www.transicionestructural.NET es un nuevo foro, que a partir del 25/06/2012 se ha separado de su homónimo .COM. No se compartirán nuevos mensajes o usuarios a partir de dicho día.
0 Usuarios y 4 Visitantes están viendo este tema.
Las Faangs haciendo de las suyas, pero qué coñazo. Otros 0.25 de subida en junio y como siga a este ritmo igual le mete hasta medio punto. En algún momento corregirán digo yo, que llevan 7 meses subiendo como si no hubiese un mañana, o un ChatGpt.
PLANIFICACIÓN CENTRAL CAPITALISTA
La burbuja popularcapitalista es una vulnerabilidad de seguridad nacional
Lagarde insiste: "todavía tenemos que tener tipos de interés sostenidamente altos"Christine Lagarde ha vuelto a defender de la necesidad de tener unos tipos de interés altos durante un largo periodo de tiempo para combatir la inflación. Durante una entrevista con TVE, la presidenta del Banco Central Europeo ha comentado que "todavía tenemos que tener tipos de interés altos, sostenidamente altos. Es el momento de apretarnos el cinturón". En ese sentido, Lagarde ha añadido que aún no se ha llegado al final del ciclo de subidas y que "tomará las medidas necesarias para que la inflación vuelva al objetivo del 2%".(...)
Bank of America says markets 'underestimate' the Fed's next moveMarkets are currently pricing in a pause in the Federal Reserve's interest rate increases next month. A move that will come before the central bank is forecast to cut rates twice before the end of 2023, according to market pricing.But a new report from rates strategists at Bank of America Global Research out Thursday suggested this pricing means one of two things — either the Fed's rate hikes aren't over yet, or cuts will be deeper than markets expect."Historically, the market tends to underestimate actual Fed policy ahead of both hiking and cutting cycles: the market often prices too few rate cuts ahead of a cutting cycle and too few hikes ahead of a hiking cycle," BofA strategists led by Meghan Swiber wrote in a note to clients on Thursday.(...)
New York City May Be Sinking Under the Weight of Its SkyscrapersA scientific journal suggests that the city’s 1.68 trillion pounds of buildings are causing the city to descend, in some neighborhoods faster than othersFrom the Financial District’s sky-high centers of economic power to the pricey pads that rise above Billionaires’ Row, the great volume of towering buildings is part of what gives New York City its identity. But according to new research cited by the New York Post, the weight of those same buildings that give the Big Apple its soaring sense of bravado could contribute to the city sinking. That’s according to the work of three University of Rhode Island oceanologists and a researcher from the US Geological Survey, who collaborated to publish their findings in the scientific journal Earth’s Future. The scholars first estimated the cumulative weight of New York’s buildings to be 1.68 trillion pounds, and then calculated the downward pressure these buildings exert on the mixture of clay, sand, and slit that make up most of the ground beneath the city’s streets. Based on their model, New York experiences a “subsidence rate” (the technical term for sinking) of about one to two millimeters per year on average, though Lower Manhattan, as well as particular areas of Brooklyn and Queens, show a propensity for greater subsidence risk. As the authors note in their paper, much of lower Manhattan is currently no more than one to two meters above sea level, possibly exacerbating the effects of climate change in turn.While one to two millimeters per year may not seem that much, the study’s authors warn that this amount is more than enough to cause major coastal cities serious problems in the future. “The combination of tectonic and anthropogenic subsidence, sea level rise, and increasing hurricane intensity imply an accelerating problem along coastal and riverfront areas,” the paper states. “Repeated exposure of building foundations to salt water can corrode reinforcing steel and chemically weaken concrete, causing structural weakening.” (...)
