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 2 Visitantes están viendo este tema.
Vuelvo a editar: parece que ya han desmontado la historia de la pobrecita Giuseppina, que ahora no aparece por ningún lado.https://news.italy24.press/news/336065.htmlEl ladrillariado es más rápido desmintiendo estas historias que newtral y maldita. Me van a faltar palomitas para tanto circo.
Para según qué cosas... convendría volver a usar la máquina de escribir.
Como señalan los compañeros de Xataka, el “Algoritmo Max” vigila que las empresas cumplan su labor con aspectos como las horas extra o los impagos a los empleados. Para ello, es capaz de cruzar datos con la Agencia Tributaria para analizar aspectos como la facturación o la contratación de personal. Y, en caso de detectar un indicio, como una empresa que factura más dinero con los mismos empleados, genera un aviso automático que llega a los inspectores del Ministerio de Trabajo y la Seguridad Social.
(...)Decir que los conquistadores del Nuevo Mundo lo hicieron por dinero es como decir que los astronautas van al espacio por dinero. ¿Hay "bando correcto" en la Historia? Lo que hay es una serie de hechos encadenados y unos valores que transmiten "los ganadores". La evolución de esos valores es lo marca nuestra forma de pensar actual. Desde nuestra perspectiva sí, hay un "bando correcto". Si los acontecimientos se hubieran desarrollado de otra manera, el lado bueno de la Historia sería diferente.Con la excepción de España que nos quieren vender que Franco fue una anomalía histórica cuando fue la norma para su epoca y contexto. No creo que pervive "el que mata menos", creo que es al revés. Pervive el que tiene la tecnología para matar más (aunque no la use). Si hacemos balance de la historia reciente los mayores asesinos han muerto en una cama y con sus países/imperios funcionando a pleno rendimiento.
Google Axes 12,000 JobsPosted by msmash on Friday January 20, 2023 @09:00AM from the tussle-continues dept.Google is laying off 12,000 workers, or about 6% of its workforce, becoming the latest tech company to trim staff as the economic boom that the industry rode during the COVID-19 pandemic ebbed. From a report:CitarCEO Sundar Pichai informed staff Friday at the Silicon Valley giant about the cuts in an email that was also posted on the company's news blog. The firings adds to tens of thousands of other job losses recently announced by Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook parent Meta and other tech companies as they tighten their belts amid a darkening outlook for the industry. Just this month, there have been at least 48,000 job cuts announced by major companies in the sector."Over the past two years we've seen periods of dramatic growth," Pichai wrote. "To match and fuel that growth, we hired for a different economic reality than the one we face today." He said the layoffs reflect a "rigorous review" carried out by Google of its operations. The jobs being eliminated "cut across Alphabet, product areas, functions, levels and regions," Pichai said. In a regulatory filing late last year, the company said that it employed nearly 187,000 people. Pichai said that Google, founded nearly a quarter of a century ago, was "bound to go through difficult economic cycles."
CEO Sundar Pichai informed staff Friday at the Silicon Valley giant about the cuts in an email that was also posted on the company's news blog. The firings adds to tens of thousands of other job losses recently announced by Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook parent Meta and other tech companies as they tighten their belts amid a darkening outlook for the industry. Just this month, there have been at least 48,000 job cuts announced by major companies in the sector."Over the past two years we've seen periods of dramatic growth," Pichai wrote. "To match and fuel that growth, we hired for a different economic reality than the one we face today." He said the layoffs reflect a "rigorous review" carried out by Google of its operations. The jobs being eliminated "cut across Alphabet, product areas, functions, levels and regions," Pichai said. In a regulatory filing late last year, the company said that it employed nearly 187,000 people. Pichai said that Google, founded nearly a quarter of a century ago, was "bound to go through difficult economic cycles."
Cita de: puede ser en Enero 20, 2023, 01:23:36 am¿Los extremeños que conquistaron América lo hicieron para extender los valores judeo-cristianos y la herencia greco-romana?, no, lo hicieron por dinero. a no ser que sea catalan, reflexione sobre lo que ha escrito.
¿Los extremeños que conquistaron América lo hicieron para extender los valores judeo-cristianos y la herencia greco-romana?, no, lo hicieron por dinero.
