Market Conditions: Chicago Sales Fell 12% YOY in September as Inventory Remains Low
Chicago’s September sales fell 12% as inventory remains low. It was the lowest number of sales since 2011, which was during the housing bust. (The picture above was actually taken in October 2011 in Lincoln Park.)
From the Illinois Association of Realtors:
The city of Chicago saw a 12.0 percent year-over-year home sales decrease in September 2024 with 1,643 sales, down from 1,867 in September 2023. The median price of a home in the city of Chicago in September 2024 was $350,000, an increase of 7.7 percent from September 2023 when the median price was $325,000.
September sales for the last 18 years:
- 2007: 2172 sales
- 2008: 1816 sales
- 2009: 1918 sales
- 2010: 1403 sales
- 2011: 1498 sales
- 2012: 1845 sales
- 2013: 2395 sales
- 2014: 2242 sales
- 2015: 2414 sales
- 2016: 2398 sales
- 2017: 2355 sales
- 2018: 2040 sales
- 2019: 2006 sales
- 2020: 2635 sales
- 2021: 2684 sales
- 2022: 2064 sales
- 2023: 1867 sales
- 2024: 1643 sales
Median prices for the last 18 years:
- 2007: $267,750
- 2008: $268,600
- 2009: $225,000
- 2010: $180,000
- 2011: $190,000
- 2012: $188,900
- 2013: $230,000
- 2014: $249,000
- 2015: $250,000
- 2016: $260,000
- 2017: $275,000
- 2018: $285,000
- 2019: $292,250
- 2020: $322,350
- 2021: $320,000
- 2022: $320,000
- 2023: $325,000
- 2024: $350,000
“In September, closed sales trended down, but the need to buy and sell was still evident in the decrease of days on market and increase in median sales price,” Erika Villegas, president of the Chicago Association of REALTORS® and broker and owner of RE/MAX In the Village said. “With interest rates hitting their lowest in September, and knowing a transaction cycle is around 60 days, we should see the impact of dropping interest rates in the coming months.”
The average 30-year fixed rate mortgage fell to the lowest level of the year at 6.18%. That was down from 6.5% in August and 7.2% in September of last year.
However, there is a lag on the mortgage rates as buyers tend to lock in the rate and then buy several months later.
September’s low rates won’t really show up until October and November closings.
Also of note, rates have risen again here in October.
Statewide, inventory continued to recover off of its lows for the second month in a row, gaining 6.1% to 22,284 from 21,010 homes last year. Inventory still remains extremely low statewide.
But Chicago inventory continued to drop, falling 8.9% to 5,254 homes.
For comparison purposes, for the month of September:
- 2021: 9,478
- 2022: 8,163
- 2023: 5,768
- 2024: 5,254
“Our three-month forecast expects statewide closed sales activity in the fourth quarter of 2024 to be about 6 percent lower than levels seen in the fourth quarter of 2023, and prices of single-family homes are expected to increase by nearly 14 percent by the end of the year compared to December 2023,” said Geoff Smith, Executive Director, Institute for Housing Studies at DePaul University in Chicago.
“Homebuying conditions continue to be challenging with affordability remaining a concern, but there are some signs that these conditions may ease with statewide housing inventories increasing starting in the second half of 2024 and recent declines in mortgage interest rates.”
Condo sales slumped more than single-family-home sales with condos down 15% to 976 while SFH sales were down just 7.2% to 667.
Number of days on the market in Chicago fell to 29 from 30 last year. It was also 30 days in September 2022. 29 to 30 days seems to be the new norm.
Given the lag in mortgage rates, and that they are again rising, are they a non-factor in influencing Chicago’s market for the rest of the year?
Illinois home sales fall while inventory and median prices rise in September [Illinois Association of Realtors Press Release, October 23, 2024]
30 Year is back at 7%…
“30 Year is back at 7%…”
Rates dont matter
People just want to live their lives!
ALL of you are stupid!
( I’m the one that’s alone and right)
Rates are just the uber wealthy in America (think UNHW $30MM+) throwing a temper tantrum in the bond market because they don’t like Donny–he represents the most tangible threat to their stranglehold on our society. Come Wednesday, or Saturday or whenever WI & PA finally finish counting their votes, rates will come down no matter who is the victor.
Wow Texas & Florida were real battleground states
Political prognosticators are on par with Real Estate
The rage of the disenfranchised, formerly middle class, as they adjust to being poor explains the failure of the establishment to put down Trump. Expect regular kick-the-bums-out cycles until a new more socialist alternative appears. Hard times are unavoidable.
Assuming Biden will pardon his perp son. Too bad the FBI painted the laptop story as Russian disinfo (a recurring theme, along with lawfare) and manipulated “our democracy” in 2020. We might not be funding multiple wars if Trump had a second term, and we might have been allowed to have a 2024 Democratic primary.
“The rage of the disenfranchised, formerly middle class, as they adjust to being poor explains the failure of the establishment to put down Trump.”
I saw a good tweet that expressed what is going on. Middle class got crushed during the financial crisis so they elect Trump in 2016 saying, “please help us.”
He didn’t. Corporate tax cuts were supposed to trickle down. All that companies did was buy back shares. Stock investors got richer, but they are just 60% of the country.
So voters kicked him out for Biden. Biden actually DID do somethings to help the middle class, including bringing back some manufacturing jobs. But the inflation coming out of the pandemic crushed the middle and working classes. So voters have now tossed out Biden/Harris and put Trump back in. They are screaming “help us.”
But what will Trump do?
He will extend the same corporate tax cuts he put in from his first term and he will try and deport millions (deported 1.2 million in his first term.) Will any of this help the middle class who is screaming help us?
Republicans will be tossed again in 2028.
Housing costs will remain high. Inflation will still be there. Trump’s plans all run up the deficit. Stock investors will be richer than ever, including the billionaires which now includes Trump himself.
“Assuming Biden will pardon his perp son.”
And THIS is your biggest issue about the nation in 2025? Tells you everything about the election right there.
Trump will pardon over 700 traitors who stormed the Capitol, taking the flag of the confederacy into the people’s house. I should think that would be more important to most Americans than Biden pardoning his drug addict 60 year old son.
“Rates are just the uber wealthy in America (think UNHW $30MM+) throwing a temper tantrum in the bond market because they don’t like Donny–he represents the most tangible threat to their stranglehold on our society.”
Wrong. Rates are reflecting what we ALL know. This isn’t the first Trump rodeo. He spent like a drunken sailor in his first term even with Paul Ryan in there trying to contain it and it will be WORSE this term unless the Freedom Caucus actually does its job.
Even just extending the tax cuts will add $4 trillion to the deficit. And how will he pay to deport more than the norm?