https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/new-york-city-may-be-sinking-under-weight-skyscrapersCitarNew York City May Be Sinking Under the Weight of Its SkyscrapersA scientific journal suggests that the city’s 1.68 trillion pounds of buildings are causing the city to descend, in some neighborhoods faster than othersFrom the Financial District’s sky-high centers of economic power to the pricey pads that rise above Billionaires’ Row, the great volume of towering buildings is part of what gives New York City its identity. But according to new research cited by the New York Post, the weight of those same buildings that give the Big Apple its soaring sense of bravado could contribute to the city sinking. That’s according to the work of three University of Rhode Island oceanologists and a researcher from the US Geological Survey, who collaborated to publish their findings in the scientific journal Earth’s Future. The scholars first estimated the cumulative weight of New York’s buildings to be 1.68 trillion pounds, and then calculated the downward pressure these buildings exert on the mixture of clay, sand, and slit that make up most of the ground beneath the city’s streets. Based on their model, New York experiences a “subsidence rate” (the technical term for sinking) of about one to two millimeters per year on average, though Lower Manhattan, as well as particular areas of Brooklyn and Queens, show a propensity for greater subsidence risk. As the authors note in their paper, much of lower Manhattan is currently no more than one to two meters above sea level, possibly exacerbating the effects of climate change in turn.While one to two millimeters per year may not seem that much, the study’s authors warn that this amount is more than enough to cause major coastal cities serious problems in the future. “The combination of tectonic and anthropogenic subsidence, sea level rise, and increasing hurricane intensity imply an accelerating problem along coastal and riverfront areas,” the paper states. “Repeated exposure of building foundations to salt water can corrode reinforcing steel and chemically weaken concrete, causing structural weakening.” (...)
Powell Says Inflation Remains Too HighThe Fed chair said that it would take “some time” for inflation to moderate and that the central bank would continue to look at data as it considers whether to raise rates next month.Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, said on Friday that inflation continues to be “far above” the central bank’s target but said policymakers “haven’t made any decisions” about whether to raise rates at their next meeting in June.The comments, made at the Fed’s annual Thomas Laubach Research Conference, came as businesses and investors around the world are trying to gauge whether the Fed is preparing to pause its campaign to raise borrowing costs amid signs that inflation is easing and the U.S. economy is cooling.Mr. Powell did not offer a clear signal on the path of interest rates, but said the Fed remains committed to bringing inflation closer to the central bank’s 2 percent target.“The data continues to support the committee’s view that bringing inflation down will take some time,” Mr. Powell said.Still, Mr. Powell did note that recent turmoil in the banking sector has prompted lenders to pull back on providing credit, which will probably weigh on economic growth. That could reduce the need to raise interest rates as high as they otherwise would need to be lifted.But Mr. Powell made clear that the Fed, which meets on June 13-14, has not yet determined its next move.“Until very recently, it’s been clear that further policy firming would be required,” Mr. Powell said. “As policy has become more restrictive, the risks of doing too much versus too little are becoming more balanced.”He added: “So we haven’t made any decisions about the extent to which additional policy firming will be appropriate.”(...)
Le voy a pedir nuevamente a Cadavre su ayuda para subir este artículo del Wall Street Journalhttps://www.wsj.com/articles/in-todays-housing-market-its-timing-over-location-eefdb890CitarIn Today’s Housing Market, It’s Timing Over LocationSteep increases in home prices and mortgage rates have set buyers on divergent financial trajectories—even when they bought only a year or two apart.Fue alrededor de 1998 que yo me di cuenta de que algo no funcionaba: debería de haber nacido antes para poder acceder a una vivienda con un esfuerzo razonable. Ya entonces estaba trabajando en grandes despachos de abogados, así que "más y mejor" era difícil de alcanzar. Yo ya había alcanzado un objetivo profesional que no me facilitaba unas condiciones de vida en proporción al esfuerzo que yo realizaba diariamente.
In Today’s Housing Market, It’s Timing Over LocationSteep increases in home prices and mortgage rates have set buyers on divergent financial trajectories—even when they bought only a year or two apart.
