Tonight's debate

[El Rojo]

DOJ Indicts JD Vance For Brutally Beating 3 Women

NEW YORK, NY — The excited mood among Republicans following last night's vice presidential debate was quickly squelched by the breaking news that the Department of Justice had indicted Ohio Senator J.D. Vance for brutally beating three women.

babylonbee.com

 

[attitude]

The mental gymnastics people on Reddit are doing to try and explain how Waltz won is fucking hilarious.

 

[rcmike]

He is super passionate about his friends, the school shooters..

Either he is so stupid he doesn't understand, or he is so stupid he can't communicate, or maybe he just likes school shooters...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1841555105696674055

 

[clarence]

I would bet the opposite. They know now they need to get it done before they count the votes.

They've a much better chance against Trump than Vance.

Trump's polarizing enough to make election fraud somewhat believable.

Not Vance (since he didn't come across as "weird," radical, or otherwise unlikeable).

Especially post-assassination when he'll get a significant vote just so as to not reward the tactic.

 

[Racey]

 

[COCA COLA COWBOY]

I like to watch the "other side" from time to time just to try and get both sides and see if I can understand their thought process. My wife watches Newsmax only and when she is home it is her go to. I personally am over the media and choose to read facts....if I can find them. With that said, I had to stream NBC, ABC and MCNBC this morning to see what they were saying. It's literally like they did not watch the debate or they are so jaded with their own hate they don't see the world for what it is.

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/o...-to-the-vice-presidential-debate-220634181616

 

[Racey]

I like to watch the "other side" from time to time just to try and get both sides and see if I can understand their thought process. My wife watches Newsmax only and when she is home it is her go to. I personally am over the media and choose to read facts....if I can find them. With that said, I had to stream NBC, ABC and MCNBC this morning to see what they were saying. It's literally like they did not watch the debate or they are so jaded with their own hate they don't see the world for what it is.



https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/o...-to-the-vice-presidential-debate-220634181616

It's option 3, they are pushing an agenda, not reporting news

 

[COCA COLA COWBOY]

It's option 3, they are pushing an agenda, not reporting news

I understand that, but it's truly amazing that citizens are so oblivious to the what is happening in this world.

 

[Racey]

I understand that, but it's truly amazing that citizens are so oblivious to the what is happening in this world.

All that matters to the left is seizing power. Any activity done in furtherance of that goal is completely acceptable, this includes lying, fabricating stories, denying reality, etc etc etc.

 

[500bbc]

I like to watch the "other side" from time to time just to try and get both sides and see if I can understand their thought process. My wife watches Newsmax only and when she is home it is her go to. I personally am over the media and choose to read facts....if I can find them. With that said, I had to stream NBC, ABC and MCNBC this morning to see what they were saying. It's literally like they did not watch the debate or they are so jaded with their own hate they don't see the world for what it is.

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/o...-to-the-vice-presidential-debate-220634181616

The propaganda arm of the left...

 

[DRYHEAT]

He is super passionate about his friends, the school shooters..

Either he is so stupid he doesn't understand, or he is so stupid he can't communicate, or maybe he just likes school shooters...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1841555105696674055

You would certainly think that a schoolteacher would have better communication skills that’s for damn sure.

 

[RitcheyRch]

 

[Sportin' Wood]

The tired suggestion that illegal immigration is driving up housing costs is getting old. It's Blackrock and other investment groups driving up housing costs. That is why the politicians do this dance around the question. They want to eat from the trough. At least they could try and understand the rational behind using federal land for housing. That could be believable if they explained the checkerboard ownership of public land that is hard to manage and would make a good trade. I like JD, but he bombed that question IMHO. Walz was a bumbling idiot when asked his plan, it was jibberish.

