Austin housing affordability crisis

[jimmyjazz 45560]

Don't rental properties typically cover a standard note (30 yr fixed, taxes, insurance)?  If that's true, it would seem buying would be cheaper.

[bolverk 29405]

2 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Lots to read, so apologies for being that asshole who posts before reading. Not necessarily a huge fan of it from a philosophical point of view, but the concept of homestead exemption could be extended. Basically price people out of gobbling up inventory by placing huge fees and extra taxes on residential real estate purchases not used for primary residence. 

I'm sure this is a terrible idea for a reason I didn't think of in the 5 seconds I spent on it. Tell me why. 

Sounds very similar to vacant/underutilized building ordinances that many smaller Texas communities, which are trying to revitalize their downtowns, have been passing. The problem for them is lots of disinterested owners have inherited older buildings and just let them sit and rot or just use them for storage. From what I hear, they're pretty effective.

[We’reTexas 1469]

17 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Don't rental properties typically cover a standard note (30 yr fixed, taxes, insurance)?  If that's true, it would seem buying would be cheaper.

There’s a lot to the calculus, but with decent 2/2’s in the SF metro and LA areas blowing past $1.5M down payments are becoming prohibitive. The idea is to buy into something accessible as an appreciation play and use the property as a rental or STR to largely offset the note. 

[High Plains Drifter 10978]

4 hours ago, South Austin said:

They'll move to Caldwell.

 

poor bastards, but I guess that is what they get for living in Manor in the first place.

3 hours ago, The Dog said:

Yes there is:

"Replacement rate" is 2.1 births per woman. 

 

8 billion people on the earth, if it hasn't already gone to 9 billion. 8 billion (shit, 4 billion) is not a sustainable population. Falling birth rates are a good thing. If our economy depends on an increasing population, then we need to change the basis of our economy.

 

[Neonmoon 38127]

40 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Don't rental properties typically cover a standard note (30 yr fixed, taxes, insurance)?  If that's true, it would seem buying would be cheaper.

Yes and no. Tons of variables. Lots of ins and outs. 

[Chewbacca 7730]

1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

Yes and no. Tons of variables. Lots of ins and outs. 

And what about the what have yous?

[High Plains Drifter 10978]

23 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

And what about the what have yous?

 

 

Lots of those too, man.

 

 

[safe sex 11684]

Lmao at the idea that I'll ever be able to own a home while working in patient-facing healthcare. Gotta sell my soul to the darkside of administration before they'll pay me anything close to a wage where I can start any sort of notable savings.

[Brisketexan 104628]

Just now, trauma babe said:

Lmao at the idea that I'll ever be able to own a home while working in patient-facing healthcare. Gotta sell my soul to the darkside of administration before they'll pay me anything close to a wage where I can start any sort of notable savings.

It's like you've never even heard of a stripper pole, sheesh.  Pull yourself up by your bootstraps (which is, conveniently, the primary item of clothing you'd be wearing) -- you know how this works.  It's your fault for not working harder.

[gmr548 16517]

I know everyone wants to talk about all the robinhood stuff and whatnot. That's not the real issue, the real issue is that my taxes for a house I bought in 2010 are now more than the mortgage, interest and insurance. 
~2000/mo in taxes
~1650/mo mortage+insurance
This is the issue. Housing is becoming unaffordable for those who already own a home. It's absolutely absurd to pay more than your mortgage to the local and state government to live in the house, even if it's paid off. There is nothing that can make that make sense, it's a problem and it's one that will destroy the city. 
Wages have become stagnant and employers are not adjusting for inflation, even in high paying jobs. It's completely unsustainable, there isn't a place for normal people to live in this city anymore - soon we'll have friends buying houses together and just being roommates forever. I don't know how much of this problem is attributed to "boomers" for living too long and staying in their houses, but something is extremely fucky about how this is going down and not just for those who don't already own homes (making it near impossible for them to own one) 
I mean who is going to fund the bump in rents that is going to happen across the board when the rental market adjusts to this complete assfucking by the city? I don't see companies shelling out the extra compensation required to live here - so what happens then? Where are all the service industry folks going to live? Austin isn't cool enough to live like a ski bum with 5 people to a 2 bedroom and the houses overall are much too nice to even allow for a setup like that generally speaking. 
I just don't see how this doesn't lead to some major reform once we get a normal government back in Texas instead of raping everyone for the 1% or better, which is what is happening all across the state. 

1.) Your property tax bill is $24,000? Implying a million + dollar taxable assessment even with a homestead exemption?

2.) lol normal government is never coming back

[immamac 42520]

1 minute ago, gmr548 said:

1.) Your property tax bill is $24,000? Implying a million + dollar taxable assessment even with a homestead exemption?