ESTUDIO SOBRE LAS CAUSAS DE LAS CORRUPCIÓNLa probabilidad de corrupción se multiplica por cuatro por cada 1% que sube la viviendaCorrupción y alzas desmesuradas en el precio de la vivienda van de la mano. Un estudio ha encontrado una estrecha vinculación. Las probabilidades de corrupción se multiplican por cuatro si la vivienda sube un 1%Foto: Vista desde el barrio de la Palmilla de Málaga. (EFE/Jorge Zapata)Vista desde el barrio de la Palmilla de Málaga. (EFE/Jorge Zapata)Por Carlos Sánchez19/01/2023 - 05:00EC EXCLUSIVOArtículo solo para suscriptoresEl trabajo se ha publicado en una de las plataformas académicas más prestigiosas del mundo económico, y su aportación fundamental es haber medido las probabilidades de que crezca la corrupción en función del incremento de la vivienda. Su principal conclusión no deja lugar a dudas: por cada 1% que suba el precio medio de la vivienda, la probabilidad de que haya corrupción se multiplica por cuatro. En concreto, un 3,9%. La segunda conclusión tiene que ver con una consideración de carácter político basada en la experiencia de anteriores ciclos expansivos en los que se encarecieron de forma intensa los precios de la vivienda, y que habitualmente se conocen como burbujas. En este caso, concluye el estudio, los gobiernos municipales que gozan de una mayoría absoluta "son más susceptibles de incurrir en corrupción".Foto: Foto: Reuters/Jon Nazca.El nuevo rentismo: crecen los españoles con varios pisos en alquiler (y las familias sin piso)Héctor García Barnés Gráficos: Ana RuizEl estudio no ha detectado diferencias reseñables en la probabilidad de corrupción en municipios liderados por gobiernos locales mayoritarios del PP o del PSOE, aunque sí en función del nivel de actividad económica en los municipios. Los más dinámicos, donde la renta per cápita es mayor, tienen menos probabilidad de que estallen casos de corrupción que los más atrasados. Los autores del estudio, en contra de lo que intuitivamente puede parecer, no encuentran evidencias de que el hecho de que un municipio se sitúe en la costa sea más proclive a la corrupción. Habitualmente, como se sabe, se ha relacionado la corrupción con las recalificaciones en zonas de playa al calor de la inversión nacional y extranjera. El trabajo —se puede leer aquí— lo firman los profesores Antonios Marios Koumpias, de la Universidad de Michigan Dearborn; Jorge Martínez-Vazquez, de la Universidad del Estado de Georgia, y Eduardo Sanz-Arcega, de la de Zaragoza, que han estudiado la causalidad que existe entre precios de la vivienda y la corrupción urbanística, fenómeno que se dio con intensidad durante los primeros años del siglo hasta que la burbuja estalló. Los numerosos casos observados preocuparon, incluso, al Parlamento Europeo, que llegó a calificar de "endémica" la corrupción urbanística en España.El contextoLos autores del estudio parten para su análisis de diferentes trabajos académicos que han puesto de manifiesto la existencia de "un grave problema de corrupción política a nivel municipal asociado al sector inmobiliario", y, en particular, un vínculo estrecho entre corrupción y desarrollo urbanístico. A esta conclusión se puede llegar de forma intuitiva, pero lo que aporta el estudio, según Eduardo Sanz-Arcega, uno de los autores, es, precisamente, que las mediciones están basadas en criterios científicos. Son, por lo tanto, medias. Es por eso por lo que del análisis se han excluido comportamientos irregulares que han podido existir en otras actividades no inmobiliarias, pero que no están acreditadas en alguno de los registros con los que se han construido las bases de datos. Entre las causas de la corrupción se encuentran las oportunidades que ofrece el negocio inmobiliario para la búsqueda de rentas, la enorme discrecionalidad municipal en el planeamiento urbanístico y, por último, un débil sistema institucional local que ha favorecido la corrupción. Además de condiciones de financiación muy beneficiosas, tanto para los compradores como para los promotores. Entre 1999 y 2007, en concreto, los créditos hipotecarios crecieron en España un 19,8%, muy por encima del 10,4% en el conjunto de la zona euro. Igualmente, en 2007, por cada 100 habitantes se construyeron 1,6 viviendas, también muy por encima del 1,1% en la eurozona. Los precios reales de la propiedad inmobiliaria aumentaron un 25,5% entre 2003 y 2009.El trabajo hace suyos algunos estudios académicos anteriores que han encontrado evidencias de que el hecho de que se destapen casos de corrupción apenas tiene influencia en los resultados municipales posteriores. Uno de los trabajos que se citan ha llegado a la conclusión de que, entre 2007 y 2011, la pérdida de votos para el partido corrupto es de apenas el 1,8% respecto de los alcaldes que son honestos. Ahora bien, como sostiene Sanz-Arcega, hay que matizar que el trabajo, por razones de disponibilidad de datos, no analiza la intensidad cuantitativa de la corrupción, lo que significa que no se diferencian casos de unos pocos miles de euros con otros de mucha mayor cuantía. Para su análisis, lo que han hecho los autores del estudio es explotar la información existente a nivel