 

[Racey]

The tired suggestion that illegal immigration is driving up housing costs is getting old. It's Blackrock and other investment groups driving up housing costs. That is why the politicians do this dance around the question. They want to eat from the trough. At least they could try and understand the rational behind using federal land for housing. That could be believable if they explained the checkerboard ownership of public land that is hard to manage and would make a good trade. I like JD, but he bombed that question IMHO. Walz was a bumbling idiot when asked his plan, it was jibberish.

Blackrock and these other funds getting basically free loans to scoop the property up doesn't help the problem, but When you have 25-30 millions extra people in a country of 330.... That's like what? 8%? It's massive, it makes a huge difference. Those people are also customers of Blackrock, or take up other properties on the market displacing others to blackrock.property. Extra demand, and not a small amount.

And if you have federal land in certain areas that's not being used, AND a housing supply problem. That is literally the 1st thing that can be done to bring more supply without getting directly involved in the market via legislation, rules, red tape, etc.

 

[DC-88]

Blackrock and these other funds getting basically free loans to scoop the property up doesn't help the problem, but When you have 25-30 millions extra people in a country of 330.... That's like what? 8%? It's massive, it makes a huge difference. Those people are also customers of Blackrock, or take up other properties on the market displacing others to blackrock.property. Extra demand, and not a small amount.

And if you have federal land in certain areas that's not being used, AND a housing supply problem. That is literally the 1st thing that can be done to bring more supply without getting directly involved in the market via legislation, rules, red tape, etc.

I gotta' say, it's been "feeling" for a while now to me with my residential construction work like the illegals that were already coming into the US , coupled with the flood of last 4 years has affected the lower population areas I build in. The Covid scam contributed also. Almost all the customers and buyers I know with money were, at least in their minds "pushed out" of their more populated areas due to rapid population growth and the subsequent deterioration of their infrastructure, services available, and general quality of life. The 25-30 Million extra sure seems like it has to play a role. It's been good for business in our case, but not worth the short term gain in the long run at the expense of the country as we knew it.

 

[Sportin' Wood]

Blackrock and these other funds getting basically free loans to scoop the property up doesn't help the problem, but When you have 25-30 millions extra people in a country of 330.... That's like what? 8%? It's massive, it makes a huge difference. Those people are also customers of Blackrock, or take up other properties on the market displacing others to blackrock.property. Extra demand, and not a small amount.

And if you have federal land in certain areas that's not being used, AND a housing supply problem. That is literally the 1st thing that can be done to bring more supply without getting directly involved in the market via legislation, rules, red tape, etc.

We agree on the federal land item, I'm just pointing out that Rs are doing a bad job of explaining it.

I'm not buying the illegals driving up housing costs. My perception is they are in government subsidized multifamily options, tents, or stacked a dozen deep in a rental. I could be convinced otherwise with some data.

Sales to investor speculators drove up the housing costs, be it institutional, boomers, or just younger folks with the HUSTLE to buy them. I don't take issue with that, other then they need to stop saying that wide open immigration drove up housing costs. It's not a believable argument in current form and it detracts from the message.

I'm sure I could rattle off a half dozen ways to make affordable housing. Some ideas in no particular order that might be strung together.

• Revisit the VA loan program. Lock in lower rates, provide additional tax relief for our men and women who served and make the dream of home ownership a reality.
• Reopen US based lumber mills and loosen the regulations around timber harvesting.
• Streamline any federal regulations required for development of raw land
• Neuter the ability of legal defense advocates that earn a living from federal lawsuits
• Provide federal funding to states and counties whom prioritize housing for families for infrastructure projects that support development.
• Consider options that make institutional investments in residential housing less attractive.
• Restrict ownership of real estate by citizens or corporations based in countries that do not extend the same courtesy to Americans.
• Require Citizens and corporations of China to liquidate all real estate holdings within a specific time period or face seizure of the assets to be sold at auction.

Buyers don't drive up housing prices FWIW, sellers do.

 

[4Waters]

View attachment 1435275

 

[DRYHEAT]

We agree on the federal land item, I'm just pointing out that Rs are doing a bad job of explaining it.