2.) lol normal government is never coming back

Yep. Bought it for obviously significantly less than that and not for an under market price at the time. It's an original except for alliances and HVAC 1954 constructed 2/1 bungalow in zilker. 

[Pato del Muerto 52342]

10 minutes ago, immamac said:

Yep. Bought it for obviously significantly less than that and not for an under market price at the time. It's an original except for alliances and HVAC 1954 constructed 2/1 bungalow in zilker. 

This is a homesteaded property?  What were taxes when you bought it?

[immamac 42520]

Just now, Pato del Muerto said:

This is a homesteaded property?  What were taxes when you bought it?

425k purchase price. This isn't hard math. It's been 10% capped for 12 years. Except the 1 year they left it alone cuz of the MLS fuckery. 

[immamac 42520]

Also I'm not complaining, I can afford it. I'm saying there's a lot of people who can't. 

It's absurd that an expensive house now has a tax burden more than the mortgage when it was an expensive house. That's the point I'm making. It makes living in Austin and buying a house impossible without doing cash out refi or HELOC 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11810]

16 minutes ago, immamac said:

Also I'm not complaining, I can afford it. I'm saying there's a lot of people who can't. 

It's absurd that an expensive house now has a tax burden more than the mortgage when it was an expensive house. That's the point I'm making. It makes living in Austin and buying a house impossible without doing cash out refi or HELOC 

I feel your pain. I own 2 properties in Travis, only one is homesteaded.  I own a shitton in Hays, which is not.  Shit is crazy.    Incentivized to sell.  But to who?   

[Immaculate Vibes 114]

3 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

poor bastards, but I guess that is what they get for living in Manor in the first place.

 

8 billion people on the earth, if it hasn't already gone to 9 billion. 8 billion (shit, 4 billion) is not a sustainable population. Falling birth rates are a good thing. If our economy depends on an increasing population, then we need to change the basis of our economy.

 

The Malthusian argument is a tired one. 

The planet can sustain a growing population.
 

As to your second point, we may actually agree. Our economy needs an increasing population because it’s a debt based ponzi system. That’s the real reason western countries need immigration in the face of falling birth rates. 

[gmr548 16517]

Yep. Bought it for obviously significantly less than that and not for an under market price at the time. It's an original except for alliances and HVAC 1954 constructed 2/1 bungalow in zilker. 

The hell is the appraised market value then!? I shudder to think

[StassneyHorn 6540]

I like checking out this site, most of the places are for remote workers, so nothing helpful for traditional or blue collar workers
https://www.makemymove.com
 

10k to live in Morgantown plus free outdoor recreation and rentals- https://ascendwv.com

10k in bitcoin or cash + road/trail bike in NW Arkansas -https://findingnwa.com

10k for Tulsa-https://tulsaremote.com/homeownership/

 

[Hmbre97 6297]

34 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

I feel your pain. I own 2 properties in Travis, only one is homesteaded.  I own a shitton in Hays, which is not.  Shit is crazy.    Incentivized to sell.  But to who?   

Wait, are you being serious with the bolded?

[Hmbre97 6297]

11 minutes ago, StassneyHorn said:

I like checking out this site, most of the places are for remote workers, so nothing helpful for traditional or blue collar workers
https://www.makemymove.com
 

10k to live in Morgantown plus free outdoor recreation and rentals- https://ascendwv.com

10k in bitcoin or cash + road/trail bike in NW Arkansas -https://findingnwa.com

10k for Tulsa-https://tulsaremote.com/homeownership/

 

 

[Neonmoon 38127]

1 hour ago, immamac said:

Also I'm not complaining, I can afford it. I'm saying there's a lot of people who can't. 

It's absurd that an expensive house now has a tax burden more than the mortgage when it was an expensive house. That's the point I'm making. It makes living in Austin and buying a house impossible without doing cash out refi or HELOC 

Texas tax system is to blame for this, not high home prices.

[jimmyjazz 45560]

1 hour ago, immamac said:

Also I'm not complaining, I can afford it. I'm saying there's a lot of people who can't. 

It's absurd that an expensive house now has a tax burden more than the mortgage when it was an expensive house. That's the point I'm making.

I'm not sure I get your point.  One feature of a standard mortgage is fixed payments.  You are directly benefiting from the value appreciation, and the cost is higher property taxes.  The ratio of property tax to mortgage is uninteresting.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11810]

22 minutes ago, Hmbre97 said:

Wait, are you being serious with the bolded?

I live in travis, in a home.  I have a property out in Hays that I own, which I could do a number of things with.  

[David Dennison 18661]

55 minutes ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

The Malthusian argument is a tired one. 

The planet can sustain a growing population.
 