municipal sobre los casos de corrupción urbanística y su relación con los precios locales de la vivienda durante un periodo de tiempo determinado. En concreto, entre principios de siglo y mediados de la primera década, en los municipios más grandes de España. Para ser más precisos, los que tuvieran una población de más de 25.000 habitantes, que son los únicos de los que se cuenta con información detallada sobre los precios de la vivienda. La base de datos es la que ha confeccionado un equipo de investigadores de la Universidad de Barcelona liderado por Albert Solé-Ollé. La muestra del estudio se compone de 554 observaciones municipio-ciclo electoral. A la vista de los resultados, los autores del estudio recomiendan a los poderes públicos avanzar en tres direcciones para hacer frente a la corrupción urbanística. En primer lugar, favorecer la competencia política, ya que actúa como freno de la corrupción urbanística. En segundo lugar, alentar la rendición de cuentas por acción de la ciudadanía, lo que dificulta la incursión en prácticas corruptas, que parecen actuar en mayor medida en municipios densamente poblados y en aquellos de mayor población. Finalmente, favorecer el diseño de políticas públicas que tengan en cuenta los efectos perjudiciales que tiene el incremento de la actividad económica en torno al urbanismo en forma de externalidades negativas, como la propagación de la corrupción.
El precio del alquiler sube más que la inflación en 32 capitales y en 35 grandes poblacionesA cierre de 2022, el precio medio de la vivienda en alquiler se ha incrementado un 8,4% interanual en España hasta los 11,4 euros/m2 al mes, según el último índice de precios del alquiler de viviendas publicado por idealista, el marketplace inmobiliario del sur de Europa.Son 2,7 puntos porcentuales más que la tasa de inflación registrada en diciembre, tras conocerse el dato definitivo de Índice de Precios al Consumo (IPC) del último mes del año publicado por el Instituto Nacional de Estadística (INE).https://www.idealista.com/news/inmobiliario/vivienda/2023/01/16/803090-los-precios-del-alquiler-suben-mas-que-la-inflacion-en-32-capitales-y-en-35-grandes
The Mystery of the Declining U.S. Birth RateThe Issue:Up until the Great Recession, the number of babies born per woman in the United States had been quite stable for the previous three decades. The birth rate fluctuated within a relatively narrow range, often along with economic conditions, with fewer babies born during lean times and with births recovering when economic growth was stronger. However, the U.S. birth rate has fallen precipitously since the 2007 Great Recession, with no signs of reversing. This decline cannot be explained by demographic, economic, or policy changes. It is reflective of lower childbearing rates across successive cohorts.The Facts:*The Great Recession disrupted a stable period in birth rates. For the almost three decades between 1980 and 2007, the U.S. birth rate hovered between 65 and 70 births per 1,000 women between the ages of 15 and 44. The birth rate followed a predictable pro-cyclical pattern, falling during economic downturns and recovering when the economy improves. But something changed around the time of the Great Recession; the birth rate fell precipitously, and it did not recover when the economy improved. Rather, the U.S. birth rate has continued a steady descent. As of 2020, the U.S. birth rate was 55.8 births per 1,000 women between the ages of 15 and 44, a decline of almost 20 percent from the rate of 69.3 in 2007. *The decline in births cannot readily be explained by changing population composition. The sustained decline in U.S. births since 2007 has been driven by declining births among many demographic groups, rather than by changes in population composition. Births have fallen among women in their early 20s, late 20s, and teens (in fact, the teen birth rate in the U.S. has been falling steadily since the mid-1990s). Births have fallen among white women, Black women, and Hispanic women, with the largest declines among Hispanic women. Births have also fallen among women with and without college degrees and among both married and unmarried women. The population of U.S. women of childbearing age has actually shifted toward groups that tend to have higher birth rates, not lower birth rates, with the exception of a rising share of women of childbearing age being unmarried. *No obvious policy or economic factor can explain much of the decline. The onset of the Great Recession clearly played a role in the early stages of the decline. Beyond that, it is difficult to identify any policy or economic factor that can statistically account for the continued decline. Casual observers have suggested that a variety of potential factors are responsible for the decline, including greater take-up of highly effective contraception, the high cost of raising children, improved occupational opportunities for women, and the high level of student debt carried by young adults. Our research finds little empirical support for these possible explanations. Moreover, none of the measures that have been shown in previous research to have