I'm not buying the illegals driving up housing costs. My perception is they are in government subsidized multifamily options, tents, or stacked a dozen deep in a rental. I could be convinced otherwise with some data.

Sales to investor speculators drove up the housing costs, be it institutional, boomers, or just younger folks with the HUSTLE to buy them. I don't take issue with that, other then they need to stop saying that wide open immigration drove up housing costs. It's not a believable argument in current form and it detracts from the message.

I'm sure I could rattle off a half dozen ways to make affordable housing. Some ideas in no particular order that might be strung together.

• Revisit the VA loan program. Lock in lower rates, provide additional tax relief for our men and women who served and make the dream of home ownership a reality.
• Reopen US based lumber mills and loosen the regulations around timber harvesting.
• Streamline any federal regulations required for development of raw land
• Neuter the ability of legal defense advocates that earn a living from federal lawsuits
• Provide federal funding to states and counties whom prioritize housing for families for infrastructure projects that support development.
• Consider options that make institutional investments in residential housing less attractive.
• Restrict ownership of real estate by citizens or corporations based in countries that do not extend the same courtesy to Americans.
• Require Citizens and corporations of China to liquidate all real estate holdings within a specific time period or face seizure of the assets to be sold at auction.

Buyers don't drive up housing prices FWIW, sellers do.

Here is a stale article I found interesting. I’m not disagreeing with you, I’m sure one of our real estate gurus could probably come up with better information.

So if an individual owns a few income properties, does that make them a terrible person that’s causing the housing crisis also?

This particular article was difficult to read on my phone, but it seems that the greatest crisis started a few years ago. Maybe it was Covid or maybe it was the millions of immigrants rushing the border. And let’s not forget cheap money making every Tom, Dick and Harry a multi house investor.

No, Wall Street investors haven't bought 44% of homes this year

Despite the hype, big investors are still a tiny percentage of homebuyers and not to blame for extremely low housing inventory.

www.housingwire.com

 

[MPHSystems]

 

[Sportin' Wood]

Here is a stale article I found interesting. I’m not disagreeing with you, I’m sure one of our real estate gurus could probably come up with better information.

So if an individual owns a few income properties, does that make them a terrible person that’s causing the housing crisis also?

This particular article was difficult to read on my phone, but it seems that the greatest crisis started a few years ago. Maybe it was Covid or maybe it was the millions of immigrants rushing the border. And let’s not forget cheap money making every Tom, Dick and Harry a multi house investor.

No, Wall Street investors haven't bought 44% of homes this year

Despite the hype, big investors are still a tiny percentage of homebuyers and not to blame for extremely low housing inventory.

www.housingwire.com

I don't mean to create the wrong impression about housing prices. I'm only opposed to the talking points of the Republicans regarding immigration as the single reason prices went up. I find that to be a mistaken talking point that is not believable and undermines their credibility.

I do however dislike China citizens buying US real estate. I'm guessing the RE market is not as attractive to the institutional investors right now.

Edit: Revisiting the terrible people question. No I don't think buying houses qualifies someone for terrible status on that item alone, but I might find them terrible for other reasons.

I readily admit, I might have a unique position on housing prices. I think the sellers own some of the responsibility for driving up housing prices. It is an extremely hot topic right now in our state, ever commercial break is attacking the rich out of stater who drove up housing in Montana, but they required a willing seller. I say it was the greedy seller who sold out his neighbors.

 

[RitcheyRch]

 

[DRYHEAT]

I don't mean to create the wrong impression about housing prices. I'm only opposed to the talking points of the Republicans regarding immigration as the single reason prices went up. I find that to be a mistaken talking point that is not believable and undermines their credibility.

I do however dislike China citizens buying US real estate. I'm guessing the RE market is not as attractive to the institutional investors right now.

Edit: Revisiting the terrible people question. No I don't think buying houses qualifies someone for terrible status on that item alone, but I might find them terrible for other reasons.

