you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

for a while people were moving back to cities instead of suburbs as cities had improved/gentrified and people wanted to save money on transportation, gas, upkeep of cars etc. That may reverse as cities have been getting looted and pillaged. But it's a fact there are thousands of houses not being sold and banks would rather let them sit and rot than sell them at a loss because they're worried it becomes a trend and housing prices go down. Just like how the fed tries to keep inflation high. We would have deflation in a normal market where prices go down because people's wages go down and there are less jobs than before.

Yeah that is why it is more profitable to not sell them. Asbestos, great point, this is what made the WTC buildings worth less and hard to sell. Of course asbestos is in shtty urban shitholes as well as the suburbs.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I don't think you're following. The reason they're not selling is not necessarily a cabal that keeps prices high, it's that holding assets counts toward their ability to lend money. In other words, banks holding onto these properties they they're mutually valuing beyond any sane persons desire to pay because it actively makes them more money by lending the value of those assets. A purely natural state of affairs thanks to what is frankly a gross oversight by the government in allowing banks to value assets beyond the money they hold.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

bad post. blocked.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I'm sorry you're not mature enough to handle reasoned arguments. Maybe one day your balls will drop.