this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2026
670 points (99.0% liked)

politics

28244 readers
1561 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Go ahead, vote MAGA in the midterms if you're curious how fucked your life can get.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 262 points 2 weeks ago (15 children)

Here's the thing that I think a lot of people don't understand about home ownership: Housing prices going up is only beneficial if you plan to sell.

We were (very) lucky and were able to get in on the tail end of the early 2010s housing crisis and leverage the first-time homebuyer incentives that were offered at the time to buy a modest house. It cost $245k. It's currently worth $550k, and people seem to think this means we made $300k in profit! Yay us! And technically, on paper, sure, we did, but in reality, no.

Housing prices across the board are up, and we still need a place to live, so if we sold this place, we'd have to buy something else (at the same grossly inflated prices), or we'd have to rent (at grossly inflated prices). If the $550k this place is worth on paper buys us something that would have cost $245k in 2010, we haven't gained anything.

Either way, we have no intention of selling, so we will never see a cent of that increased value. What we are seeing, however, is increased property taxes since the property has, on paper, doubled in value.

What I'm getting at is, this doesn't benefit homeowners, it benefits housing investors, who are the group Trump really wants to prop up.

[–] Dadifer@lemmy.world 143 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

You know who it is good for? Boomers who are selling their big houses to go live in a condo or nursing home. Guess who votes for this shit.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 55 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Also good for people who want to flee the US before the bubble pops.

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 36 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

We absolutely want to, and if having money was the only barrier to doing so, we'd sell in an instant, but unfortunately it's simply not an option for a lot of people

[–] danekrae@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What's the plan, if not welcome in the new country? Or it's invaded by the US?

[–] coyootje@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

There's plenty of countries (in Europe or elsewhere) where Americans are still welcome. Here in the Netherlands we have quite a American community and we like having them, as long as they're not maga crazies.

[–] Asafum@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

For me it's not even a matter of who is accepting of Americans, but who will allow me to move there. I'm an "uneducated" factory schmuck and the vast majority of countries have some professional or monetary requirements I can't meet :(

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 25 points 2 weeks ago

And, you know, US Presidents whose families own real estate empires.

[–] MuskyMelon@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

If no one can afford the boomer homes, the houses stay unsold so there's a balance when trying to maximise profit.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 14 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

As mentioned above, that's fine for investors actually. They don't want individuals buying homes. They want people renting them. Across a long enough period, renting will be more profitable so they are happy to buy them up even if your average person can't afford the mortgage.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Lexam@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago

Same here. We bought our modest house and have been slowly updating it. But we never plan on moving unless we absolutely have to. So I don't need or want it to increase in value. The value is it's my home.

[–] TheRealKuni@piefed.social 11 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

What you do gain is equity. And while that equity can’t be used to pay for a new house, it can be borrowed against cheaply.

A second mortgage, such as a home equity loan or a home equity line of credit, means you can use some of that value in your house for big purchases or projects without the higher interest rates you would pay for other types of loans or a credit card.

It’s one of the reasons home ownership is financially superior to renting, even if your monthly payment might not be that different. Owning property has inherent value.

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 25 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I have a mortgage payment already, and groceries have tripled in what feels like a year and a half. My property taxes went up $200 a MONTH this year. What makes you think I’m in a position to make more fucking payments?

Equity is a fucking scam, brother.

[–] lectricleopard@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

I agree in general. But it is nice to know there is an option in an emergency (cancer, or totalling a brand new car or something). Cold comfort i know but its not nothing.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] fizzle@quokk.au 7 points 2 weeks ago

Exactly.

Our home has doubled in value in the last 7 years, but life would be better if it had've stayed at the same price.

We're lucky enough to have somewhere to live but as a community it really sucks that its so hard for so many people - the rental market is just awful, inhumane even.

God forbid we want to buy a bigger home with some more room for the kids - upgrading just cost twice as much.

My parents are boomers and have been beneficiaries of the eternal increase in property values throughout their lives. They're in their 80s and really need to retire, but can't really afford to. Increasing property prices aren't really good for anyone.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] skozzii@lemmy.ca 50 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

He is setting USA up for the worst economic crisis in history.

The biggest, the best, the most beautiful financial downfall the world has ever seen.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Crashed economies hurt the poor. The rich use their wealth to buy up resources, realestate, stocks, etc. on the cheap and then ride it out in their luxury homes while the rest of us stand in the bread lines.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] D_C@sh.itjust.works 46 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

"Who didn't work very hard"
Says the obese orange paedo that has never worked a day in his life.
The only thing this fat tub of corruption ever worked hard at was finding and raping little children. Sweaty cunt.

[–] flop_leash_973@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Shit not even finding the little children. He had Epstein for that part of it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tonytins@pawb.social 38 points 2 weeks ago

Says the laziest person on the planet.

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 30 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It's OK guys, I'm planning on buying a home later this year. Knowing my luck, property values should plummet sharply shortly after I do that.

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 14 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Alternatively, hyper inflation will reduce your debt to nothing and you'll still have a house.