I readily admit, I might have a unique position on housing prices. I think the sellers own some of the responsibility for driving up housing prices. It is an extremely hot topic right now in our state, ever commercial break is attacking the rich out of stater who drove up housing in Montana, but they required a willing seller. I say it was the greedy seller who sold out his neighbors.

I kind of agree on both points, but nobody’s holding a gun to a buyers head to overpay for a piece of property either.

It pisses me off that we are selling American soil to foreign entities that hate us. I kind of blame the greedy Americans for selling out, but that’s beyond my pay grade. I guess the free market has a slippery slope of gray, red and green.

 

[Mini Kat]

He is super passionate about his friends, the school shooters..

Either he is so stupid he doesn't understand, or he is so stupid he can't communicate, or maybe he just likes school shooters...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1841555105696674055

I'm wondering if Cum Harris and Tampo Timothy is the plan B and they scrubbed their original plan A look in the background. Here was plan A.

 

[Racey]

We agree on the federal land item, I'm just pointing out that Rs are doing a bad job of explaining it.

I'm not buying the illegals driving up housing costs. My perception is they are in government subsidized multifamily options, tents, or stacked a dozen deep in a rental. I could be convinced otherwise with some data.

Sales to investor speculators drove up the housing costs, be it institutional, boomers, or just younger folks with the HUSTLE to buy them. I don't take issue with that, other then they need to stop saying that wide open immigration drove up housing costs. It's not a believable argument in current form and it detracts from the message.

I'm sure I could rattle off a half dozen ways to make affordable housing. Some ideas in no particular order that might be strung together.

• Revisit the VA loan program. Lock in lower rates, provide additional tax relief for our men and women who served and make the dream of home ownership a reality.
• Reopen US based lumber mills and loosen the regulations around timber harvesting.
• Streamline any federal regulations required for development of raw land
• Neuter the ability of legal defense advocates that earn a living from federal lawsuits
• Provide federal funding to states and counties whom prioritize housing for families for infrastructure projects that support development.
• Consider options that make institutional investments in residential housing less attractive.
• Restrict ownership of real estate by citizens or corporations based in countries that do not extend the same courtesy to Americans.
• Require Citizens and corporations of China to liquidate all real estate holdings within a specific time period or face seizure of the assets to be sold at auction.

Buyers don't drive up housing prices FWIW, sellers do.

Any house, condo, apartment, etc that is taken by an illegal is one less on the supply side for an actual citizen. The housing vouchers aren't just for government owned housing. They are living everywhere. They never said illegals were the single reason prices are up, it's just one of the major reasons, when you have a 1 minute response you can't explain all the nuances, you have to give the most dramatic blatant example to the audience.

 

[DWC]

The tired suggestion that illegal immigration is driving up housing costs is getting old. It's Blackrock and other investment groups driving up housing costs. That is why the politicians do this dance around the question. They want to eat from the trough. At least they could try and understand the rational behind using federal land for housing. That could be believable if they explained the checkerboard ownership of public land that is hard to manage and would make a good trade. I like JD, but he bombed that question IMHO. Walz was a bumbling idiot when asked his plan, it was jibberish.

How much real estate do investment groups own?

 

[DRYHEAT]

How much real estate do investment groups own?

One of the articles I looked at I thought said around 3%, that sounds low to me, considering how many REIT’s are out there.

The article I read said the highest percentage of income property owners had less than 10 individual properties. Must be all the RDP Land Barrons.

 

[DWC]

One of the articles I looked at I thought said around 3%, that sounds low to me, considering how many REIT’s are out there.

The article I read said the highest percentage of income property owners had less than 10 individual properties. Must be all the RDP Land Barrons.

Haven’t looked it up but sounds about right for single family residential.

 

[Wizard29]

Any house, condo, apartment, etc that is taken by an illegal is one less on the supply side for an actual citizen. The housing vouchers aren't just for government owned housing. They are living everywhere.