In Today’s Housing Market, It’s Timing Over LocationSteep increases in home prices and mortgage rates have set buyers on divergent financial trajectories—even when they bought only a year or two apart.By Joe Pinsker | Photographs by Carlos Bernate for The Wall Street Journal | May 19, 2023Elizabeth and Phillip Martin feel lucky to have bought a house in 2020 with a mortgage rate of 2.875%. Anyone on the hunt for a new house lately has learned a hard truth about real estate: The only thing more important than location is timing.Mortgage rates surged so much and so quickly in 2022 that those who bought homes mere months apart are now on starkly different financial paths. Some buyers’ good fortune to lock in historically low rates could pay off for decades and impact their life choices. Many late to the market have shifted from having fear of missing out to actually missing out.Elizabeth and Phillip Martin of Roanoke, Va., started to shop for a home in spring 2020. That’s when Phillip, now 36, got a job as a high-school administrator, which confirmed they would stay in the area.The couple bought a three-bedroom house that August for $239,000 with a mortgage rate of 2.875%, less than half the nationwide average today. “Anytime I think I’m having a bad day, I just think, ‘I could be paying my house off on a 7% interest rate,’” said Elizabeth, a 35-year-old high-school teacher. “There but for the grace of God go I.” The Martins at home in Roanoke, Va. Their house’s price has increased by about 33% in under three years, according to estimates on real-estate websites.Three years later, Kyanna Sampson, of Woodbridge, N.J., and her fiancé found themselves in a very different environment when they got engaged and started searching for a house. In March, they were preapproved for a mortgage with a rate of 6%, said Sampson, a 31-year-old member coordinator at a local realtor association. “We obviously are coming into the housing market at a horrible time,” Sampson said. “My fiancé, he always keeps saying, ‘If we were just born a little earlier or a little later…’”Happening into the housing market at a favorable moment has always been nice, but its wild fluctuations over the past three years have created a financial and emotional gulf between different groups of recent buyers.Average rate on a 30-year fixed mortgageNote: Weekly data as of May 18. Based on a 20% downpayment and a FICO score of 740 or higher.Source: Freddie MacRosie Ettenheim/THE WALL STREET JOURNAL“The real financial winners were the pandemic home buyers who locked into mortgage rates around 2 to 3%,” said Odeta Kushi, deputy chief economist at First American Financial Corporation, a provider of title and settlement services. Mortgage rates initially dropped after the Federal Reserve lowered interest rates at the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. They later jumped as the Fed began a series of rate hikes in March 2022 to address inflation. Fed officials signaled earlier this month that they might be finished raising rates for now. The average rate for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage is currently 6.39%, according to Freddie Mac. The typical monthly payment on a median-priced existing single-family home nearly doubled in two years, rising from $1,033 in June 2020 to $1,933 in June 2022, according to the National Association of Realtors, a trade group. Since the Martins bought their house, they have had room in their budget to put in some new flooring and carpeting as well as a wood stove in their den. They also bought a new car. Elizabeth Martin said she has at times felt financially unlucky as someone who holds student debt and has Type 1 diabetes. “We don’t always note those times when we’ve been the beneficiaries of luck,” she said. “This was definitely one of those times.”“We don’t always note those times when we’ve been the beneficiaries of luck,” said Elizabeth Martin, a 35-year-old high-school teacher. “This was definitely one of those times.” House hunters’ buying power has declined significantly since the Martins’ home purchase. In August 2021 the highest-priced home that a median-income household could afford with an average mortgage rate peaked at $593,166, according to an analysis from First American. That figure, which assumes a down payment of 20%, plummeted to a recent low of $387,313 in October 2022. For home buyers, it’s as if they took a bathroom break during a game of Monopoly to find that every price on the board had nearly doubled. Many of today’s prospective buyers cannot afford to get their foot in the door, literally. Some of Kyanna Sampson’s friends managed to buy houses in 2019 and 2020, in convenient locations and with lower mortgage rates. “I am a little jealous,” she said. The Cost of Buying a $300,000 House in June 2020 vs. June 2022For a purchase with a 30-year loan and a 20% downpaymentNote: Interest and total amount paid are in thousands of U.S. dollars. Total paid includes the estimated costs of refinancing.Source: Andy Carswell, University of GeorgiaRosie Ettenheim/THE WALL STREET JOURNALMany of those who bought when their dollars went furthest, however, faced vicious competition, Kushi noted, and may have waived contingencies or settled for less-than-perfect houses. The median number of days that a house was on the market, typically 30 to 40 in 2019, dropped to the low 20s in 2020 and into the teens in 2021 and 2022, per the National Association of Realtors. The difference in having bought a home now versus a few years ago could hit Americans’ wallets for decades to come, economists say. Refinancing down the line could help, but likely wouldn’t come close to erasing that gap.A hypothetical buyer who purchased a house in June 2020 for $300,000, roughly the median for existing single-family homes at the time, with