Report Says Immigration Crucial for Housing Recovery

I think the study is right, except they assume that a rebound in the housing market is desirable at all. Which I don’t — it was only a matter of subprime lending mania and low interest rates that drove housing sky high. I’m sorry for those of you “underwater” in your mortgage, but it’s just plain wrong, and definitely not condusive to the working middle class and for the Sailerian concept of “affordable family formation” for a 3BR 2BA house to cost $900,000 in the Silicon Valley.

Even in St. Louis, an English Tudor style ranch that listed for $109,000 in 1993 listed again for $450,000 in 2006, that was in the upper middle class new money part of town, Chesterfield.

Just for the record, if I were in charge during the subprime crash, I would have proposed these two measures: (1) subsidies for the interest delta, i.e. the amount that an ARM adjusted upward because of interest rate changes, to those who would have not been able to afford their new payments, (2) interest subsidies, delta or whole, for those homeowners who are “underwater,” and (3) forever prohibited affirmative action mortgage lending, ARMs, and brought back the tried and true 20/28 floors, i.e. 20% down payment, payment is no more than 28% of income. That would have cost money, but far far less than the trillions of stimulus, porkulus, spendulus and bailouts that have happened since September of last year. Unlike Pierce/NA, I don’t think it’s a good idea to “bring it all down man,” those who think that have nothing to lose to begin with. They forget that in the American experience, crises turn government to the left. The only time in recent Western history when government turned a hard right was 1920s/30s Germany, and obviously that will never happen again.

I always knew that it was just a matter of time before an article such as this one would come out in a major mainstream business news publication. The underlying message is that the builders, developers, Realtors, and money brokers deserve protection and another bite at the apple at the expense of finishing the job of ruining the nation.

My guess is that the 2010 census will indicate something on the order of three to four habitable bedrooms in this country for every inhabitant. (this, notwithstanding the fact that possibly millions of illegal aliens live in housing units at the rate of four or more people per bedroom) And we haven’t even touched the billions of sq. ft. of unused retail space (constructed in the last 35 years) that is only serving as impermeable surface area and mural space for (mostly Black and Hispanic) youth with spray paint.

What really needs mentioning is that we might not even be having this discussion had we not exported our manufacturing base; thus giving rise to the political promotion of unneeded construction as a false replacement economic base.

This is complete nonsense. It is well known that this country has a glut of housing already and certainly doesn’t require MORE!(Ron Paul has noted this many times) Moreover, we need more open spaces, more nature, less clutter and sprawl - not more “housing” to fill up with “immigrants.” Sounds like typical Forbes thinking - money and greed first…everything else second!

This idea is a Population Ponzi Scheme for the real estate industry — the idea that we can only have a good economy if we continue to import ever greater numbers of “consumers.” This is the same stupid idea our shortsighted politicians propose to save Social Security and Medicare. Like all Ponzi Schemes, this idea is bankrupt and will lead to disaster, because it requires endless, ever larger increases in immigration to sustain it. We all know that all Ponzi Schemes eventually collapse.

Not only does such a Population Ponzi Scheme ignore the ultimate disaster (massive overpopulation which overwhelms our capacity to supply oil, electricity, water, landfill, education, health, policing, jails, and social services), but also considers only one aspect of immigration. Yes, if you double the population, it does increase the overall economy, but it also causes hundreds of other problems, including increasing social stress and racial conflict. Ah, but our friends at Forbes are only concerned with money (greed).

There are dozens of reasons to REDUCE immigration, including lowered housing costs for young people who cannot afford the ridiculous prices caused by too many people competing to live in one locality. Lowered population would reduce the need to continually destroy farm land and natural areas for housing and shopping centers. Reduced population would mean large tax savings, because we would not need to build new power plants, water and sewage facilities, schools, fire and police stations, airports, jails, etc. No, increased immigration will not save us — reduced immigration will.

“Immigration Crucial for Housing Recovery”

What good is increasing housing sales through massive immigration, when no jobs are created after the immigrants are housed? What kind of immigrants are we talking about here, rich, self-sufficient immigrants that don’t require jobs? This suggestion of the Harvard economists is nothing more than a return to creating another housing bubble, adding to the collapse of the one we are still suffering from. You don’t encourage, in my opinion, a massive real estate market through massive immigration, until a “Real Economy”, where something is actually produced is created.

“Fewer people have been moving to the U.S. since job opportunities have slumped, and if this continues “a deep, prolonged recession would likely suppress immigration to levels that are never fully made up.”

Lower immigration, fewer resources used, less social benefits paid out, less turmoil and fighting, more classroom space, fewer doctors and other professionals necessary, etc.

Are these people totally imbecillic or do they have at least part of their brains still on an active level?

Our founding fathers understood that some things are more precious than money. They risked their lives and FORTUNES for freedom. Today our so called betters, such as Mr. Forbes, Mr. and Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Jimma Carter, etc. think that destroying a great nation, a civilized and inventive culture, and displacing it’s native born sons is worth a few pieces of paper currency. Men of no values.