This. And they can afford it because they move multiple families into one house. But that's still one house that legal citizens can't get.

It's supply and demand. The demand for housing has been driven up by however many illegals are here in addition to our own population growth. Illegals aren't the sole cause, but they have to live somewhere and wherever that is displaces legal citizens. Do that on a large enough scale and it's enough to affect the supply, which in turn drives prices upward.

 

[MPHSystems]

I blame greedy homeowners like me.

 

[Angler]

I blame greedy homeowners like me.

 

[81Sprint]

 

[Sportin' Wood]

One of the articles I looked at I thought said around 3%, that sounds low to me, considering how many REIT’s are out there.

The article I read said the highest percentage of income property owners had less than 10 individual properties. Must be all the RDP Land Barrons.

I don't live in an Urban area, so I have to judge based on what I see. In my area the housing crisis is 100% because of investment properties, not immigration. I assume if the Housing Crisis is going to a topic for debate in a national election the answer should be more detailed than what we are getting. It seemed that the abortion debate was given more time than 1 minute, so I would argue that Housing could have been given more time.

I should also point out that I don't believe much of what I read and base my opinions on what I see, right or wrong.

 

[angiebaby]

One of the articles I looked at I thought said around 3%, that sounds low to me, considering how many REIT’s are out there.

The article I read said the highest percentage of income property owners had less than 10 individual properties. Must be all the RDP Land Barrons.

I have seen the 3% number also and I think it's incorrect. I think they mean that corps own 3% of the total SFH real estate, but many of them say that is "sales." But they are purchasing new homes, or at least they were during the 3 years of pandemic chaos.

Real-Estate Investors Bought a Record 18% of the U.S. Homes That Sold in the Third Quarter

This was an interesting article on the subject.

https://www.billtrack50.com/blog/investment-firms-and-home-buying/

and a great article from CNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/21/how...le-family-homes-and-put-them-up-for-rent.html

 

[Badchoices03]

Not going to happen. Last thing we need is for trump to go up and act like a clown (which it doesnt take much for him to do) this close to voting.

Agreed, keep Trump away from any debates, leave the debates up to Vance

 

[Racey]

View attachment 1435529

I will never not laugh when i see this meme

 

[Cdog]

 

[DRYHEAT]

I don't live in an Urban area, so I have to judge based on what I see. In my area the housing crisis is 100% because of investment properties, not immigration. I assume if the Housing Crisis is going to a topic for debate in a national election the answer should be more detailed than what we are getting. It seemed that the abortion debate was given more time than 1 minute, so I would argue that Housing could have been given more time.

I should also point out that I don't believe much of what I read and base my opinions on what I see, right or wrong.

I agree with your statement about not believing much of what I read. All data and statistics can be manipulated to read whatever anybody wants.

We all have opinions and make judgments based on what we actually see where we live. Prices and housing availability in Lake Havasu are not because illegal aliens are buying up all the houses. “ it’s those damn rich Californians.”

Debates are a waste of time most of the time in my opinion. When there’s time limitations, it’s hard to cover all points of an issue.

 

[clarence]

Trump just announced to voters in Michigan that he will free up large portions of federally owned lands for investors to set up "special zones" to build new cities, factories, and industries.

He says the zones will have "ultra-low taxes and regulations for American producers. And entice the relocation of entire industries from other countries into our country."

Trump's cities will enable a level of innovation that we haven't seen since the Industrial Revolution.

x.com

x.com

 

[Taboma]

Trump just announced to voters in Michigan that he will free up large portions of federally owned lands for investors to set up "special zones" to build new cities, factories, and industries.

He says the zones will have "ultra-low taxes and regulations for American producers. And entice the relocation of entire industries from other countries into our country."

Trump's cities will enable a level of innovation that we haven't seen since the Industrial Revolution.

x.com

x.com

Did he mention who's pie he's taking the slices from ?