a causal effect on annual birth rates – such as labor market conditions (beyond the Great Recession), certain social policy indicators (such as child support enforcement) or reproductive health policy measures (such as abortion clinic closures) – have changed in ways that can account for the drop in the national birth rate since 2007. *Successive generations of women are having fewer children at every age. While the largest decreases in birth rates have occurred amongst women under 30, it is possible that this reflects more than a general tendency among women to delay childbirth and that there are generational changes taking place. Cohorts of U.S. women born after the mid-1980s are having fewer births at all ages. The above figure shows that subsequent cohorts of women who were born in the windows 1968 to 1972, 1973 to 1977, and 1978 to1982 all had similar childbearing age profiles throughout their lives. Then, the cohort of women born between 1983 and 1987 had fewer children throughout their 20s and their 30s. The next two five-year birth cohorts of women (born between 1988 and 1997) have fewer children than earlier cohorts. In other words, later cohorts of mothers have fewer children at every age than women in earlier cohorts. The likelihood of births “catching up” at older ages across these cohorts seems limited.*Shifting priorities could be the primary driver for the decline in the birth rate since 2007. There is survey and anecdotal data suggesting that perhaps more recent cohorts of young adults have different preferences for having children, aspirations for life, and views about parenting norms that are driving the decline in the U.S. birth rates. These shifts could reflect preferences and norms that changed primarily in earlier decades, long before 2007 – such as more intensive parenting practices and expanded economic opportunities for women – in ways that profoundly shaped the world views of today’s younger adults.*A sustained decline in the birth rate would have important social and economic consequences. A temporary decline in annual birth rates does not necessarily portend social and economic challenges. However, the decline in annual birth rates in the U.S. has been ongoing for many years and as shown above, corresponds to a decline in the number of children a woman has over her lifetime, on average. This trend predicts a persistently lower fertility rate in the U.S., which, absent increased immigration, would lead to a smaller workforce and an older population. In general, a smaller workforce and an aging population would have negative implications for economic productivity and per capita income growth. In addition, the combination of a smaller workforce and an aging population puts fiscal pressure on social insurance programs, like Social Security, that rely on tax payments from current workers to pay the benefits of current retirees. Some observers point to the idea that, all else equal, a shrinking population will reduce humans’ carbon footprint, and hence have positive environmental effects. We are not aware of any evidence, though, that population declines corresponding to the size of the drop in U.S. fertility would have a meaningful effect on climate outcomes. *The onset of the COVID pandemic added another layer of uncertainty to childbearing trends in the United States. Births conceived between the onset of the pandemic in March 2020 and the end of that year fell by around 60,000. This is a smaller drop than many had expected, given the dramatic rise in unemployment and in economic and public health uncertainty at the outset of the pandemic. It is possible that government assistance blunted the economic impact of the pandemic on many families.CitarWhat this Means:Although the 2007 recession seems to have played a role in decreasing the number of children born per woman in the United States, the lack of any rebound in births and, in fact, their continued decline following the end of the recession suggests a role for factors beyond the Great Recession. A decline in annual birth rates does not necessarily imply a long-term reduction in childbearing. If the recent decline in annual birth rates simply reflects women pushing off having children from their 20s to their 30s, then annual birth rates will eventually rebound and the total number of children the average U.S. woman has over her lifetime will not change. But the decline in annual birth rates since 2007 is consistent with more recent cohorts of women having fewer births. Those cohorts have not completed their childbearing years yet, but the number of births they would have to have at older ages to catch up to the lifetime childbearing rates of earlier cohorts is so large that it seems unlikely they will do so. If the decline in births reflects a (semi)permanent shift in priorities, as opposed to transitory economic or policy factors, the U.S. is likely to see a sustained decline in birth rates and a general decline in fertility for the foreseeable future. This has consequences for projected U.S. economic growth and productivity, as well as the fiscal sustainability of current social insurance programs.
