Comments on: Economic depressions for dummies

By: David

David — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:49:12 +0000

Sorry hadn’t read many of the previous posts had been linked here from bubblepedia so hadn’t seen it in context.
I used the word refused because when you have so many people encouraging, almost pushing you to land speculate it is an active decision rather than a passive one (also was quiet angry at the way society seemed to value the activity of flipping property over usefull endevour)

By: Bryan Kavanagh

Bryan Kavanagh — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 01:15:55 +0000

This is only part of a commentary I’m doing as the economic depression rolls out, David. Whilst this one does hang together with some of the argument that has proceeded it in my other commentaries, I agree with you that, seen on its own, it’s missing a few legs.

Interestingly, so does your sentence that says you REFUSE not to speculate. Wouldn’t you simply say ‘choose’ not to speculate unless you see it as a societal ill – which might then have elicited your word ‘refuse’?

If more people chose not (or refused!) to speculate, as you have, we would not be about to reap the whirlwind of this bursting bubble (from 1999 to 2008). Australians put $2.1 trillion into real estate during this period, and the Land Values Research Group estimates that some $590 billion of it (28%) was in the bubble. If history is a guide, this amount will need to be ‘deleveraged’. That’s going to generate a financial and social breakdown that near-useless politicians haven’t come close to addressing with stimulus packages or bailouts.

To complete the loop for you on this occasion, at least, we need to address the structural fault created in economies by escalating taxation and land prices by greater land value capture and less taxation.

By: David

David — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 21:33:29 +0000

while i agree with what i can determine to be the sentiment of the story (incedentely i live on a decent wage and could afford to property speculate but refuse to {to my “worth” detriment}) your agument is missing some of the linking logic hence is likely only to appeal to people that already agree with you.