a 20% down payment and a 3% mortgage rate would pay about $89,000 in interest over the first 15 years of a 30-year loan, according to calculations by Andy Carswell, a professor of consumer economics at the University of Georgia. By comparison, someone who bought at the same price in June 2022 with a 6% mortgage rate would pay about $190,000 in interest over 15 years. If interest rates dropped such that the 2022 buyer were able to refinance at 5% five years after their purchase, that number would drop to about $168,000, Carswell’s calculations show. Homebuyers’ Purchasing Power, 2018-2023The highest price that a median-income household could afford with an average mortgage rateNote: Data through April 2023. Based on 20% downpayment and mortgage payment equivalent to one-third of pre-tax income.Source: First American Financial CorporationRosie Ettenheim/THE WALL STREET JOURNALRefinancing comes at a cost, though—in this case, about $7,000 if it came out to 3% of the value of the new loan, a typical percentage for the fees and closing costs.In the past several decades, good timing has tended to be less a matter of favorable prices and interest rates than of what happens in the housing market in the years after a purchase, said Jeffrey Zabel, an economics professor at Tufts University. The problem for prospective buyers, Zabel said, is that even though timing matters, it is very hard to know in the moment if a certain time is fortuitous.Renters who bought into the relatively stable housing market between 1989 and 1999 built more wealth in the following years and decades due to home-price appreciation than those who bought into the more turbulent market between 2001 and 2007, according to a 2020 study Zabel co-wrote. But purchasing during any particular year in one of those periods wasn’t more advantageous than purchasing during the others in that span of time. Buyers who missed out on the lower prices and rates earlier in the 2020s say it is sometimes hard not to focus on what might have been.Diana Capozzi of Lebanon, N.H., says that buying a house before 2022 would have made it easier to save for her son’s college education. Photo: Dave WilsonDiana Capozzi, a 39-year-old veterinarian, is bitter that the moment when she was ready to buy a house came near the end of a run-up in prices. She purchased a three-bedroom in Lebanon, N.H., in March 2022 for $570,000, about $170,000 more than it had sold for less than two years earlier.Her mortgage rate, 3.875%, is desirable by today’s standards and she feels lucky to have it. Nonetheless, she saw some friends refinance in 2020 at a percentage point lower and wishes she had become a homeowner sooner. She wonders if doing so would have put her on a more comfortable financial trajectory as she saves for her child’s college education and continues paying off loans from vet school. Capozzi said that the amount she would have saved on her monthly mortgage payment if she had bought a year earlier would cover most of what she owes each month on her student loans. The house she bought is on a road called Poverty Lane, which she hopes isn’t a bad omen. Economists say that because homeownership is a powerful generator of wealth, people who today wish they had bought earlier still have much to gain. “I wouldn’t kick myself too hard if I was 30 and missed the last three years,” said Bill McBride, author of the housing-focused economics blog Calculated Risk. “I would just say, ‘OK, well, I got lots of years left.’” Americans continue to have more faith in real estate than any other investment. 34% of Americans rated it the best long-term investment in a recent Gallup survey, down from 41% in 2021 and 45% in 2022. For the purposes of building long-term wealth, when someone buys a home is typically less important than if they buy one at all, McBride said. And for many people, surging prices and interest rates closed off that possibility for now. Jessica Jordan is grateful to have capitalized on that window of opportunity before it closed. In 2020, after eight years of renting an apartment in the Chicago area, Jordan, now age 37, and her wife were tired of its communal laundry facilities, window AC units, and uncovered parking. Jessica Jordan, right, says that she and her wife, Kate Frangella, now wouldn’t be able to afford the house they bought in August 2020 with today’s higher prices and interest rates. Photo: Kate FrangellaThe couple had assumed that they couldn’t afford to buy a house, but started looking as mortgage rates began to dip that spring. In August, they ended up with a $295,000 house in Lombard, Ill., a 2.875% mortgage rate, and a sense that they had taken a long-awaited step toward full-fledged adulthood. Jordan, who works at a distributor of auto marketing products, thinks that they would still be in their old apartment today if they hadn’t bought a house before prices and rates shot up. “I feel like we’re going to live here forever,” she said.Write to Joe Pinsker at joe.pinsker@wsj.com
Cita de: asustadísimosPLANIFICACIÓN CENTRAL CAPITALISTA = Nacionalsocialismo Cita de: asustadísimosLa burbuja popularcapitalista es una vulnerabilidad de seguridad nacional = pactar con BILDU Estoy seguro de que esto va a llevar mucho más esfuerzo del que pueda parecer a priori. Esta misma semana, un buen amigo de mi infancia me explicaba cómo acababa de entrar en el negocio popularcapitalista, con el legítimo fin de vivir de rentas.No tengo la menor duda de que ganará. ¿Alguien duda de que la política de fronteras abiertas tienen esa finalidad? Reconozcamos que la PLANIFICACIÓN CENTRAL consiste en llenar el país de gente en edad de trabajar que honre el negociete de la generación T.¿Porque?Porque son ellos quienes LO ESTÁN PLANIFICANDO.Pon a un pederasta a planificar y ya sabes lo que obtendrás.Me remito a la imagen.