What this Means:Although the 2007 recession seems to have played a role in decreasing the number of children born per woman in the United States, the lack of any rebound in births and, in fact, their continued decline following the end of the recession suggests a role for factors beyond the Great Recession. A decline in annual birth rates does not necessarily imply a long-term reduction in childbearing. If the recent decline in annual birth rates simply reflects women pushing off having children from their 20s to their 30s, then annual birth rates will eventually rebound and the total number of children the average U.S. woman has over her lifetime will not change. But the decline in annual birth rates since 2007 is consistent with more recent cohorts of women having fewer births. Those cohorts have not completed their childbearing years yet, but the number of births they would have to have at older ages to catch up to the lifetime childbearing rates of earlier cohorts is so large that it seems unlikely they will do so. If the decline in births reflects a (semi)permanent shift in priorities, as opposed to transitory economic or policy factors, the U.S. is likely to see a sustained decline in birth rates and a general decline in fertility for the foreseeable future. This has consequences for projected U.S. economic growth and productivity, as well as the fiscal sustainability of current social insurance programs.
Housing’s Big Hurdle Is AffordabilityHome prices and mortgage rates are coming down, but not enoughBuying a home has gotten a little more affordable in recent months. Which isn’t to say that homes are affordable at all.That is the biggest challenge the housing market faces this year. While it is reasonable to expect there will be some improvement in the housing market in the months ahead, at current rates and prices there won’t be much of one.The National Association of Realtors on Friday reported that a seasonally-adjusted 4.02 million previously-owned homes were sold in December, at an annual rate, down from 4.08 million existing-home sales in November. That was the lowest sales pace since November 2010—one of the worst months of the housing bust.Sales are probably picking up a bit now. The existing home sales figures reflect closings, which typically come a month or two after homes go into contract. Mortgage rates peaked during that period and are now lower: On Thursday, Freddie Mac reported that the weekly average rate on a 30-year fixed mortgage was 6.15%, which compares with a peak of 7.08% in early November. Prices are falling, too—with the caveat that the NAR doesn’t adjust for the mix of homes sold, Friday’s release showed the median price on an existing home was $366,900 in December versus a high of $413,800 in June.So it is a bit easier to buy a home. An affordability index released earlier this month by the NAR, based on home prices, median family incomes and prevailing mortgage rates, rose to 95.5 in November from a multidecade low of 91.3 hit in October. (Lower values indicate lower affordability.) For comparison’s sake, over the 12 months before the Covid crisis struck, it averaged 162.A back-of-the-envelope calculation—assuming family incomes continued to grow at their recent pace, that the median home price is unchanged from December and a mortgage rate of 6.15%—suggests the NAR index for January would register about 106. One way for it to get back to its prepandemic level 162 would be for the average mortgage rate to fall to about 2.6%. Another would be for prices to fall by about a third. Yet another would be for family incomes to increase by about 50%.Now, homes probably don’t have to get quite as affordable as they were right before the pandemic for the housing market to mount a recovery —affordability measures were historically quite high then. Housing supply in the U.S. remains limited, and that provides some support for the market. Plus, there are a great many Americans who are now entering the prime age for home buying, with United Nations figures showing that as of 2021 the largest U.S. five-year U.S. population cohort was aged 30 to 34, and the second largest was aged 25 to 29.But homes still need to get a lot more affordable for that incoming wave of would-be owners to start holding their noses and buying.
Cita de: sudden and sharp en Enero 20, 2023, 13:33:35 pmPara según qué cosas... convendría volver a usar la máquina de escribir.Para algunas, sí.Para otras, la IA no ha traído precisamente lo que algunos esperaban. El Gobierno ya usa un algoritmo basado en una IA para combatir la explotación laboral y los datos que ha recopilado son desoladoresCitarComo señalan los compañeros de Xataka, el “Algoritmo Max” vigila que las empresas cumplan su labor con aspectos como las horas extra o los impagos a los empleados. Para ello, es capaz de cruzar datos con la Agencia Tributaria para analizar aspectos como la facturación o la contratación de personal. Y, en caso de detectar un indicio, como una empresa que factura más dinero con los mismos empleados, genera un aviso automático que llega a los inspectores del Ministerio de Trabajo y la Seguridad Social.Como se decía el otro día de las inspecciones a las Big Four, la parte tecnológica es lo de menos. El análisis de datos está inventado desde hace mucho, la informática también, y todas estas inspecciones asistidas se podían haber implementado hace mucho. Los trucos de inventarse reportes porque Inspección no puede mirar más que una mínima parte existen por algo.La cosa está en por qué ahora. Por qué, siendo tecnológicamente viable antes, no se hacía antes y ahora sí.
