>>1109967
I love the modern age and the ease with which one can lie.

>>1109971
Me too. In fact, I'm lying right now.

>>1109967
Even if that was true, the house not gaining any value in almost 10 years is HORRIBLE.

It should be about 20-30% higher from inflation alone.

>>1110030
Isn't that what caused the collapse in the first place?

>>1110322
the collapse was caused by a bunch of second mortgages being un payable

>>1110322

No, the cause of the collapse was people getting mortgage they ultimately could not afford from people that wanted to sell those mortgages to other people that wanted greater and greater amounts of stable income from their investments.

>>1110324
>>1110327
Oh ok so people bought homes they couldn't afford to live happily ever after in them not for investment purposes.

And there were no noisy commercials and aggressive cold calls from agents ordered to boost housing sales because Wall Street was desperate to boost MBSs and CDOs.

And Moody's and Standard & Poor and Fitch Group were all innocent in rating *EVERY! SINGLE! MBS!* as a AAA+ because we all innocently expected people to continue paying mortgages once the original introductory APR was finished and people's mortgages doubled in size.

And they were all second homes. All of them.

***
Understood.

So .... you're saying it would be a good thing for the economy for homes to boost in value by 20-30% again since that has no corollary effect on rentals and doesn't in any way lead to more social services or vast exoduses from cities or spikes in crime.

And a housing market where homes appreciate in value 20-30% every year won't be invested in by Wall Street since they already learned their lesson.

So a stagnant housing market where home prices flatline is bad for the economy even if lots of new homes are being constructed.

***
Thanks for clarifying that, guys.

Man, /biz/ is the best!

Hey what stocks should I short?