50 year mortgages? Yes, Trump suggests a number of things. But the way he works, he suggests things and then suggests other things to get people out of their entrenched mindset. People think he’s a lunatic, needs to be impeached, whatever. At a time of his choosing, he then drops the real deal. Any doubt, re-read The Art of the Deal.
Excellent points. I've said many times that if you want to understand Trump, you absolutely need to understand "The Art of the Deal." Trump says (my paraphrase, not a quote) go into every negotiation sounding like you expect 10 times more than what you could ever expect to get. And when it's all over, no matter how much you get, never spike the football. Always praise the other side for their shrewd negotiations.
It is still a terrible idea. Does anyone realize that there is no way to become a conservative if one doesn’t have anything to...well...conserve?
A 50-year mortgage, as Christofer correctly pointed out, transforms ownership (something to conserve) into a speculative financial asset, owned by interests but not the person with the mortgage.
Great podcast. We need to stop the infighting and focus on the communists. The only way to make America affordable again is mass deportations. That will protect American workers' wages while lowering the cost of housing, education, and healthcare. MAGA Econ/Polisci 101: increase supply, decrease demand, reward allies, punish adversaries: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/make-america-affordable-again
I agree, Focus on the communist, but how can you frame communism in such a way that 100 % of the country will recognize that communism is BAD!!!!!! It seems like one of our political parties is now openly cozying up to communist and the other acts like it’s not a big deal when socialist policy is enacted. We probably don’t even need communism to tank the country, we just need to keep raising the debt and eroding personal responsibility. Then in another generation we’ll all be wards of the state
Agree on your concerns about 50 year mortgages. However, a bigger issue is that we allow corporations, pension funds, and foreigners to buy single family homes. Even wealthy Elites should only be allowed to own two. These two changes would restore a natural real estate marketplace, and replace speculating on single family homes that encourage responsible citizenship. I encourage you to consider this and comment on it, Christopher. Thank you for your work.
“A bigger issue is that we allow corporations, pension funds, and foreigners to buy single family homes.” Strings up, fade to black. There is no conceivable reason this is not banned. If it’s hard for Congress, start at the state level. My village banned short-term rentals if not owner occupied for a similar reason. They take properties off the market for people who want to make this place home not a junket.
I will just say this. In my rather long life I've had multiple loans/mortgages, etc. I ALWAYS sought the longest term/lowest monthly payment possible so that a) I would never be in danger of default, and b) because I could (and did) always pay loans off way early. I only have a mortgage at all now because it is at 2.9% and Clark Howard always recommended NOT paying off your mortgage because of the interest deduction. But a young person getting in needs the house, and if their finances grow, they can always re-do the mortgage and/or double up.
Exactly! It is not as if every buyer will choose the 50 year mortgage. I’ve been through multiple ups and downs. When I bought my first home the average mortgage interest rate was 15 to 16%! So there were some creative options like interest only with a balloon in 15 years. Both the owner and mortgage company were betting the value of the home would rise.
The NINJ (ninja) loans that preceded the 2008 crash were insane. A friend who was VP of mortgage fulfillment said it used to be people wouldn’t lose their homes no matter what. That changed with this loans and resulted in the 2008 Crash.
My house lost $100K in value overnight.
The 50 year mortgage might be a temporary tool to get new buyers in. Fine give it a try.
I also suggest getting rid of paying taxes on the gains in your home. This is keeping a lot of old Boomers like me in their homes when they might want to downsize.
Benjamin, I think it’s terrific and about time. I’m also encouraged that a whistleblower wouldn’t let this go when management ruled it “no big deal.”
It’s astounding that people don’t know how truly corrupt the BBC and old media have become but they don’t. So hopefully this will help open a few more eyes.
And Yea Trump! People/orgs have to be held to account for anything to change and he is doing just that!
How much time do we have left to break the back of the Marxist-Education Complex, which provides the only basis for the Democrats' future in power? This is serious business. Many millions of kids are being twisted like a pretzel as we speak.
There is a journo flurry just now in the the UK press..... in the wake of the BBC being once again outed for the Leftist-biased organisation it has always been. As always there is the usual futile commentariat blah blah about 'changes needed at the top' to preserve the BBC's much vaunted 'impartiality'. Impartiality which, in truth, it has never remotely had.
It never ceases to amaze me how much wishful nonsense about ‘saving’ the BBC and its ‘proud tradition of independence’ gets blah blahed out whenever the corporation gets outed for its endemic Leftist bias. Even from the conservative commentariat. To ‘save’ it as a national public broadcaster you would need to sack a large majority of its 20K-strong+ workforce because, for many decades now it’s been a de facto case of ‘only Lefties need apply’. Anyone on the Right has known that trying to get in would be a hiding to nothing so very few will have even tried……again this political distortion has been going on for many decades.