“Normal” deportations are what he did in his first term. About 1.2 million people. Obama did 3 million in 8 years. That’s with the current spending. But in order to deport more, you need a lot more immigration judges. Have to hire a lot of federal workers to round people up. Might have to build detention centers. And the cost of sending people “back” is high too. Some of that is already in the budget though (the cost of sending people “back.”) But it would be extraordinarily expensive to even do double what Trump did in his first term, in just 4 years.
He would need all of this money and spending approved by Congress. And the Republicans will only have a handful seat majority in the House (like they do now).
Meanwhile, he wants to cut taxes on tips, overtime and Social Security. If he cuts them on Social Security, it will deplete the trust fund faster, which means the big benefit cuts will come by 2030 instead of 2032.
Yeah, I don’t think bond yields will want to come down for quite some time until they see how this all plays out. And that won’t happen until January 2025.
Also, debt ceiling must be raised by the end of December. Will the Republicans do it or burn it all down?
“Rates dont matter”
When you have 250 properties on the market in Lakeview, they don’t. Plenty of wealthy people in Chicago who can buy with rates at 7%, as we’ve seen for the last, oh, 2 1/2 years.
Baby Boomers can pay with cash. And now that their stock portfolios are literally soaring, bitcoin too, they are richer than ever.
I can see why GenZ is so angry. They haven’t had time to accumulate any hard assets yet. They are being left behind.
“ Inflation will still be there”
I thought you stated that Biden/Harris fixed it and it wasn’t a problem?
“ When you have 250 properties on the market in Lakeview, they don’t. Plenty of wealthy people in Chicago who can buy with rates at 7%, as we’ve seen for the last, oh, 2 1/2 years.”
Plenty of people can’t sell at 7%. Which for some strange reason you cannot accept
“Baby Boomers can pay with cash. And now that their stock portfolios are literally soaring, bitcoin too, they are richer than ever.”
Ok, and? Aren’t they moving to Fl, Az, Tn?
“i can see why GenZ is so angry. They haven’t had time to accumulate any hard assets yet. They are being left behind.”
Don’t they just want to live? I seem to recall someone telling us that Zs were making $100k right out of college and doubling their salaries every couple of years. Who was that?
“ “Normal” deportations are what he did in his first term. About 1.2 million people. Obama did 3 million in 8 years. That’s with the current spending. But in order to deport more, you need a lot more immigration judges. Have to hire a lot of federal workers to round people up. Might have to build detention centers. And the cost of sending people “back” is high too. Some of that is already in the budget though (the cost of sending people “back.”) But it would be extraordinarily expensive to even do double what Trump did in his first term, in just 4 years.”
And the cost to keep them here is zero, right?
“He would need all of this money and spending approved by Congress. And the Republicans will only have a handful seat majority in the House (like they do now).”
This is a liberal masturbation fantasy and you wonder why the left got completely punked this election. You’ll get token resistance from those in safe seats (AOC types), but he’ll pull enough D’s to claim its a bipartisan solution
If Trump is smart, he’ll get a few forensic accountants to go thru the books and announce that we’re spending $XXXB on illegal immigration and blame that for inflation/deficit/etc. No swing district Dem is going to jump into that fight.
He’d be smarter to limit new arrivals, allow a pathway to citizenship (tax or fee), and deport the criminal elements. He’d secure the immigrant vote for years
“in order to deport more, you need a lot more immigration judges.”
hahahaha.
No, you just need a change in law. *Maybe* only an executive order.
Certainly an executive order would work for a portion of those Trump wants deported.
Change the law, none of them are entitled to a hearing.
One judge can then sign the deportation order for all of them. Appealed thru the 5th circuit, who will uphold it, and there’s a 6-3 majority at the USSCt for giving MAGA what it wants. And that will be rocket-docketed, with the SCt (likely) not accepting the appeal from the 5th circuit order.
If they aren’t running a total donkey rodeo in DC (only like 50/50, right?), they should be able to get that done in only a few weeks.
“Baby Boomers can pay with cash.”
What baby boomers are looking in Lake View?
“And THIS is your biggest issue about the nation in 2025? Tells you everything about the election right there.”
No,that was my issue with the 2020 election. Just my cynical self expecting the grift that contributed to the needless of Ukranians to be swept under the carpet. There was a peace deal in the works in early 2022 for Ukraine, Biden decided to keep the money train running.
Personally, my biggest issue is foreign policy and my tax dollars funding the slaughter of innocents abroad. Biden was horrific in this respect.
*needless *slaughter* of Ukranians, in our efforts to fund the war in Ukraine down to the last Ukranian. Thank you, Joe Biden.
BTW, I did not vote, refused to support a candidate that does not speak out against the Gaza genocide. Trump getting $100 million from Miriam Adelson makes me think he owes her something. Last time round, he paid the Adelsons for their support with the Golan Heights.
So I remain disenfranchised until the Israel Lobby loses its grip on our legislators.
What kills me is that Trump is promising price reductions and that’s what people want and expect. We all know that there is no way that is happening. It will be interesting to see how that plays out but there is a reasonable chance that Trump will claim prices are going down and people will believe him.
“Even just extending the tax cuts will add $4 trillion to the deficit.” The data does not support the claim that tax cuts increase the deficit. Where is the revenue reduction from the original Trump tax cuts? https://www.statista.com/statistics/200405/receipts-of-the-us-government-since-fiscal-year-2000/
“And the cost to keep them here is zero, right?”
Actually, for the ones that are integrated into our economy (many) it is negative. The economic consequence of getting rid of these people will be devastating. I really don’t want to cut my own lawn and my neighborhood was largely built by, what I assume are, illegal aliens – based on observations. And I will tell you that there is a situation I have first hand knowledge of where an illegal alien was the only one that could perform a critical function when the lazy ass, entitled, US citizens couldn’t do it. I’m all for deporting US citizens that don’t want to work.
“I’m all for deporting US citizens that don’t want to work.”
I don’t *want* to work, Gary. But such is my lot.
“ Actually, for the ones that are integrated into our economy (many) it is negative. The economic consequence of getting rid of these people will be devastating. I really don’t want to cut my own lawn and my neighborhood was largely built by, what I assume are, illegal aliens – based on observations. And I will tell you that there is a situation I have first hand knowledge of where an illegal alien was the only one that could perform a critical function when the lazy ass, entitled, US citizens couldn’t do it. I’m all for deporting US citizens that don’t want to work.”
Selective reading Gary and is what I said false?
Sorry if I’m not going to cry you a river as you have to mow your own lawn. The Horror…
I’m fairly pro immigration but Tacos & cheap lawn service aren’t the main drivers
“What kills me is that Trump is promising price reductions and that’s what people want and expect. We all know that there is no way that is happening.”