 

[RiverDave]

Trump just announced to voters in Michigan that he will free up large portions of federally owned lands for investors to set up "special zones" to build new cities, factories, and industries.

He says the zones will have "ultra-low taxes and regulations for American producers. And entice the relocation of entire industries from other countries into our country."

Trump's cities will enable a level of innovation that we haven't seen since the Industrial Revolution.

x.com

x.com

What is wrong with the current giant abandoned factories that are doing nothing?

RD

 

[clarence]

What is wrong with the current giant abandoned factories that are doing nothing?

RD

Because Michigan doesn't offer much in the way of Enterprise/Opportunity Zones offering favorable tax rates, regulatory exemptions, or other incentives (the last Republican Mayor left office in 1962).

 

[MPHSystems]

Any house, condo, apartment, etc that is taken by an illegal is one less on the supply side for an actual citizen. The housing vouchers aren't just for government owned housing. They are living everywhere. They never said illegals were the single reason prices are up, it's just one of the major reasons, when you have a 1 minute response you can't explain all the nuances, you have to give the most dramatic blatant example to the audience.

Not to mention, even though it’s only one reason it’s a fairly easy one to resolve. Just deport them.

If a guy steels your catalitic converter do you think: “well, he’s got it now. Might as well let him keep it. He’s just trying to build a better life for himself”?

just because someone got away with breaking into a country doean’t mean they deserve to stay there.

Go break into caniduh and when you get caught, try telling them that you have a right to stay because you already got in. Besides, this is my home now and I can’t go anyplace else. See how that flys with literaly any other country in the history of earth.

 

[angiebaby]

Did he mention who's pie he's taking the slices from ?

View attachment 1435751

View attachment 1435752

Well, much of the federal land looks like this map. Do you see the checkerboard of green and white on the left? The green is USFS land surrounded by private land. The public cannot access this land because of the private land surrounding it. This is a huge issue in Montana for hunters. I feel that, in some areas, especially BLM land, near residential areas, this could be used for housing. Reno has a lot of BLM land right up next to town, for example. Also, every one of these departments fall under the Executive Branch. It could be done.

 

[Taboma]

Well, much of the federal land looks like this map. Do you see the checkerboard of green and white on the left? The green is USFS land surrounded by private land. The public cannot access this land because of the private land surrounding it. This is a huge issue in Montana for hunters. I feel that, in some areas, especially BLM land, near residential areas, this could be used for housing. Reno has a lot of BLM land right up next to town, for example. Also, every one of these departments fall under the Executive Branch. It could be done.

View attachment 1435987

OK, but what I posted was in regards to this ---- " Trump just announced to voters in Michigan that he will free up large portions of federally owned lands for investors to set up "special zones" to build new cities, factories, and industries."

In the case of Michigan, BLM isn't involved. It's National Forest, Forest Service, Game and Fish and a small portion of Dept of Defense, I was just curious which one was Trump addressing ?

 

[angiebaby]

OK, but what I posted was in regards to this ---- " Trump just announced to voters in Michigan that he will free up large portions of federally owned lands for investors to set up "special zones" to build new cities, factories, and industries."

In the case of Michigan, BLM isn't involved. It's National Forest, Forest Service, Game and Fish and a small portion of Dept of Defense, I was just curious which one was Trump addressing ?

It's my understanding this is a national plan, not just for Michigan. But here is an example of the hodge-podge checkerboard that is part of our national forest in Michigan. Why does it matter which department he was addressing? I doubt he had any specific land tracts in mind. He is a generalist. We have a lot of federal land, we have a housing shortage. Is this much different than when federal land was carved up in 1862 and subsequent homestead acts? I'm not advocating selling all of our public lands off, but specifically here in the West, we have a LOT of public lands that are off of the state tax roll. In Nevada, that number is 85%. We have a lot of federal land, and a lot of homes that need to be built to accommodate the need.

 

[clarence]

Orania

 

[Cole 392]

View attachment 1435309