There is of course a simple solution….scrap the licence fee and make the BBC fend for itself. But then you’d need a decent conservative government and the prospect of that it a remote one
No “changes at the top” are ever going to make the BBC remotely ‘impartial. It is not even that it and is – for the most part anyway – deliberately trying to present a distorted perspective on current affairs or anything else. It is worse than that; the distortion is so embedded in media culture that it collectively fails to comprehend that there are other perspectives. The BBC and its hinterland of favoured contributors teems with champagne lefties, celebrity poseurs and assorted other have-your-cake-and-eat-it fellow travellers of the liberal establishment elite. And it is a veritable honey pot for the not so big wide world of the arts and academia. The joke is that they all think of themselves as radicals and guardians of freedom. https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/non-binary-sibling-is-entertaining
I’ve been watching the BBC for 60 years and it has never been any different.
Absolutely Yes. But first you'd need a decent UK government.... with some balls. A very distant prospect; given that the last 'conservative' government just spent its 14 years 'in power' running scared of offending the BBC.
Well I rarely do now.... and never it's 'news' output. But as I said, the BBC has been the dominant media organisation in the UK for 60 years of my adult life so I know plenty about it.
Not big on 50 year mortgages but I would bring back the ability to assume mortgages. When I bought my first home in 1982, the ability to assume was key to making it affordable for me. Too bad we couldn’t do it retroactively for all those 3 and 4 percent mortgages out there
It was very common in the 70s and 80s. As a matter of fact with that home I assumed the 1st and 2nd and even took on a 6 month 3rd. Things were wild in the beach communities around LA then
Sounds cool. I just wish there weren't so many great podcasts, thinkers and writers to try to keep up with. Maybe the Marxists are right... if there's only one point of view, you'll have more time to pursue other interests besides defending your Freedom, your family and all aspects of Western Civilization.
As for the photo contest. Would there be a category for "AI generated"? I've created some absolutely incredible imagery, e.g., I asked Google AI to create an image of New York City after it was taken over by a Marxist/Jihadist ideology. Scary how it figured out what Sowell, Hansen, Horowitz, Rufo et.al., have been warning about all these many years. (anyone can ask Google AI Studio that query)
Random thoughts. First, I really like your thoughts about focusing on nature. It is far too often overlooked! I would also support your idea about a photography "contest", even if it just means sharing our humble surrounds. My husband and I (marriage of 40+ years) are late life cattle ranchers, and spend a lot of time with the land. Nature is too amazing to describe in words...spiders, snakes and all! It provides a welcome respite from all of the burdensome political BS and stress of the conditions of our world today. Young people would probably find healing if they spent more time with nature and less time on their *^&%$ing devices! Just my .02 worth. A subscriber
You are a great writer. Read the 1600 by Carlo Versano. It is connected to Newsweek. He is a Dem. I am a Republican. But the length of his podcast is perfect. Makes you think..but short enough that you can focus completely on it.
Hey, I was disappointed by your take on the Tucker / Fuentes thing. You didn’t engage with the argument fairly. Nobody is saying “you’re not allowed to invite someone on your podcast.” That’s a strawman.
Of course people can interview Fuentes. But if you do, the obligation is to challenge him, not coddle him. If you platform him because you agree with him and want to amplify his message, that is a problem.
There are enemies to the right and to the left. An intellectually honest movement needs lines in both directions.
Should you debate people across those lines? Absolutely.
But if you do, it should be crystal clear that you’re in disagreement. And you need to push back, hard, on people like Fuentes, Cooper, Carroll. That is something Tucker is failing to do, and is a problem, and deserves criticism.
50 year mortgages? Yes, Trump suggests a number of things. But the way he works, he suggests things and then suggests other things to get people out of their entrenched mindset. People think he’s a lunatic, needs to be impeached, whatever. At a time of his choosing, he then drops the real deal. Any doubt, re-read The Art of the Deal.
Excellent points. I've said many times that if you want to understand Trump, you absolutely need to understand "The Art of the Deal." Trump says (my paraphrase, not a quote) go into every negotiation sounding like you expect 10 times more than what you could ever expect to get. And when it's all over, no matter how much you get, never spike the football. Always praise the other side for their shrewd negotiations.
It is still a terrible idea. Does anyone realize that there is no way to become a conservative if one doesn’t have anything to...well...conserve?
A 50-year mortgage, as Christofer correctly pointed out, transforms ownership (something to conserve) into a speculative financial asset, owned by interests but not the person with the mortgage.
The interest on a $400,000 house and a 50 year mortgage is about $1M.
But because of inflation a lot of the $$ is in depreciated dollars.
For a 30-year mortgage of $400,000 at 5.35%,
You’d pay ≈ $354,920 in interest over the life of the loan.
