess capital looking to make money without producing anything. Workers actually produce. Shifting excess capital from investors to workers is a good thing in the long term.