[–] jacksilver@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Assuming you still have a job/income.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 29 points 2 weeks ago (17 children)

LOL, I cannot wait until I have my next IRL conversations with the more-leftist-than-thou dumbasses that sat out or voted third party and the Enlightened Centrists that voted for Taco because they fell for the right wing/Russian agitprop that Biden's economy was so terrible and/or that Kamala was genocidal and/or something something "gerontocracy".

JFC.

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 16 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Maybe you should devote that energy toward more constructive organization efforts within your party, or good faith gestures that build trust and solidarity with new allies? As someone who did hold his nose and voted for the uninspiring, inept Democrat pick who went on to eat shit I have to say this preoccupation with rubbing your party's failure in the face of anyone you failed to reach is... Not inspiring, to put it charitably.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Christian USA basically had to choose between the Antichist and your average capital-loving politician and they went "fuck it, I'll vote for satan cause he said he I'll make gas cheaper.". And the pedo-guy still has a 40% approval rating at the current moment. This country is a lost cause.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 28 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

I worked my ass off. Now I can pay for a place to live and keep paying it off no matter what for 30 years. No matter what? Yeah anything happens to me, that means my family looses their house for life because they are too young to work now but not having a house will make it harder for them to ever get one.

I'm basically a slave.

Now if I were to sale my home, then I could probably afford to buy a smaller house and keep paying even more! Yey! That's how math works right? You get 10 dollars for your house so that you can buy half that house for 11 dollars! Yey!

[–] lofuw@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago

I’m basically a slave.

That's the goal. Whatever keeps workers working is what the ruling class will force upon us.

It's why we never invested in fusion energy. Expensive fossil fuels keeps people working.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Furbag@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago

I hate him.

My dream is to be a homeowner and it's slipping away faster than I can chase after it.

I fucking hate him so much.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 23 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

vote MAGA in the midterms if you're curious how fucked your life can get.

Or don’t vote. Again. Either will have the same effect.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 23 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Hahahahaha! This is so unbelievably fucking ridiculous.

All while they're crying about the falling birth rates.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] FauxPseudo@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Ask a Trump supporter why they want higher property taxes.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lofuw@sh.itjust.works 17 points 2 weeks ago

Donald Trump never had to work for a house.

[–] Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Housing should become regulated infrastructure and stop being speculative assets. Fuck the real estate sector

[–] SippyCup@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Why stop there?

Guarantee housing with a housing stipend and impose massive taxes on additional properties

[–] DylanMc6@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 weeks ago

How about this: rent should be abolished, housing prices should be controlled through a planned market economy, and property should be taxed through a land value tax. It's time that Americans see the cat.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 16 points 2 weeks ago

If only salary and net worth would be tied to the actual effort made at work.

Almost all CEOs would be homeless.

[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 weeks ago

Soon there will be a critical mass of people who have nothing left to lose. Thats why the Republicans and Democrats need a secret paramilitary police force in the streets. If they don’t quell uprisings and arrest activists (i.e. “domestic terrorists”), the citizens may gain enough momentum to enact another New Deal, and the wealthy benefactors of both parties will do everything they can to stop that from happening.

[–] chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

Per usual, read the article and not just the headline.

Sounds like he's talking about banning investor purchases of single family homes. Which is a good thing.

I fucking hate Trump and he's wrong about pushing housing prices higher, but banning investor purchases of homes is the right call, so he's kinda right.

Also, crashing housing value would destroy anybody who has invested in their home as equity. What needs to happen is a leveling off and investment in cheaper starter home builds, as well as a push for first time homebuyer loans that are low interest and up front down payment.

I bought my first home on a HomePath mortgage. No PMI, 5% down, and reasonable interest rate that was only a bit higher than a traditional mortgage.

Getting people into their FIRST homes and making sure they aren't beat out by cash offers from investors it's the correct way forward.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Why should I care about someone's equity? Houses are for shelter and privacy. Why do we treat them as investment vehicles?

My car doesn't become more valuable as it ages. Neither does my computer, or my clothing, or anything else. If they want their home to become more valuable, they should invest in improvements to it, not just depend on all houses getting more expensive for everyone else forever. It's a ludicrous, unsustainable idea.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Pika@rekabu.ru 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Appreciate the nuance, though I think that "house as equity" thing should definitely be dismantled, at least over time.

House is a place to live, period. The rest is a fucked predicament we found ourselves in thanks to big investors.

But yes, first house should be made super accessible, and any subsequent ones could be sold for a major markup.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Prior_Industry@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Honestly curious to see how this pans out. Trump's polling still seems higher than it should be given the shit show he's presiding over.

Here in the UK, we appear desperate to touch the Reform stove. I despair.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago

Makes sense if everybody's dad can give them a million or so to get started. Trump worked very hard to get that million from his unloving father, so I get it. /s

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago

I feel sad for the young people that voted for him, but maybe they’ll learn something from this. 

[–] J92@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What a shite take from the man who has no sense of real-world costs.

The price of a house is roughly, give or take, about one house. People might trade up and supplement the difference or have had savings from between purchases, but that initial upfront, first-time cost is the hardest one. It's not a grand difference of space between rungs on the ladder, it's that more and more of the lower rungs are getting actively broken off for the benefit of those with a surplus to sell.

Scum.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›