President Donald Trump

A fifth of California homes are investor-owned as state’s affordability crisis deepens – report
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...

NY:
https://www.nysenate.gov/newsroom/press-...
In the metro area, nearly one of every six homebuyers in Q3 2024 was an investor. In Buffalo, the investor hold is even stronger, both in ownership and sales.

The state government is taking notice: new proposals aim to curb speculative purchases by large investment firms and help preserve opportunities for individual homebuyers.

And we can go on down the list.

Been only skimming the thread to catch up but I just want to address this.

I strongly believe the coastal elite stereotype is at least 50% perpetuated by Democrats and left leaning people in general.

To a large extent, I think some of internalized the critique and do worry about being elitist and that makes conversations awkward when they want to make the argument the government should be staffed by “technocrats” that inevitably needs to be highly educated. In some ways, they are simultaneously saying the jobs need to be staffed by people like them (highly educated elites) but not by people like them (can’t be white and can’t be from Ivy or some other privileged background).

There is just a disconnect between their blue collar working class narrative and their increasingly white collar base. The disconnect is especially big with racial minorities who actually tend to lean conservative on social and economic issues.

This is to say nothing of that the definition of “whiteness” historically tended to expand to maintain a majority. (This isn’t out of malice or anything. I think it’s a natural sociological phenomenon of being in more constant contact with expanding groups and eventually melting with the expanding groups.)

What’s an “investor-owned” home? Would that include rental properties?

what's a "fact" that "foreign owned REITs buy a lot of property in blue states" because "the federal gvmnt has allowed them to buy unlimited property"?

1) When did the "federal gvmnt" "allowed" foreigners to buy property? are you sure the fed had to explicitly allow it and it was otherwise illegal?

2) How many houses do "foreign owned REIT" own in , say, california, as a % of total? ballpark?

I read less redic versions of this conspiracy , at least they said "corporate entities". They still grotesquely exaggerated the amount of housing that corporate entities bought.

Give us some numbers than would explain that reason to be the MAIN DRIVER of obscenely higher costs in blue states (rather than, say, far higher local taxes)

you said FOREIGNERS lolomg wtf.

Any property owned by an outside investment group. Most groups primarily buy in order to rent. That's why there's a running joke that we're all eventually going to be renters.

1) This is part of federal law and the constitution, to protect foreign nationals. States can step in and change property right laws, and some have or are in the process of doing so.

2) You can research this yourself. Also, I didn't just mean ONLY foreign investment groups. It doesn't really matter if they are foreign or not, just that they aren't buying there not to live. They are buying there to turn a profit only.

It's called, supply and demand. People w/ money and resources, prefer to live in blue states. Red states don't tax appropriately, and end up sucking off blue states teets. So while they have lower costs of living, really they are all just welfare queens in the end. And they are welfare queens w/ worse outcomes in every important quality of society metric.

You're fkn wrong... and I'm not going to waste my time explaining any of this to you, because to be quite frank, your brain is broken and there's no point.

that's literally how a huge swathe of americans vote

who would i rather frack or have a beer with

pretty common knowledge, do not understand your outrage and indignancy on this one

I generally agree with all of this at a high level

says "blue states are expensive because the fed allowed foreigners to buy housing!"

then "doesn't matter if they are foreigners"
oh "it was always allowed actually at the federal level"
to oh wait it's something STATES can do (and many do)

Nut nut level of analysis

there's very good reason why of all the little trumpkins, these are the two who he surrounds himself with the most and who get the most attention

I guess she doesn’t like the term liberal wine mom or the suggestion that they would vote based off of looks.

Which is funny because liberal wine mom is a leftist slur to denigrate what they perceive as low info voters that we coopted I’m pretty sure.

IHIP news is a good example of this demographic.

There is a reason we have the "conservative face" meme and its just republican women who have had a bunch of surgery and do their make up to look like Ivanka

Like I said, it's pointless... you can't even understand that the main point is investment groups are buying up property in blue states, and not living there. It doesn't matter if they are foreign or not. <---- this drives up costs.

I first said foreign groups, because they are part of those investors... but they are not all of them. But now you're hyper focused on that lack of clarifying language, because you want to win the argument, not understand it.

Like I said... it's pointless engaging w/ you.

Have fun everyone!

What you wrote above is certainly true to a degree. But what you wrote below isn't the only cause.

In some cases, liberals have perpetuated the stereotype by writing things or saying things that sound relatively elitist, or that at a minimum are easy to mischaracterize as expressions of elitism. The endless discussion of What's the Matter with Kansas and Obama's gaffe about working class voters clinging to guns and religion come to mind.

In other words, I don't think it is all a product of self-flagellation or misguided expressions of liberal white guilt.

Well if it feels good then thats the most important thing.

But yeah, the democrats have certainly been very cringy and out of touch when they deviated away from focusing on the pocket books and financial well being that resonates with everyone from age 20-90 to instead virtue signal smaller groups to feel good about themselves at the cost of votes.

Republicans of course have been prone to similar gaffes that smack of elitism. Romney's notorious 47% remark comes to mind.

fact is Romney said something which was objectively true and key for the political divide. result: electoral disaster.

that's when republicans understood completely they have to lie (and they are right)

I saw that you had responded in this thread.

And I knew without even looking which post you were responding to and what you had said.

I mean, morale is an important factor for surviving the next 3 years

One of the goals of flooding the zone, the endless rhetoric, and constant boundary pushing is to instill a feeling of helplessness that drives a sense of political nihilism

So yeah, I'd say that "feeling good" is important when you have to tread water for years. Not sure I'd say its "the most important thing"

Ya pretty funny telling that to elite republicans when the voting base of the party is actually white rural welfare Cletuses.

was it in 2010?

Why are you trying to guess what I’m thinking when you don’t have the necessary aptitude for it?

nah it's just 14 months. If you get the house in 2026 (and you have sky high chances to get it), things change a lot and you can do whatever you want to gain morale with it. Like impeaching everyone in the trump admin you think overstepped and so on.