Yep. Never going to happen. But when you promise the world and you have no political legislative skills whatsoever, this is going to happen.
“So I remain disenfranchised until the Israel Lobby loses its grip on our legislators.”
So HH is only now finding out that neither side supports his antisemitic views. It must be a really tough time for you HH. Yes, “nobody” is really Dan/HH. He knows I will block him if he tries to sign in with his usual handle so he’s back to signing in with new names.
“What baby boomers are looking in Lake View?”
I know so many! I know some who want to be near the shops and restaurants. They LOVE Lakeview. Developers are building small condo buildings with elevators so it works for them. They don’t want the stairs. They save money on HOAs versus the big downtown buildings.
“hahahaha.
No, you just need a change in law. *Maybe* only an executive order.
Certainly an executive order would work for a portion of those Trump wants deported.”
Short memory by most people. He tried this 8 years ago. Was completely blocked in the courts. If you want to change asylum law, then go f*cking change it. There have been two bipartisan laws proposed which would have made dramatic changes to asylum law. The biggest changes in 40 years. Trump told the Republicans, “don’t pass it.” So they didn’t.
He now has all three: WH, Senate and House. Just like in 2017. In 2017, he did NOTHING. They could barely get tax cuts passed even with a 47 seat majority. This time, will only have about 6 seat majority. And a weak Speaker who can’t even pass a budget.
Do you really think the moderates who are left in the House, some of them immigrants themselves, are going to pass a law that says anyone who has filed for asylum is not entitled to a hearing? (basically eliminating “asylum” then.)
AND they are going to try to extend the tax cuts that have already increased the deficit by trillions and will increase it another $4 trillion over the next 10 years?
You get ONE big, signature program as president. And he’s a lame duck so I’m not sure he’s even going to get the one.
What will they choose? Tax cuts? Gutting immigration? Is not going to get both- as we saw in 2017.
He went for the tax cuts back then. Might go for immigration this time. There are 4 million people in the asylum system (not including children). The government knows where they are. Change asylum law to deny asylum to anyone and you could deport them all.
But I also don’t think such legislation would fly through the Senate like you think it will, even with their majority. Romney will be gone but there are still other moderate Republicans.
They all face re-election. Trump does not.
“And the cost to keep them here is zero, right?”
Nope. Never said it was. We have public education and their kids are in school. Taxpayers are paying for that. But, otherwise, most migrants are out of the system within 6 months. Illinois, for instance, only gives 6 months vouchers for housing. New York is only 2 months, I believe.
In Chicago, less than 5,000 are still in shelters in the city. Everyone else has moved to apartments or left the area.
But once these migrants have work permits, and get jobs, they are a net benefit to the economy. They pay taxes. They buy consumer goods. Their kids need new sneakers and want to see Taylor Swift.
Chicago has spent several hundred million handling about 50,000 migrants and refugees. It’s money we didn’t have. But Chicago has always thrived when it brought in immigrants. From the Germans, to the Poles and Irish, to the Mexicans and now the Ukrainians and Venezuelans.
“This is a liberal masturbation fantasy and you wonder why the left got completely punked this election. You’ll get token resistance from those in safe seats (AOC types), but he’ll pull enough D’s to claim its a bipartisan solution”
Due to extreme gerrymandering, on both sides, nearly ALL seats are safe in the House now. Just 30 that were “swing” possibilities this election.
It’s going to be extremely difficult for Johnson to keep control of his caucus. Paul Ryan had a 47 seat majority and he couldn’t do it. Had to quit over it. He managed to get the tax cuts through, and that was it.
Freedom Caucus is still in the House. It may not be as big, or as powerful, as 8 years ago. But all they need is 10 to 20 votes to put the kibosh on out of control spending.
“Plenty of people can’t sell at 7%. Which for some strange reason you cannot accept”
Who’s that?
The properties in Chicago that are NOT selling right now are those:
1. Old buildings and not updated. Buyers are renting luxury apartments with modern finishes. They do not want to buy your circa 2004 kitchen and bath condo for $600k. They WILL buy it if it’s renovated.
2. Views are bad or something else is just off about the unit. Or it doesn’t have w/d or parking or a/c or all of the above.
3. High HOAs, including a co-op, which also usually has high HOAs.
4. Luxury units over $2 million. There are too many properties in this price point, especially condos. Remarkably, there has still been a flurry of luxury units selling this year but when the St Regis has 200 still to sell all priced over a million, it’s still tough for some sellers out there. All depends on the building, neighborhood though.
“Don’t they just want to live? I seem to recall someone telling us that Zs were making $100k right out of college and doubling their salaries every couple of years. Who was that?”
Thanks for quoting me from 2021 JohnnyU. You know, nearly FOUR years ago now.
Yep, 2021 was the best job market we’ve had in 25 years. As I have said on this blog many times. Huge starting salaries. But then the Fed raised rates to crush inflation and the start-ups went bust and big tech laid off thousands. They also stopped recruiting at most colleges. It’s been tough for GenZ to get a “good” job now.
But they are still working- just not at the likes of Microsoft and whatnot.
Sanity has returned.
History has told us that the US will go into a recession 12 to 24 months after the Fed starts raising rates. That hasn’t happened yet. Did we escape a recession for the first time in history or is it coming in 2025?
“And I will tell you that there is a situation I have first hand knowledge of where an illegal alien was the only one that could perform a critical function when the lazy ass, entitled, US citizens couldn’t do it.”
We have a labor shortage. The farmers have been crying for a decade for an increase in the seasonal visas (Trump denied them when they asked him 8 years ago). 14% of agriculture workers are undocumented. But if you lose that 14%, it’s going to cost a lot more for your strawberries.
And maybe Americans are okay with that. They voted for 60% tariffs on their iPhones and Watches. And 20% on every other item. Every pair of Nike shoes, for instance.
But maybe Trump will give exemptions to all of these companies, like he did with the initial tariffs in 2017. But what will be the point of it then? Why should businesses have to deal with this much uncertainty? They already have enough to deal with.
“So HH is only now finding out that neither side supports his antisemitic views. It must be a really tough time for you HH. Yes, “nobody” is really Dan/HH. He knows I will block him if he tries to sign in with his usual handle so he’s back to signing in with new names.”
So apparently you have never bothered to learn more on the subject of the Isreal Lobby from people like John Mearsheimer (U of Chicago professor who wrote the book) or Columbia’s Jeffrey Sachs, among MANY others. Feel free to stay uninformed and repeat the narrative you have been fed by the much mainstream media, who have lost their credibility.
Being Anti-zionist does NOT make somebody anti-semetic. There are plenty of Jews who are anti-Zionist, including journalists like Max Blumenthal and Arron Mate at the Greyzone and Glen Greenwald.