Yellen warns of ‘global financial crisis’ if US debt limit agreement isn’t reachedCNN — Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Friday warned of the widespread global effects that could be felt if the federal government exhausts extraordinary measures and fails to raise the debt ceiling, telling CNN’s Christiane Amanpour about the ways everyday Americans could face stark consequences.Yellen’s warning comes after the United States on Thursday hit its $31.4 trillion debt limit set by Congress, forcing the Treasury Department to start taking extraordinary measures to keep the government paying its bills.While those newly deployed extraordinary measures are largely behind-the-scenes accounting maneuvers, Yellen told Amanpour that “the actual date at which we would no longer be able to use these measures is quite uncertain, but it could conceivably come as early as early June.”Speaking exclusively to CNN from Senegal, Yellen said that after the measures are exhausted, the US could experience at a minimum downgrading of its debt as a result of Congress failing to raise the debt ceiling. The effects of the federal government failing to make payments, she argued, could be as broad as a “global financial crisis.”“If that happened, our borrowing costs would increase and every American would see that their borrowing costs would increase as well,” Yellen said. “On top of that, a failure to make payments that are due, whether it’s the bondholders or to Social Security recipients or to our military, would undoubtedly cause a recession in the US economy and could cause a global financial crisis.”“It would certainly undermine the role of the dollar as a reserve currency that is used in transactions all over the world. And Americans – many people would lose their jobs and certainly their borrowing costs would rise,” she continued.(...)
Existing Home Sales Slide to Cap Biggest Annual Drop Since 2008*Sales of previously owned homes fell for 11th straight month*Transactions declined in three of four regions in DecemberSales of previously owned US homes fell in December to the slowest pace in over a decade, capping one of the housing market’s worst years on record amid a rapid jump in mortgage rates.Contract closings decreased 1.5% to an annualized pace of 4.02 million last month, the slowest rate since 2010, the according to data from the National Association of Realtors out Friday. The median estimate in a Bloomberg survey of economists called for sales to drop to 3.95 million.The figures wrap a tumultuous year for the housing sector, in which transactions fell for a record 11 straight months. For all of last year, slightly more than 5 million existing homes were sold — a drop of 17.8% from 2021, the biggest annual slide since 2008.The Federal Reserve’s most aggressive tightening campaign in a generation sent mortgage rates soaring in 2022 to the highest level in two decades, sidelining many prospective buyers.While borrowing costs have come off their peak in recent weeks, helping to boost builder sentiment, the outlook is still shaky. Separate data out this week showed new home construction declined in 2022 for the first time since 2009 while applications to build, a proxy for future construction, also fell in December.“December was another difficult month for buyers, who continue to face limited inventory and high mortgage rates,” Lawrence Yun, NAR’s chief economist, said in a statement. “However, expect sales to pick up again soon since mortgage rates have markedly declined after peaking late last year.”The number of homes available for sale fell to 970,000 in the month, the fewest since March. It would take 2.9 months to sell all the homes on the market, up from 1.7 a year earlier. Realtors see anything below five months of supply as indicative of a tight market.The median selling price was up 2.3% from a year earlier to $366,900, reflecting higher prices in all regions. The price gain was the smallest since May 2020, Yun said.Properties remained on the market 26 days in December compared with 24 days in November and 19 days at the end of 2021. Some 57% of homes sold were on the market for less than a month.Digging Deeper*Sales fell in three of four regions, while the West was unchanged from the prior month*First-time buyers made up 31% of purchases in December, up from November*Cash sales represented 28% of total sales. Investors, who often purchase with cash and are therefore less sensitive to mortgage rates, made up 16% of the market, up from the prior month*Sales of single-family homes dropped 1.1% from a month earlier to a 3.6 million pace, also the lowest since the end of 2010. Existing condominium and co-op sales were down 4.5%*Existing-home sales account for about 90% of US housing and are calculated when a contract closes. New-home sales, which make up the remainder, are based on contract signings, and will be released next week
Cita de: Benzino Napaloni en Enero 20, 2023, 12:52:19 pmCita de: el malo en Enero 20, 2023, 12:32:10 pmHay cenutrios que si por ellos fuese se volvía a la máquina de escribir.Para según qué cosas... convendría volver a usar la máquina de escribir.Pues ya puestos, el escribir cartas y documentos a mano. También el pensar de verdad se hace a mano y despacio...No puedo resistirme a recordar mi serie favorita Violet Evergarden.
Cita de: el malo en Enero 20, 2023, 12:32:10 pmHay cenutrios que si por ellos fuese se volvía a la máquina de escribir.Para según qué cosas... convendría volver a usar la máquina de escribir.
Hay cenutrios que si por ellos fuese se volvía a la máquina de escribir.