The problem is not that houses are presently too cheap. They’re now just barely becoming affordable for a lot of middle class people. My brother lives in California and was priced out of the market for years. Only now is he seriously looking for a condo. The problem is that houses got way too expensive during the real estate bubble and too many fools (of all races) borrowed too much money to buy them. Hint: If you can’t put at least 20% down, pay a fixed rate no gimmicks mortgage, and still have enough cash each month to pay all your expenses and save a a little money for emergencies, you can’t afford the house. The last thing we need is a bunch of immigrants pushing housing prices up to unaffordable levels again.

It’s always seemed strange to me that so many people think that higher food prices are bad, higher insurance prices are bad, higher clothing expenses are bad, higher medical costs are bad, higher commuting costs are bad, but higher housing costs are good.

What is it with financial publications? Money above all else.

These are the people who would justify bringing millions of Africans to the US because it would be great for the US economy.

A country attempting to sustain itself by massive colonial invasions and construction to house them is no longer a nation.
Please change the name of US to a more accurate description; marking a line in time when US no longer existed under constitutional rules/laws. US is nothing of its founders. Then, at least, history will show the dramatic change which made the US another nation. V

Harvard can also say that piling wood on a bonfire will cause heat.

Of course immigrants stimulate the building sector, but, like a large wood fire, you must continually stoke the real estate market with more immigrants to maintain the radiance.

These Harvard brains aren’t saying much of value.

Notice the immediate bias in the article, inherent right in the first sentence:

“A perceived strain on government resources has caused some Americans to begrudge the country’s immigrant population.”

The word perceive implies that one is comprehending through the mind and other senses a thing or event within a certain (and perhaps limited) point of view and perception. Hence, right off the bat, the authors of the paper are able to belittle anyone who disagrees with them about their great economic and housing recovery engine of even MORE immigration.

Never mind if you have to pay higher and higher taxes for reduced and more shoddy service. Never mind that police forces are being strained both on the job (higher crime rates that third worlders enrich us with) and off. (having to take same third worlders in AA hiring) Never mind the rapidly declining state—and higher costs—of education. The list goes on and on…but even for people who have to live with it in the real world, it’s just a matter of perception, right?

Maybe I’m just splitting one hair too many on this (and by all means let me know if I am!) but I do recall another excellent post right here on AmRen which delved into pretty much the same thing with regards to the actual language and wording used by these type of smug, ivory tower academics. I get a feeling we’ll be seeing a lot more subtle language like this, as “academics” use all of their rhetorical skills in an increasing and vain attempt to deny reality.

I’m starting to think its really not the immigrant nor the black man that is my enemy.
Its that rich lilly white liberal who lives in a gated community and has never stepped foot in a mixed lower income area, like most of us here.

I think we need to change the direction

The fact is if America’s population - driven by immigration - had never increased so rapidly, then all the new houses never had needed to be built in the first place.
Therefore so much money (borrowed from China by deadbeats), would never have never been thrown into the black-hole in the first place (it might have even found a more useful home for itself), and the World wouldn’t be mired in this hopeless depression (perhaps worse than the 1930s slump, only time will tell).
But, of course, that’s too simple an analysis for all these ‘smart Harvard economists’, who will argue black is white - as along as it runs to 2000 pages and contains impenetrable graphs and jargon.

Why does the article come across as pure propaganda? We DO NOT NEED more housing/home construction. There are plenty of decent homes in all price ranges offered for sale.

If the building market is flat for a decade, that would certainly be far better than ripping up more prime land to build yet more ticky-tacky housing tracts. Yes, even the uber-priced housing tracts mean the destruction of land. Besides, given the reality builders prefer to hire illegal immigrants over qualified White Americans, who cares if the building trade stays flat. The construction companies are getting no more than they deserve!

Another bold face from Immigration Enthusiasts. There are many of them in the economics profession.

The dominant economic pardigm in academia and and beltway think tanks is neoclassical economics. Libertarian economics is an even more extreme version of this model. The core logic of this econmic pardign is:GROW,GROW AND GROW SOME MORE OR DIE!!! But if the real world is taken into account-and this certainly seems to be a very good idea-it is then manifestly obvious that:Grow,grow,grow and grow some more and die.

Neoclassical and Libertarian economists are propagandists for the corporations. The corporate inner logic is to maximze profit as fast as possible regardless of the destruction they inflict on th environment on local communities and a nation as a whole. WE do not have to acept this.

The logical conclusion of corporate logic is that a strong economy requires the race-replacement of the Native Born White Americans. This is another bold face lie that I do not accept. Native Born White Americans should not accept this. There is no econmic argument for the race-replacement of Native Born White Americans.

It is not a coincidence that Eeconomic Department Chairs are funded by Corporations.

“These are the people who would justify bringing millions of Africans to the US because it would be great for the US economy.”