Pretty pathetic argument, I can only guess that you are an ardent Zionist and have no problem with Bibi’s “mowing the lawn”.
“The data does not support the claim that tax cuts increase the deficit. Where is the revenue reduction from the original Trump tax cuts?”
Trump’s 2017 tax cuts did not pay for themselves. It added trillions to the deficit. “Growth” was never going to pay for it. So Paul Ryan lied and claimed it would. But why would Trump care? They made it so it would expire just after his second term. Except he never got the second term and now here he is having to deal with the reality of it.
Tax cuts are fun. Not one person who doesn’t like them. But we can’t afford it.
Extending them, would add another $4 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years.
If he follows through with his other tax cuts on Social Security, tips and overtime, it would add a total of $7.5 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years.
And Social Security would really be screwed. The tax adds 4% to the trust but losing that would mean benefits would face cuts two years earlier, in 2030. I don’t think the vast majority of our seniors are prepared for 17% cuts to their social security checks in just 5 years.
He won’t be able to do ANY of these tax cuts. There is no way to pay for them.
“Being Anti-zionist does NOT make somebody anti-semetic. There are plenty of Jews who are anti-Zionist, including journalists like Max Blumenthal and Arron Mate at the Greyzone and Glen Greenwald.”
HH: you have been antisemitic on this site for more than a decade. Stop pretending you’re anti-zionist. Your comments about Miriam Adelson give you away.
I am NOT HH,I have Jews in my family, including a brother in law and son in law, and have never made any disparaging remarks about Jews, only Zionists who put Israel’s interests above those of the US:
From Columbia professor Jeffrey Sachs (who is, incidentally, Jewish)regarding the Israel lobby:
“Israel persists with its intransigence because it believes that it has the unconditional backing of the United States. Through decades of large campaign contributions and assiduous lobbying, the Israel lobby in the United States not only controls votes in the Congress, but also has also placed arch-Zionists in top positions in every administration. Yet due to Israel’s brutality in Palestine and Lebanon, the Israel Lobby has lost its ability to control the narrative and votes across mainstream American society.”
https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/israel-two-state-solution
The US has damaged is geopolitical reputation by being the only country that stands by Israel and its genocidal rampage.
I brought up the Adelsons to explain why thinking Trump’s pledge for peace might not include Gaza, my red line for disenfranchisement.
Also, all Zionists are not Jewish! The most vocal Zionist in my family is a white supremacist, Evangelical Christian, who probably has a lot in common with HH. I learned more than I ever wanted to know about the rapture insanity from him. Faith requires the suspension of critical thinking skills.
“Trump’s 2017 tax cuts did not pay for themselves. It added trillions to the deficit.”
That assertion runs counter to the data which I shared. Revenue was flat in FY2018 and the trend before and after the tax cuts took effect was unbroken. Therefore, they could not have added to the deficit. How did that happen? Economic growth? Income recognition spurred by tax cuts? Tariffs? I don’t know but facts are facts.
“Selective reading Gary and is what I said false?”
I read your entire sentence and quoted it back. I don’t know how that could be selective. And, yes, what you said is false. The answer to your question is that the cost is negative. All the illegal immigrants, taken as a whole, are net contributors to the economy. It is also true that the most recent arrivals are probably a drain for the time being.
“I don’t *want* to work, Gary. But such is my lot.”
To be clear these folks not only didn’t want to work, they acted like they didn’t want to be at work, they were not doing their job, and they were asked not to return.
“ I read your entire sentence and quoted it back. I don’t know how that could be selective. And, yes, what you said is false. The answer to your question is that the cost is negative. All the illegal immigrants, taken as a whole, are net contributors to the economy. It is also true that the most recent arrivals are probably a drain for the time being.”
When did you turn into a Sabrina?
I didn’t say net cost, I said cost.
if not selective, your getting close to being dishonest
“ Who’s that?
The properties in Chicago that are NOT selling right now are those:”
No one can be this dumb
I said they can’t sell because holding a 3% note makes moving very difficult as the HMAM crushes folks with 3% rates
There is also the cost, Gary, of breaking the law. Simply because a price cannot be put on something doesn’t mean that there is no cost. It only means that the measuring system may be insufficient.
As any proponent of broken windows policing will attest, the cost of broken windows is more than the cost of physically replacing a window.
“I didn’t say net cost, I said cost.”
You also didn’t say cost of those that are not integrated into our economy. The discussion has been around all illegals as a group. The cost of keeping them here is less than what they contribute to the economy as a group. If you ship them all back you will lose more than you save.
Now, if you can figure out which ones are costing us more than they are producing then deporting them makes sense.
“It’s going to be extremely difficult for Johnson to keep control of his caucus. Paul Ryan had a 47 seat majority and he couldn’t do it. Had to quit over it. He managed to get the tax cuts through, and that was it.”
Lets add another wrinkle to this: the President elect is picking current members of congress for his cabinet. Without regard for the outcome of control of the house or for how slim the R majority may be.
What if Rs wind up with 217 house seats because Trump selected a sitting member for his cabinet and they lose the special election for it?
“What if Rs wind up with 217 house seats because Trump selected a sitting member for his cabinet and they lose the special election for it?”
He’s picked two so far. The special election will take a few months so Trump will have his first 100 days with a super narrow majority (most likely).
Everyone is already fighting and the Congress and the President haven’t even been sworn in yet. Good luck.
“I said they can’t sell because holding a 3% note makes moving very difficult as the HMAM crushes folks with 3% rates”
If they “can’t sell” then they aren’t selling. Can’t sell has nothing to do with a property NOT selling. They have never listed the property so, obviously, it’s not selling unless someone knocks on their door and makes an offer (occasionally DOES happen.) Lol.
3% rates will keep some in their homes. If you don’t have to move, then, yeah, you aren’t giving up your rate. I guess a LOT of young people are going to be “stuck” in their 2/2s for 10 years or more. Oh no.
“All the illegal immigrants, taken as a whole, are net contributors to the economy.”
The various studies done by the Federal Reserve, and others, have shown this to be true. In fact, studies have shown that the migrants, over the last 4 years, have also boosted GDP.
Many economists believe Australia stayed out of a recession for 40 years because of the boost of immigration. It had an aggressive immigration policy that brought in thousands each year.
That assertion runs counter to the data which I shared. Revenue was flat in FY2018 and the trend before and after the tax cuts took effect was unbroken. ‘
Yep. It has added trillions and extending them would add $4 trillion over the next 10 years.
From the Brookings Institute:
“An important effect of extending the 2017 tax cuts is that it’s estimated to cost an extra $3.8 trillion over the next decade. Without significantly cutting services, the federal debt would balloon to 211% of GDP by 2054, compared to about 100% of GDP right now.”
