time magA recent issue of Time Magazine carried an article by The Curious Capitalist / Justin Fox entitled 'Get Homes Off Welfare" .  I'm not sure if Fox really is a capitalist at heart, or if he's just curious about the concept. Either way he makes a semi-literate case against the housing industry in general and the governments support of same. He bemoans the fact that homeowners are 'at the receiving end of a truly staggering array of subsidies and tax breaks', hard to put a price tag on but 'clearly in the hundreds of billions of dollars a year.'

He claims that even with all this aid homeowners aren't doing so well and then trots out the old canards about real estate values falling by $4 trillion the past couple years and the millions of foreclosures and people 'booted from their homes'. Like that's somehow 'housings' fault. He bemoans the fact that 80% of mortgage loans this year are backed by the government and their minions Fannie, Freddie & Ginnie at lower interest rates than private market mortgages.  He lumps in the Federal Reserve for good measure blaming them for artificially lowering interest rates by buying up Freddie, Fannie & Ginnie securities.  All of this, according to Fox, puts taxpayers on the hook when things go disastrously wrong, as they so spectacularly have the past couple years.

He goes on to slam the $8,000 first-time homebuyer tax credit and then progresses to the mortgage interest deduction, property tax deductions and capital gains tax breaks , which he believes cost the government at least $100 Billion this year and every year.  With nary a nod to the economic benefit and the hundreds of billions in revenue & jobs provided by housing, building and ancillary industries, he goes on to complain that the bulk of tax benefits flow to the upper end of the income spectrum and to the coasts. 

Let me get this straight - Justin thinks homeowners aren't taxed enough and that too many breaks go to the wealthy and the coastal elitists. Hmmmm, I may have just figured out his position on capitalism after all. That's curious. 

Then he posits that subsidies have a side effect that 'push us to buy rather than rent'. These dastardly subsidies  not only push us to buy, but force us to buy more home than we can afford & drive prices up and that subsequently our homeownership becomes a 'ball and chain' if workers want to move where jobs are more plentiful. He says  that subsidizing housing resulting in appreciating home values is good for sellers but not renters or first time buyers. Maybe he should peddle that claptrap to the 350,000 first-time homebuyers  who have recently become homeowners thanks to this subsidy. 

In fairness, every point Justin raises is valid. But as with so many in the media today, he appears to be in touch with only 1/2 the picture, the half that supports his agenda. Or maybe he was just on deadline and didn't have time to do an objective article, or he just thought this would be clever or something. Who knows. 

He closes his article by stating the obvious - that rising prices are always good news for real estate agents, mortgage lenders and homebuilders.  (Jeez, Justin, what might you conclude about our fortunes during the past 3 years of plummeting prices?) 

This part I love. "These groups are powers in Washington. The National Association of Realtors gave more money than any other group to candidates in the last election ($4 million). Its 1.1 million members can do a lot of lobbying." Justin, you got that 100% correct right there. 

Finally he refers to Dwight Eisenhower's caution against the 'military-industrial complex' by issuing a call-out to the 'real-estate industrial complex'.  I love that. Sure maybe it's just little old Justin Fox, the Curious Capitalist, who has recognized that fact, but it's a start.

I don't know about you but when it comes to advocating on behalf of homeowners, or standing up for private property rights and supporting the industry that drives our economy, I'm damn proud to be part of the real-estate industrial complex. Except, Justin, for future reference, we call ourselves 'The Realtor Party'. Try to get it right if they give you any column inches in the future. Of course that's just my opinion... I could be wrong.

party

 
Post is included in group: The Lounge at Active Rain
Post is included in group: Silent Majority
Post is included in group: Realtors®
Post is included in group: Politics And Real Estate

4 Comments on Time Magazine vs The Realtor Party.

OCT
15
211,787 Points 4 Featured Posts

Gene, great post my friend.

You hit the nail right on the head with this line, "....he appears to be in touch with only 1/2 the picture, the half that supports his agenda."

His slant is obvious. His information is right on. But it's only one side of the coin.

Of course I'd love to see him pen a follow up, but tthat's unlikely and the damage is already done

7:54am • #1
1 Featured Post

Realtor Party?  What happened to the trade association?  How can a ploitical partty extort "dues" from its members?  Particularly when non Realtor(R) brokerages and companies are often treated in ways that were the inspiration for anti-trust and RICO laws.  You really showed your colors by taking a socialist publication and quoting a feeble attempt - good and legitamate arguments, but poorly supplrted.  It is like fighting a straw man.  Wow!  You won the debate!

I guess the reason for so few comments is that you take the NAR web 1.0 position of "We tell you what to do, you don't complain, because you are paying us and it is not up for debate."

 

10:29am • #2
131,691 Points 13 Featured Posts

Craig - thanks for getting it.

Dan - sorry you didn't. Sounds like you may not be particularly well versed on the working of NAR and our legislative agenda. I didn't coin the Realtor Party phrase but I applaud the non-partisan flavor it imparts and the success it has had for our members and our clients. Does it hit a home run every time? No. But it always fights the good fight.

And one of the things I like most is that within our association it is ALWAYS up for debate. And if you can mount a coherent argument instead of a non-sequitur laden rant, it's even more effective.

6:06pm • #3
210,781 Points 39 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Interesting article. Interesting comments from Dan. I rarely read TIME for some reasons I'm sure you know and it looks like Dan may fully support :)

8:28pm • #4

Leave a response…



(optional)
What does the graphic say?
 
Rainmaker_large

Gene Wunderlich - Realtor®, Government Affairs Director

Temecula, CA

More about me…

Southwest Riverside County Association of Realtors

Office Phone: (951) 894-2571

Cell Phone: (951) 205-1911

Email Me

Photobucket




Links

Archives

RSS 2.0 Feed for this blog

Find CA real estate agents and Temecula real estate on ActiveRain.