Cita de: CHOSEN en Mayo 19, 2023, 16:33:17 pmCita de: asustadísimosPLANIFICACIÓN CENTRAL CAPITALISTA = Nacionalsocialismo Cita de: asustadísimosLa burbuja popularcapitalista es una vulnerabilidad de seguridad nacional = pactar con BILDU Estoy seguro de que esto va a llevar mucho más esfuerzo del que pueda parecer a priori. Esta misma semana, un buen amigo de mi infancia me explicaba cómo acababa de entrar en el negocio popularcapitalista, con el legítimo fin de vivir de rentas.No tengo la menor duda de que ganará. ¿Alguien duda de que la política de fronteras abiertas tienen esa finalidad? Reconozcamos que la PLANIFICACIÓN CENTRAL consiste en llenar el país de gente en edad de trabajar que honre el negociete de la generación T.¿Porque?Porque son ellos quienes LO ESTÁN PLANIFICANDO.Pon a un pederasta a planificar y ya sabes lo que obtendrás.Me remito a la imagen.Efectivamente y nunca han escondido su parecer. Hay dos colectivos ampliamente pro inmigración, no por valores humanos claro está, sino para mantener el negociete. Los dos son poderosos porque unos son la generación T más todos los propietarios, normalmente gente que esconde la apertura de fronteras por cuestiones humanas, pero lo único que quieren es ver aumentar la población de su ciudad para que la presión demográfica aumente el valorcillo de los inmuebles, le importa un pito si llega a convertirse en un estercolero humano. El otro colectivo es el empresario que se centra en el turismo y los servicios de bajo valor añadido, mención especial al sector de la agricultura. Estos empresarios son los que salen quejándose de falta de personal llamando gandules a gente que va a vendimiar a Francia porque pagan mejor. Este dueto aparentemente opuesto tiene los intereses muy muy alineados y configuran gran parte de la política nacional. Antes del 2008 había muchos más interesados, el propio estado con los impuestos, las constructoras, las promotoras, los fabricantes, los ayuntamientos...... la burbuja en cierto punto, alimentaba a gran parte del país. Ahora es el puto trile de mierda de joder a los trabajadores a través de los bajos salarios y los pisos caros. Este modelo exclusivo (de excluir a colectivos) pasará una factura del copón, ni se imaginan lo que ocurrirá de mantener el tinglado durante algo más de tiempo (tampoco falta mucho). Ahora nos vienen con guarrerías, como saben que España se está despoblando, concentran fuerzas en ciudades, especialmente en Barcelona y Madrid, pero intentan alargar los tentáculos a ciudades medianas como Valencia o Zaragoza. Amén de la costa y todo lo relacionado con el turismo de las cuatro P’s (Pipas, Playa, Paseo y Pisito).Me encantaría que dieran voz a ciertos colectivos menospreciados por la derecha y por la izquierda, colectivos que no poseen pisito, que cada vez pagan más impuestos y reciben menos servicios y que parecen ser el escudo humano de todas las crisis económicas.Saludos y buen finde.
La planificación central consiste en campañas anuales contra la gripe porque hay nuevas cepas cada año, pero no contra el covid, porque ni es grave ni suele mutar, a pesar de que era justo lo contrario hace 12 meses, según los expertos planificadores centrales.¿Qué entendemos por planificación central?¿Acaso la burbuja inmobiliaria no fue planificada?Demasiadas sombras.Hace falta que la situación evolucione.
Eran funcionarios chinos con tres hijos (el sistema) los que firmaban sentencias de muerte para bebés nacidos en otras familias durante la política de "un solo hijo".Son los usuarios de jets privados (el sistema) los que se reúnen para quitarte el coche barato con el que visitas a tu madre enferma.Etc.Se necesita definir quien, como, cuando y donde se van a tomar esas decisiones de planificación que afectan tan gravemente a la ciudadanía, porque planificado y central podemos acabar rebajando la condena a 1200 violadores por el bien de las mujeres.