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-will-happen-to-the-trump-tax-cuts-in-2025-and-how-will-they-affect-the-national-debt/
CBO recently looked at what impact the extension would have and they have revised their estimate on the deficit from $3.6 trillion to $4.6 trillion.
Here’s a great article discussing all the tax cuts and how much they will add to the deficit. Going to have to use reconciliation to extend the 2017 cuts but you can’t use reconciliation to touch Social Security, so that will fail.
They could raise the tax brackets for social security though, as they haven’t been raised in like 20 years. Raising them would give relief to lots of people.
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/11/11/trump-tax-cut-promises-gop-deficit-hawks-congress-debt.html
Kumar said to expect one of the first big discussions on Capitol Hill, assuming the GOP maintains control of the House of Representatives, to be about the extension of the 2017 tax cuts and how to finance them without increasing the deficit. “There will be some who say it should all be deficit-financed, and that’s more than $4 trillion.”
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that extending the Trump tax cuts for the next 10 years would add $4.6 trillion to the deficit.
“I am NOT HH,I have Jews in my family, including a brother in law and son in law, and have never made any disparaging remarks about Jews, only Zionists who put Israel’s interests above those of the US:”
Yes, you ARE HH. Otherwise, how else do you even know who I’m talking about? It’s not like he’s posted on this site in a year or more.
Come on HH. We’re not stupid. I have to laugh at your dilemma though. Your antisemitism has NO home in either party.
“ You also didn’t say cost of those that are not integrated into our economy. The discussion has been around all illegals as a group. The cost of keeping them here is less than what they contribute to the economy as a group. If you ship them all back you will lose more than you save.”
Holy Sabrina answer. This has Zero to do with the question I posted
Do you often make up arguments?
“Holy Sabrina answer. This has Zero to do with the question I posted”
Then I don’t even know what question you are asking. I’ve answered two different possible interpretations of your question. Perhaps you need to rephrase your question with more precision this time.
“Yep. It has added trillions”
Nope. It didn’t. I showed you the data. Note that both of the articles you linked to are about what they believe will happen if the tax cuts are extended. Totally unrelated to the discussion. I have been talking about what actually happened when the tax cuts went into effect in 2018.
“ Then I don’t even know what question you are asking. I’ve answered two different possible interpretations of your question. Perhaps you need to rephrase your question with more precision this time.”
The better course of action would be for you to not create Strawman arguments.
I mean if you can’t digest “ And the cost to keep them here is zero, right?”, that’s really on you
“Romney will be gone but there are still other moderate Republicans.”
Wish that were the case, but there are none in any meaningful way.
“I have to laugh at your dilemma though. Your antisemitism has NO home in either party.”
Again, really wish that were the case, but it is not. On the right, the tiki torch crowd has always been there, and it remains, notwithstanding the high hopes of recent Republican converts like Bill Ackman, et al. On the left, a popular and competent guy like the gov of PA was passed over for VP so as not to offend a portion of MI voters (who ultimately turned their backs on the Democrats anyways – a move that, along with the rightward shift of certain major labor unions, should not be forgotten), and as the past year has shown, a large portion (the majority?) of progressive students have had their brains so rewired by Gaza that it rivals or exceeds the mass psychosis that covid inflicted on right-wingers, and those people are future Dem political professionals and politicians.
“He tried this 8 years ago. Was completely blocked in the courts.”
…and what happened to the makeup of the courts between ’16 and now?
“a large portion (the majority?) of progressive students have had their brains so rewired by Gaza”
It is reasonable to ask to what extent that all was supported (words, deeds, both) by ‘elements’ (domestic, foreign, both) who wanted Trump elected. Anyone who confidently states “not at all” is not a serious person, or is trying to sell you something.
“The better course of action would be for you to not create Strawman arguments.
I mean if you can’t digest “ And the cost to keep them here is zero, right?”, that’s really on you”
How is it a strawman argument?
Interesting how you are trying to change the discussion away from the original topic and focus it on me instead. Just like you do with Sabrina. Yeah, let’s discuss the discussion instead of the real topic. Why not just tell me what you think I am obviously missing? Probably because I am missing nothing but you would prefer to pretend that I am missing something.
“ Wish that were the case, but there are none in any meaningful way.”
Paul, Collins, Murkowski, Hawley.
Tester was about the only centrist Dem.
“ On the left, a popular and competent guy like the gov of PA was passed over for VP so as not to offend a portion of MI voters”
Walz was chosen to appeal to white male and rural voters, unfortunately for her that blew up in her face as Walz was as phony as a $3
“ How is it a strawman argument?”
an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent’s real argument.
Because you’re making up an argument vs replying to what I stated.
“Interesting how you are trying to change the discussion away from the original topic and focus it on me instead. Just like you do with Sabrina. Yeah, let’s discuss the discussion instead of the real topic. Why not just tell me what you think I am obviously missing? Probably because I am missing nothing but you would prefer to pretend that I am missing something.”
It’s interesting how, especially when you’re the one changing the topic, lol.
Sabrina states that the direct costs to deport illegal immigrants – Courts, detention centers, transportation would be extraordinarily expensive. I state that the costs to maintain them are not zero. You pull an ackshually and reply with something completely different than what is being discussed and bemoan the potential loss of cheap labor to avoid mowing your lawn.
The fact that you and Sabrina both do this is boorish
“Because you’re making up an argument vs replying to what I stated.”
You’re gaslighting because I did no such thing.
” I state that the costs to maintain them are not zero.”
I assume by “them” you mean all illegal aliens. That would be the union of those integrated into the economy and those that are not. I was pretty clear and responded directly to your point. You are wrong. There is no cost to maintain illegal aliens integrated into the economy. There is an economic benefit – i.e. negative cost. On the other hand, there might be a cost to maintain illegal aliens not integrated into the economy to the extent they are not supported by family members. If you can separate that last group out and deport them no problem. However, there really hasn’t been much of a discussion about distinguishing between these two groups.
Now what issue do you exactly have with that answer, which sure as hell looks to me like it’s right on topic?
If you don’t think that providing shelter and other assistance isn’t a cost, you are operating on another plane of reality.
No one except you was talking about net benefit, which is a different discussion
1) The only way the public would be providing assistance is if the people in question were not integrated into the economy – the second group I addressed. Presumably we are on the same page about them as should be clear from my earlier response.
2) I have no idea why you would ever talk about anything other than net benefit. The fact that there is a cost to society of you and I living here is kinda meaningless since we offset that cost with our contributions. So are you arguing that you and I should be deported?