Exactly! If massive immigration increases customers at WalMart or fast-food restaurants, then “it is good for the economy.” If it supplies abundant low-skilled, low-wage employees to work at WalMart and fast-food restaurants, then “it is good for the economy.”

Immigration for economic reasons is based on greed! These “economists” ignore the massive damage done by massive immigration. Money is the only factor considered. There is more to life than having an additional 20 fast-food restaurants in your town.

As I mentioned previoulsy, the core logic of neoclassical economics is grow or die. The politicians,economic “experts” bankers and hedge funds are trying to reinflate the housing bubble. Post-1965 non-white immigrants and their offspring or the huge market necessary to reinflate the housing bubble.

The massive number of post-1965 hispanics and the deregualtion of banking and finacial markets during the Clinton administration are two main reasons for the housing bubble and its collapse. Millions of Native Born White Americans are now bailing out the bankers and politicians who created this mess. And in the process of bailing out the greedy cheating class, Native Born White Americans are rapidly becomming an ever dwindling racial minority within the borders of America.

The probability of the housing bubble collapse occuring- and the collapse of the US economy which it triggered -would have been much lower if the 1965 immigration refrom act had not been passe Without the huge housing demand created by the presence of millions of hispanics who otherwise wouldn’t be in America if it weren’t for the passage ofthe 1965 immigration refrom act, the Economic collapse in 2009 would not have occurered.

The collapse of the housing bubble is a powerfull indictment of post-1965 immigration policy.

Housing prices STILL are not back down to pre-bubble levels anywhere in the country. While a “good deal” can be found occassionally, the prices still haven’t settled back down generally, at least to their lowest point.

I would advise anyone who is going to buy a house or condo to wait for at least two years. At that time I’m pretty sure we’ll finally have a bottom out on this downturn. The one thing in question, however, is how much the market will be backed up with foreclosure inventories at that time.

Beware of media hype that we’re entering an upsurge in the economy, AND housing prices, because there have been some VERY low-key, credible reports indicating a psychological push by the media to “create” the false impression that things are going back up when they’re not. As they do with social issues, they oftentimes report a situation falsely, hoping that “creating” a certain impression will be enough to bring it about.

I buy and sell property for turnover on a very small scale, and I wouldn’t touch anything right now. Amnesty and immigration are only going to make the situation FAR worse.

@Jupiter: Artificially inflating demand is hardly a legitimate libertarian position. It is very much a statist, collectivist proposition that tweaking and prodding by elites can decide what’s good for people better than the people in question can decide for themselves. Needless to say, it’s not economically sound either. They might as well advocate demolishing existing homes to force people to buy new ones.

Any benefits that accrue from these distortions come to the political elites and their handmaidens (a growing number of which falsely claim to be libertarians). These thugs get more opportunity for their social engineering to “fix” the problems that they caused in the first place. The more people spend beyond their means, the more dependent they become, the more readily they can be counted on to support robbing others to bail them out. Importing lots of entitlement hungry third-worlders, pushing the costs of their irresponsible behavior on others, and then inciting them with tall tales of white oppression gets these tyrants twice as far.

I’m all for a strong economy and housing market but not at the exclusion of everything else. Maybe the real “glut” is in the number of immigrants- both legal and illegal. If one subtracted the amount of money lost in real estate due to sluggish demand from the amount of money spent on propping up illegal immigration then the solution is a simple one: bulldoze 5% of the houses and build a fence.

Immigration, especially illegal immigration, is vital to the economic life of America. Without immigration, especially illegal immigration, America will die an economic death. In future our economy will depend on the string of convenience stores along the American-Mexican border (at least until we abolish this racist apartheid line of death) dedicated to providing booze, cigarettes, lottery tickets and prepaid cellphones to immigrants, especially the illegal ones. It will depend on a (not-yet-implemented-due-to-racism) voucher system for the string of Emergi-Cares providing “born in America, at least for the purposes of chain immigration” services along the border to immigrants, especially illegal immigrants. I could go on for days like this, especially the part about “Rope to Hang Us,” a new national franchise retail operator devoted solely to selling lengths of rope along the border; billions waiting to be made.

But, I digress. I bring even better news. There’s a device, just invented, that instantly quintuples the user’s socioeconomic status. The naysayers are all up in arms about how the device causes massive myocardial infarction but who even knows what that is? Get yours today, don’t be left behind!

Immigration policy vis-a-vis Central and South America and Mexico is pretty wide open. Vis-a-vis east Asia it’s relatively closed. Why’s that? Policy makers see Mexicans as slaves, and east Asians as competitors maybe?

4 Anon: “Population Ponzi scheme” is the perfect description of our immigration policy in only three words.

MORE FIRE NEEDED TO PUT OUT FIRES.

That’s what this sounds like.

America’s bankruptcy and the housing and stock inflation (that’s what it was, thought they call it boom) were caused by the alien invasion. Anybody we need more fire to put out the fire is a conman.

Forbes Analysts: E-con-man-ists.