what might be some second order effects of banning citizens of economically illiberal nations like china from buying property in the US as a store of value?
-
-
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @micsolana
More work for accountants and lawyers to get around the restrictions. More houses owned in the names of people's kids. More demand to make sure their kids get citizenship in an economically liberal country. Less privacy as the government will need transparency from everyone.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @JeffLonsdale
these all sound like extremely useful barriers of entry for (increasingly) the chinese middle class, which is now competing with our own middle class for affordable homes in florida, texas, georgia
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @micsolana
It would be better to make housing a mediocre store of value by building way more of it. People panicked over the Japanese buying landmark real estate in the 90s, but in the end they sold a much of it for a loss. Let's do the same thing this time.
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 4 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @JeffLonsdale
1) china’s economy is dwarfing japan’s - so way bigger scale - and 2) japan’s gov didn’t incentivize holding onto property abroad. japanese economy tanked, ppl needed money and sold. if china tanks, their gov will start stealing, and property abroad will be the only safe asset.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @micsolana ja @JeffLonsdale
there’s no amount of housing you can build in the US that would make it a less attractive store of value than chinese currency in a chinese bank
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @micsolana
Well, here is some data denominated in the relevant USD figures:pic.twitter.com/vcx8hIHRIK
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @JeffLonsdale ja @micsolana
And building enough to take away the expectation of appreciation, when combined with a negative yield/holding costs, should destroy its perception as a store of value. The problem is we lack the political willpower to actually build more. Even YIMBY people don't want sprawl.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @JeffLonsdale
again, they aren’t worried about appreciation. they’re worried about the chinese government deciding on a whim that wealth is canceled.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @micsolana
And the goal is to make the opportunity of cost of investing in developed world housing seem high when there are better alternatives like offshore gold, Swiss bank accounts, developed world stocks, crypto, etc.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä
bc of a commitment to ideology you are prescribing something impossible in our current political environment. that means you’re effectively advocating doing nothing, which will be disastrous for most americans. political right can’t just be a no vote if it wants to survive.
-
-
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @micsolana
I agree that building lots more is far fetched right now. But tax reform that reducing prices/increases the carrying cost of real estate looks attainable. There is a chance it goes too far. Also, I'm in favor of using Magnitsky act type sanctions against foreign FCPA violators.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @JeffLonsdale ja @micsolana
I don’t love the movement of this into American markets, pricing out other homebuyers and yet lots of real estate projects were partially dependent on the assumption of these buyers and when capital controls went in, their project financing was affected or shut down.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä - Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