“Walz was chosen to appeal to white male and rural voters, unfortunately for her that blew up in her face as Walz was as phony as a $3”
Harris lost by 140,000 votes in 3 states. It’s less of a loss than Trump’s to Biden in 2020. Trump got crushed by Biden in the Blue Wall. Walz or Shapiro wasn’t going to matter. Dearborn, in Michigan, decided that Trump could lead them to the promised land in Gaza. No VP pick was going to matter there.
Voter turnout for the Dems was really depressed. Not sure why. Did people think, as in 2016, that Harris would easily win over a convicted felon? In Chicago, turnout was extremely low for a presidential election.
Why is anyone saying Trump has a mandate? It seemed like he might on election night, but as the votes keep rolling in (House is still undecided but Republicans will hold), it’s clear he had absolutely NO coattails. Perhaps for the first time in history, he couldn’t even bring along Senators OR the House.
I’ve never seen a candidate that weak down the ballot.
“…and what happened to the makeup of the courts between ’16 and now?”
Biden has put in as many judges at Trump did. Only difference is the Supreme Court but as we’ve seen, they aren’t going to go his way on every ruling.
“Romney will be gone but there are still other moderate Republicans.”
“Wish that were the case, but there are none in any meaningful way.”
Are you serious anonny?
Murkowski, Collins, even Grassley and Cornyn. I guess I should clarify it as: senators who are NOT Maga. They are most likely to block a lot of what Trump does. Right now it’s all “we will support his agenda” until he nominates Matt Gaetz for AG.
“Nope. It didn’t. I showed you the data. Note that both of the articles you linked to are about what they believe will happen if the tax cuts are extended.”
All of the data from the last 7 years shows that the 2017 tax cuts did NOT pay for themselves through “growth” and added several trillion to the deficit.
Future projections aren’t hard to do on it Gary. Extending them, since they are still NOT paying for themselves, will add another $4.6 trillion.
However, if Trump actually tries to go for ALL of his tax cuts (overtime, social security and tips) it will add anywhere from $7.5 to $9 trillion to the deficit. Lol.
Not sure how they pass ANY of this. And Trump now may try and get 15% corporate tax. Not a single corporation is actually asking for that, but they’ll take it if they can get it.
Meanwhile, we’re drowning in debt. The economy is growing at 3% with the Fed at higher rates. It doesn’t need all of these tax cuts to grow further.
“I guess I should clarify it as: senators who are NOT Maga.”
Overton Window says what???
“Not MAGA” is necessary but not sufficient to be considered a “moderate republican”.
“it will add anywhere from $7.5 to $9 trillion to the deficit.”
You sure about that?
“Voter turnout for the Dems was really depressed.”
or maybe the astronomically high amount of votes for Biden in 2020 were questionable.
the amount of Dem votes in 2024 were very similar to those in 2012 and 2016. 2020 was an outlier.
“All of the data from the last 7 years shows that the 2017 tax cuts did NOT pay for themselves through “growth” and added several trillion to the deficit.”
Show me this data. I’ve shown you mine. Are you saying that my data is wrong? If you implement tax cuts and revenue does NOT go down how do they contribute to the deficit? You’ll find that spending went way up. Can’t blame that on tax cuts. Or maybe you’ll show me the results of some model that claims what revenue WOULD have been? That’s not data. That’s an assumption.
“or maybe the astronomically high amount of votes for Biden in 2020 were questionable.
the amount of Dem votes in 2024 were very similar to those in 2012 and 2016. 2020 was an outlier.”
Do you have any idea how much normal variation in voter turnout there is from one year to the next – or over time? It’s pretty big. Nothing unusual about 2020. As for 2024…not necessarily the case that Democrats didn’t turn out. More likely that 1) overall voter turnout was lower and 2) independents that voted for Biden in 2020 voted for Trump this time. https://www.electproject.org/national-1789-present
“As for 2024…not necessarily the case that Democrats didn’t turn out.”
Seems pretty likely that Ds didn’t turn out in the same numbers as 2020.
Something like 6 million fewer votes than ’20 (with, yes, some still to count–but it ain’t 6m), and, adjusted for the higher population of eligible voters, would need to be about 12m more than current coutn total to match turnout.
“Something like 6 million fewer votes than ’20”
but we were constantly told that this was the most important election of our time.
Gary, implicit in your statement is an assumption that deficits don’t matter. There is also the fact that you denigrate proven forecasting methodologies (assumptions). There’s also the fact that if growth didn’t accelerate, then what was the point of the cuts (gets back to the idea that deficits don’t matter, unless you like deficits for the sheer joy of having deficits).
“but we were constantly told that this was the most important election of our time.”
Voters determined it wasn’t. But Harris still got the third highest vote total of all time.
“If you implement tax cuts and revenue does NOT go down how do they contribute to the deficit? You’ll find that spending went way up.”
They argued it would “pay for themselves” but they didn’t. Nor would the extension of them.
“You sure about that?”
That’s according to several think tanks who have run the numbers based on EVERYTHING he promised on the campaign trail. Just extending the 2017 tax cuts is $4.6 trillion. If he wants to cut the corporate tax rate to 15% from 21%, it will add on more. (No one believes the Hill will support a further cut, however.)
Other trillions are from the “no taxes” on SS, tips and overtime.
He’s unlikely to get all three of those, if any. But we’ll see.
Also, if he does get the no taxes on SS, some of that tax money goes into the SS trust fund. It will mean the trust fund will be drained sooner than expected, by 2 years. Could see Social Security benefit cuts, if nothing is done to shore it up, by as soon as 2030.
Current estimate is calling for a 17% cut in benefits.
““Not MAGA” is necessary but not sufficient to be considered a “moderate republican”.”
There are two political parties. Magas and Republicans. Number of Magas has grown in the House and the Senate in the last 8 years but it’s not enough to be a majority in either. Still have Republicans who are caucusing with the Magas but might not always vote with them on key legislation.
You can see the difficulty Trump is having choosing a cabinet this time. In 2016, he put in a few Magas but mostly Republicans. This time, he’s trying to avoid Republicans altogether. That’s going to narrow the pool for eligible nominees who have any experience considerably.
This is why he keeps tapping the House for his administration. One of the few places you find a Maga. Not many Maga Senators or Governors but he has tapped Noem so far.
excerpt from WSJ
Griffin has sold the top two floors of the condo tower No. 9 Walton for $19 million, according to property records. The deal represents a 44% loss for the Citadel founder, who paid more than $34 million for the two units in 2017, records show….