$1,000,000 - $354,920 = $645,080 extra.
How’s that financially sound?
You’ll see some more bad ideas until the real plan comes out. I promise!
Yes, that’s Trump’s MO.
I like the photo idea, especially photos of nature.
How could we share photos?
KEEP IT SIMPLE.
Great podcast. We need to stop the infighting and focus on the communists. The only way to make America affordable again is mass deportations. That will protect American workers' wages while lowering the cost of housing, education, and healthcare. MAGA Econ/Polisci 101: increase supply, decrease demand, reward allies, punish adversaries: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/make-america-affordable-again
ALWAYS FOCUS ON THE COMMUNISTS
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
I agree, Focus on the communist, but how can you frame communism in such a way that 100 % of the country will recognize that communism is BAD!!!!!! It seems like one of our political parties is now openly cozying up to communist and the other acts like it’s not a big deal when socialist policy is enacted. We probably don’t even need communism to tank the country, we just need to keep raising the debt and eroding personal responsibility. Then in another generation we’ll all be wards of the state
How about taking it up a level? It is not about communists. It is about those who want to centralize power in political institutions.
Agree on your concerns about 50 year mortgages. However, a bigger issue is that we allow corporations, pension funds, and foreigners to buy single family homes. Even wealthy Elites should only be allowed to own two. These two changes would restore a natural real estate marketplace, and replace speculating on single family homes that encourage responsible citizenship. I encourage you to consider this and comment on it, Christopher. Thank you for your work.
“A bigger issue is that we allow corporations, pension funds, and foreigners to buy single family homes.” Strings up, fade to black. There is no conceivable reason this is not banned. If it’s hard for Congress, start at the state level. My village banned short-term rentals if not owner occupied for a similar reason. They take properties off the market for people who want to make this place home not a junket.
I will just say this. In my rather long life I've had multiple loans/mortgages, etc. I ALWAYS sought the longest term/lowest monthly payment possible so that a) I would never be in danger of default, and b) because I could (and did) always pay loans off way early. I only have a mortgage at all now because it is at 2.9% and Clark Howard always recommended NOT paying off your mortgage because of the interest deduction. But a young person getting in needs the house, and if their finances grow, they can always re-do the mortgage and/or double up.
Exactly! It is not as if every buyer will choose the 50 year mortgage. I’ve been through multiple ups and downs. When I bought my first home the average mortgage interest rate was 15 to 16%! So there were some creative options like interest only with a balloon in 15 years. Both the owner and mortgage company were betting the value of the home would rise.
The NINJ (ninja) loans that preceded the 2008 crash were insane. A friend who was VP of mortgage fulfillment said it used to be people wouldn’t lose their homes no matter what. That changed with this loans and resulted in the 2008 Crash.
My house lost $100K in value overnight.
The 50 year mortgage might be a temporary tool to get new buyers in. Fine give it a try.
I also suggest getting rid of paying taxes on the gains in your home. This is keeping a lot of old Boomers like me in their homes when they might want to downsize.
I feel like California had very long loans, maybe 80 year loans (?) about 20 years ago. Am I misremembering?
Such a reasonable response. Best one I’ve seen on this topic. Thanks.
Hey, I ain't rich. I have to watch every penny!
What are people's takes on the BBC scandal?
See:
Revealed: The devastating memo that plunged the BBC into crisis
Document exposes string of incidents that suggest serious bias in corporation’s reporting.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/721d8380ab73d651#biological-sex-and-genderundefined
Hadn't heard about this, but always assumed that everyone knew BBC, NPR, PBS, etc., are left-wing ideological actors
They are editing to the point of altering what people actually said.
I'd be interested to hear your take on the LGBT group's efforts to shape the trans coverage at the BBC.
It appears CPB continues funding public media. How is this possible?
Benjamin, I think it’s terrific and about time. I’m also encouraged that a whistleblower wouldn’t let this go when management ruled it “no big deal.”
It’s astounding that people don’t know how truly corrupt the BBC and old media have become but they don’t. So hopefully this will help open a few more eyes.
And Yea Trump! People/orgs have to be held to account for anything to change and he is doing just that!
The BBC is worse than NPR. UK taxpayer's paying a state institution to publish far-left propaganda.
It's only recently that we stopped doing the same for NPR!
How much time do we have left to break the back of the Marxist-Education Complex, which provides the only basis for the Democrats' future in power? This is serious business. Many millions of kids are being twisted like a pretzel as we speak.
There is a journo flurry just now in the the UK press..... in the wake of the BBC being once again outed for the Leftist-biased organisation it has always been. As always there is the usual futile commentariat blah blah about 'changes needed at the top' to preserve the BBC's much vaunted 'impartiality'. Impartiality which, in truth, it has never remotely had.
It never ceases to amaze me how much wishful nonsense about ‘saving’ the BBC and its ‘proud tradition of independence’ gets blah blahed out whenever the corporation gets outed for its endemic Leftist bias. Even from the conservative commentariat. To ‘save’ it as a national public broadcaster you would need to sack a large majority of its 20K-strong+ workforce because, for many decades now it’s been a de facto case of ‘only Lefties need apply’. Anyone on the Right has known that trying to get in would be a hiding to nothing so very few will have even tried……again this political distortion has been going on for many decades.
There is of course a simple solution….scrap the licence fee and make the BBC fend for itself. But then you’d need a decent conservative government and the prospect of that it a remote one
No “changes at the top” are ever going to make the BBC remotely ‘impartial. It is not even that it and is – for the most part anyway – deliberately trying to present a distorted perspective on current affairs or anything else. It is worse than that; the distortion is so embedded in media culture that it collectively fails to comprehend that there are other perspectives. The BBC and its hinterland of favoured contributors teems with champagne lefties, celebrity poseurs and assorted other have-your-cake-and-eat-it fellow travellers of the liberal establishment elite. And it is a veritable honey pot for the not so big wide world of the arts and academia. The joke is that they all think of themselves as radicals and guardians of freedom. https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/non-binary-sibling-is-entertaining
I’ve been watching the BBC for 60 years and it has never been any different.
Privatize all "public media"
Absolutely Yes. But first you'd need a decent UK government.... with some balls. A very distant prospect; given that the last 'conservative' government just spent its 14 years 'in power' running scared of offending the BBC.
The BBC? Little wonder the UK is fast becoming United Kingdistan. Allahu Akbar!
Why do you watch??
Well I rarely do now.... and never it's 'news' output. But as I said, the BBC has been the dominant media organisation in the UK for 60 years of my adult life so I know plenty about it.
Not big on 50 year mortgages but I would bring back the ability to assume mortgages. When I bought my first home in 1982, the ability to assume was key to making it affordable for me. Too bad we couldn’t do it retroactively for all those 3 and 4 percent mortgages out there
I'm curious about this idea, which would probably unlock more mobility, as people are not trapped forever when interest rates rise
It was very common in the 70s and 80s. As a matter of fact with that home I assumed the 1st and 2nd and even took on a 6 month 3rd. Things were wild in the beach communities around LA then
Same here. We were able to assume the mortgage on the first two houses we bought! Helped us tremendously!
Sounds cool. I just wish there weren't so many great podcasts, thinkers and writers to try to keep up with. Maybe the Marxists are right... if there's only one point of view, you'll have more time to pursue other interests besides defending your Freedom, your family and all aspects of Western Civilization.
As for the photo contest. Would there be a category for "AI generated"? I've created some absolutely incredible imagery, e.g., I asked Google AI to create an image of New York City after it was taken over by a Marxist/Jihadist ideology. Scary how it figured out what Sowell, Hansen, Horowitz, Rufo et.al., have been warning about all these many years. (anyone can ask Google AI Studio that query)
Random thoughts. First, I really like your thoughts about focusing on nature. It is far too often overlooked! I would also support your idea about a photography "contest", even if it just means sharing our humble surrounds. My husband and I (marriage of 40+ years) are late life cattle ranchers, and spend a lot of time with the land. Nature is too amazing to describe in words...spiders, snakes and all! It provides a welcome respite from all of the burdensome political BS and stress of the conditions of our world today. Young people would probably find healing if they spent more time with nature and less time on their *^&%$ing devices! Just my .02 worth. A subscriber
Amazing, "late life cattle rancher" is the way to do it!
You are a great writer. Read the 1600 by Carlo Versano. It is connected to Newsweek. He is a Dem. I am a Republican. But the length of his podcast is perfect. Makes you think..but short enough that you can focus completely on it.
Podcast transcription was great
IIRC you live in the pacific nw. We have the same spiders!
Hey, I was disappointed by your take on the Tucker / Fuentes thing. You didn’t engage with the argument fairly. Nobody is saying “you’re not allowed to invite someone on your podcast.” That’s a strawman.
Of course people can interview Fuentes. But if you do, the obligation is to challenge him, not coddle him. If you platform him because you agree with him and want to amplify his message, that is a problem.
There are enemies to the right and to the left. An intellectually honest movement needs lines in both directions.
Should you debate people across those lines? Absolutely.
But if you do, it should be crystal clear that you’re in disagreement. And you need to push back, hard, on people like Fuentes, Cooper, Carroll. That is something Tucker is failing to do, and is a problem, and deserves criticism.
David, I agree. Chris' take of the Tucker/Fuentes thing was uncharacteristically lame.
Rufo you have totally lost your focus.
No. I am not interested in a monthly spider photo contest.