Griffin has previously criticized Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker amid what he deems rising crime and violence in Chicago…
Griffin’s two other remaining floors at the building remain unsold, records show.
article link here
https://www.wsj.com/real-estate/luxury-homes/ken-griffin-chicago-penthouse-e16d54e8?mod=hp_major_pos3
so the 44% loss is less than a rounding error for Griffin but I certainly wouldn’t think that it’s a positive for the building which was recently discussed.
https://cribchatter.com/is-9-w-walton-in-the-gold-coast-still-the-hottest-building-a-3-bedroom-for-6-895-million/
“The deal represents a 44% loss for the Citadel founder”
smart investors know when to cut their losses.
“They argued it would “pay for themselves” but they didn’t. ”
The FACT that revenue did NOT go down means that they did pay for themselves. The only way you can reduce the tax rate and still get slightly higher revenue is with more income. That’s basic math. In fact, among other things, corporations repatriated more income from overseas. https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/us-corporations-repatriation-of-offshore-profits-20190806.html
“Gary, implicit in your statement is an assumption that deficits don’t matter.”
Not true. I said nothing about deficits. All I’m talking about, and all we need to talk about is revenue. Did the tax cut reduce revenue? The answer is no.
“There is also the fact that you denigrate proven forecasting methodologies”
Show me the forecasts of revenue for 2018+ with and without the tax cuts and then we can discuss whether or not those forecasting methods were proven. What we know for a fact is that revenue continued on trend.
“There’s also the fact that if growth didn’t accelerate,”
See my comment above. Income had to increase otherwise revenue would have gone down. This is math. I provided one example: evidence of repatriated income increasing.
I can’t believe we are even arguing about easily discernable facts. The increase in deficits after the tax cuts was totally driven by higher expenditures.
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/federal-budget-receipts-and-outlays
Just to be clear…although I think Trump got away with the tax cuts in 2017 doesn’t mean that I think he can do it again. At some point further tax cuts will result in lower revenue but they didn’t in 2017.
Marco and Gary
https://youtu.be/MYXMQnJpa_M?feature=shared&t=15
CNBC recent video. lots of chicago video in the beginning
some quick thoughts
1 – Citadel may have been right to move away given Chicago and Illinois long running budget issues
2 – (this is a bit more directed towards Gary) Over 33% of state funding are transfers from the Federal government
3 – there’s more on tax cuts and tighter budgets but really only the very first part was on chi town
“1 – Citadel may have been right to move away given Chicago and Illinois long running budget issues”
Citadel has over 1,000 workers sitting in the loop every week.
“Did the tax cut reduce revenue? The answer is no.”
2017 tax cuts did NOT pay for themselves. Remember when Paul Ryan tried to act like they would because of all the tremendous “growth” that was going to come? Lol.
“The FACT that revenue did NOT go down means that they did pay for themselves.”
Actually, no, Gary. The government gets revenue from numerous sources. Also, thanks to the increase in the IRS budget, they have been able to capture a lot of the tax dodgers again.
“smart investors know when to cut their losses.”
He moved. It had nothing to do with an “investment.” I’m glad someone bought the No 9 Walton property though. I wonder who it was?
Record high stock market has meant Chicago luxury real estate has been hot this year.
“so the 44% loss is less than a rounding error for Griffin but I certainly wouldn’t think that it’s a positive for the building which was recently discussed.”
No impact whatsoever. Several other units under contract in the building. It was raw space and unique. He just wanted to dump it.
I’m surprised at how quickly he was able to liquidate all of his penthouses. Normally, might have taken up to 10 years to sell some of those units.
“It had nothing to do with an “investment.”
I’d imagine he treats everything like an investment.
“2017 tax cuts did NOT pay for themselves.”
They obviously did. I have provided several sources of information. You keep making assertions without providing any evidence. And don’t link to some article that also makes an assertion without data.
“The Tax Foundation’s dynamic projections from 2017 imply the tax cuts will have paid for themselves in 2028. Actual tax collections and current Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projections—which have been significantly affected by interceding legislation and unforeseen economic events—show that revenues have almost fully recovered from the 2017 cuts. However, making the TCJA permanent in 2025 without additional reforms would likely permanently lower revenue below the 2017 baseline.”
Here’s the answer: https://www.cato.org/blog/did-tax-cuts-jobs-act-pay-itself#
“A recent Tax Foundation analysis of how federal tax revenue evolved since 2017 explains that revenue forecasting is a limited tool, made quickly obsolete by intervening events. In addition to unanticipated high inflation, “a growing trade war, a pandemic, a war in Europe, and a new conflict in the Middle East have each impacted tax revenues.” Congress implemented numerous tax changes in response to the pandemic, natural disasters, the CHIPS Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act, each of which lowered revenue collections. Higher-than-expected immigration has also boosted revenues more than government scorekeepers projected.”
“I’d imagine he treats everything like an investment.”
What a sad life.
Sabrina,
Thank you. I found the following sentence from the first paragraph very interesting “However, because the law boosted investment, wages, and economic growth, revenues outperformed the static projections that didn’t account for the economy’s dynamic response to tax cuts.” In other words the original projections assumed that there would be no growth – which is tantamount to assuming the tax cuts could not pay for themselves. That’s why I think it’s dangerous to go off of projections unless you really know what’s in them.
Like I said I think further cuts would be dangerous though extending the existing cuts is probably safe given that revenues continue to grow every year with the growth of the economy. Spending is clearly out of control.
Marco
I’d imagine he treats everything like an investment.
He certainly is building out Miami
”
The hedge-fund executive assembled the land in 2022. He is building a 54-story glass tower to be the splashy new headquarters for his investment firm Citadel.
…
He spent $669.5 million for the three parcels. Citadel Securities, the market-making business, will also be based in the new Miami headquarters.
”
https://www.wsj.com/real-estate/ken-griffin-and-the-big-miami-real-estate-mystery-cfd60f1e?mod=hp_lead_pos10
“He certainly is building out Miami”
Someone has to. It’s pretty pathetic as far as major cities go. No je ne sais quoi. The architecture is terrible. Must be such a let down after living in Chicago for decades. And he has his penthouse in New York City too.
“Like I said I think further cuts would be dangerous though extending the existing cuts is probably safe given that revenues continue to grow every year with the growth of the economy.”
But the extension of them literally would grow the deficit by $4.6 trillion. The CBO has scored this. Although I’m not sure if that includes getting rid of SALT, as Trump said he’d do during the campaign.
You can forget about his other tax cut pledges. They would add even more. But it’s really the Social Security tax cut that would do the most damage. The tax supplies a portion of the Social Security trust fund. If you take that revenue away, it means it has a shortfall about 2 years earlier. The benefit cuts could be as soon as 2030.
I can’t imagine the devastation of 17% to 21% benefit cuts in just 5 years.
But, like the last time this was projected show me what assumptions the CBO made about extending the tax cuts. Did they take into account the contraction of the economy if they were allowed to expire?”
The conclusion does not pass the smell test. I showed you the graph above of revenues by year. It’s on a straight line upward trend. What they are saying is either a) if extended suddenly the revenue is going to go down or b) by letting the tax cuts expire the revenue is suddenly going to hockey stick upwards. Neither makes sense but which is it?
“literally would grow the deficit by $4.6 trillion”
Are you sure about that?
“Must be such a let down after living in Chicago for decades.”
Yes, his current residence is crap:
https://www.redfin.com/FL/Miami/3031-Brickell-Ave-33129/home/42752786
And I’m sure his 50,000 sf house on 25 oceanfront acres in Palm Beach will be a let down, too, when it’s done.
“Someone has to. It’s pretty pathetic as far as major cities go. No je ne sais quoi. The architecture is terrible. Must be such a let down after living in Chicago for decades. And he has his penthouse in New York City too”
We get it, you’re old and crabby
Try the Villages, its more your speed
“Try the Villages, its more your speed”
I LOVE the Villages. Prices collapsing there though. Can get a good deal soon.
“Yes, his current residence is crap:”
Not talking about his “residence” anon(tfo). I’m talking about Miami. It sucks. And it’s an ugly city. Unfortunate that they don’t care about architecture.
That’s why it must be such a letdown. To go to Miami from 30 years in Chicago. What a drag. Food scene stinks too but I don’t know if he cares.
“The conclusion does not pass the smell test. I showed you the graph above of revenues by year. It’s on a straight line upward trend. What they are saying is either a) if extended suddenly the revenue is going to go down or b) by letting the tax cuts expire the revenue is suddenly going to hockey stick upwards. Neither makes sense but which is it?”
It doesn’t pay for itself. Another 10 years of 21% corporate tax adds up. The growth is simply NOT there. As the Cato Institute says, a lot of the “assumptions” when they passed the bill no longer hold up due to covid, the recession, further spending.
And if you include Trump’s OTHER tax cuts (overtime, tips, and Social Security) various groups estimate it will increase the deficit anywhere from $7.5 trillion to $15 trillion over the next 10 years.
Absurd.
Can’t afford ANY of it. Tax cuts cannot be extended.
“I LOVE the Villages.”
Not one person here is surprised.
“It doesn’t pay for itself.”
It clearly did and I provided evidence of that. Your own article said that’s what happened. The data showed a continuation of the revenue growth trend. I showed data on how repatriated income increased and that’s not the only effect. So, it’s absurd to claim that allowing the tax cuts to expire won’t have the opposite effect – i.e. hurt economic growth.
I think you will find that the repatriated income was a one-off, Gary. Particularly when the US could simply tax the un-repatriated income and put an end to the game playing.
“Your own article said that’s what happened.”
The article I cited, from the Cato Institute, said that intervening events such as Covid, other tax cuts, spending programs and the like, now mean that any extension will add $4.6 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years.
Sorry for the reality check Gary. Even Ken Griffin said today that the tax cuts can’t happen, although I didn’t hear him say the 2017 cuts shouldn’t be extended. But if he’s worried about the deficit, then the 2017 cuts have to go too.
“Not one person here is surprised.”
How could you not? It’s one of the country’s largest planned communities. Soooo interesting. There really should be books written about how it came about, what worked in the first decade, and how different they are building it now, over 30 years on. They have gotten rid of the plaza build-out with shops and restaurants. I guess they think Baby Boomers don’t care about that stuff.
Soooo interesting.
Gary:
CBO has graded the extension of the tax cuts at the request of the Senate:
https://www.budget.senate.gov/chairman/newsroom/press/extending-trump-tax-cuts-would-add-46-trillion-to-the-deficit-cbo-finds
So then answer my question above. If the tax cuts are extended do you believe that govt revenue will suddenly trend down? Or do you believe if they expire revenue will suddenly go up? Keep in mind that I can’t find any recent evidence of a tax increase resulting in higher revenue – 1993, 2012 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/W006RC1Q027SBEA This time will be different?
“interesting” /= LOVE
GOP takes power and Republicans immediately go from “The debt is crippling, we’re spending ourselves into disaster, blah blah blah” to
“Let’s cut taxes and who cares what it does to the debt. We’ll worry about that in four years when Democrats take over again.”
Trump’s first admin grew the debt by $7 trillion. Biden’s by $4 trillion. Not saying Biden’s record was good here, but neither party can claim it’s done anything. Not since 2000 when Clinton and the GOP worked out a deal that brought an annual surplus and Bush took over and immediately tax cut and spent it away.
The way the Republicans yammer about the debt when Dems are in power and then become silent about it when they take power is kind of like, “We’re at war with East Asia. We’ve always been at war with East Asia.”
Double think.
Hi Gary
appreciate that you are here – well not in Chicago anymore but still appreciate you
I can’t really follow the he said she said on the tax cuts but wanted to share this article with you from the WSJ
https://www.wsj.com/finance/investing/us-deficit-stock-market-presidents-compared-2013d93c?mod=hp_lead_pos7
it’s about presidents spending tax cuts deficits and so on
““interesting” /= LOVE”
Yep. I LOVE it. It’s sooo interesting. I can’t believe there aren’t books about it. Maybe I will write one.
“I’m glad someone bought the No 9 Walton property though. I wonder who it was?”
JB Pritzker. Would love to know how those negotiations went.
Kenny had to throw in a pallet of Ho-Ho’s
After that, Done deal
“Kenny had to throw in a pallet of Ho-Ho’s”
What will you criticize if he goes on Ozempic and loses the weight? What will you attack then? Because it’s never about his actual leadership or policies.
Sabrina, JohnnyU is probably a fat-attracted poof, hence the focus of his comments. I bet he has every Elton John album.
Yes I’m a chubby chaser, but Gov LardAss is even too fat for me
As far as criticizing Gov LardAss, the opportunities are legion
How hot is it out there?
This Pencil Factory loft in Roscoe Village went under contract in less than a week.
Sold in 2021 at $392,000 (fully renovated)
Listed in 2024 at $435,000
A 2/1 with garage spot, A/C and washer/dryer in the unit. Second bedroom doesn’t have windows.
https://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1800-W-Roscoe-St-60657/unit-311/home/13386150
Sold in 2021 at $392,000 + CPI = $463k
Sold in 2021 at $392,000 + C-S = $475k
Listed in 2024 at $435,000 = somewhere bt 6% and 8.5% below trend.
I, too, could sell a property in a week if I underprice it enough.
Unit faces east, from the east side of the building, so has the metra right there and the brown line curve close, too.
“I, too, could sell a property in a week if I underprice it enough.”
We don’t know what it is going to sell for. Were there multiple offers at this “underprice”?