As to your second point, we may actually agree. Our economy needs an increasing population because it’s a debt based ponzi system. That’s the real reason western countries need immigration in the face of falling birth rates. 

I'm glad you realize capitalism is the problem. That's progress.

[Huckleberry 32704]

18 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm not sure I get your point.  One feature of a standard mortgage is fixed payments.  You are directly benefiting from the value appreciation, and the cost is higher property taxes.  The ratio of property tax to mortgage is uninteresting.

Seems like an indirect benefit at best. Certainly deferred until sale, if he sells.

[immamac 42520]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm not sure I get your point.  One feature of a standard mortgage is fixed payments.  You are directly benefiting from the value appreciation, and the cost is higher property taxes.  The ratio of property tax to mortgage is uninteresting.

Explain to me how I'm directly benefitting from this value appreciation. I have not taken any equity out and Austin is arguably worse off than when I bought the house in every measurable metric of public services and utilities. 

If at the sale of my home I owed the city and state a %age with no cap that would align to your comment, but that's not what is happening. The point of bringing up a mortgage is generally speaking that is the benchmark of homeownership, not what your monthly amortization of taxes are. The main barrier is the mortgage, not the taxes. Now after you pass that barrier to entry the state is coming and constantly pushing people out of places they have been for a while. The 10% HS cap wasn't put in place to max out every year like clockwork it was there to protect homeowners from getting fucked into unaffordability. 

[DanRydell 799]

Seems like an indirect benefit at best. Certainly deferred until sale, if he sells.

You can also borrow against the increased equity but yeah, the benefit, at least until selling (and even then, really only a benefit if leaving the area) are significantly outweighed by the costs.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11810]

14 minutes ago, DanRydell said:

You can also borrow against the increased equity but yeah, the benefit, at least until selling (and even then, really only a benefit if leaving the area) are significantly outweighed by the costs.

There’s the thing. You can borrow against the equity, and pay no taxes on the loan, and then fuck everyone else.   That’s how the trumps do it.  

[Neonmoon 38127]

You are being gentrified. 

[Immaculate Vibes 114]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

I'm glad you realize capitalism is the problem. That's progress.

Booms and busts are inherent to capitalism, but the pros vastly outweigh the cons.
 

Unfortunately we are living through the end of a debt super cycle and it will likely be chaotic. These things have happened before. Eventually there will be massive debt restructuring/forgiveness, followed by a brief return to sounder money and we’ll start over the whole thing. By the time we reach the end of the next one,  we’ll all be dead and most people living then will think they have it figured out. Rinse, repeat. 

[bolverk 29405]

11 minutes ago, immamac said:

Explain to me how I'm directly benefitting from this value appreciation. I have not taken any equity out and Austin is arguably worse off than when I bought the house in every measurable metric of public services and utilities. 

If at the sale of my home I owed the city and state a %age with no cap that would align to your comment, but that's not what is happening. The point of bringing up a mortgage is generally speaking that is the benchmark of homeownership, not what your monthly amortization of taxes are. The main barrier is the mortgage, not the taxes. Now after you pass that barrier to entry the state is coming and constantly pushing people out of places they have been for a while. The 10% HS cap wasn't put in place to max out every year like clockwork it was there to protect homeowners from getting fucked into unaffordability. 

Agreed that it's a fucked up for local government to be so overly reliant on.

The valuations, themselves, are probably not too far off the mark in terms of what you could earn, if you sold your property today. The taxes themselves are simply a percentage of what your estimated earnings would be if you chose that option and, of course, if you don't choose to exercise it that income doesn't matter to you in the slightest today.

In essence it's like a wealth tax, which I'm not opposed to entirely on principle, because I understand some sort of baseline revenue stream needs to be available for the provision of municipal services. But the burden of this wealth tax falls most heavily on a percentage point basis on the middle and lower income class who don't have many options for living arrangements unless they abandon their community to find somewhere else to live that's cheaper because it has fewer job opportunities and likely leads to even less well-paying jobs/lower income.

But check this out. Where do the bulk of property tax dollars go? The overwhelming portion goes to funding schools...not roads, police/fire protection, the hospital district, water/wastewater, or other infrastructure. Most of your monthly bill goes to property taxes is to fund Austin ISD, which then has half of that money taken through recapture and distributed all over the state. And this all happens regardless of your actual current income or existing ability to pay; you have no choice or you will lose your home. Another shitty part of it is that if you live in a property poor community, your schools are still likely underfunded and, therefore, your kids' education also will likely suffer.

That's why this state needs to have an income tax to cover education and level these local discrepancies in revenue out.

[Hefeweizen 5307]

I'll add my two cents as someone departing the shit show I helped create.

I've just gone hard on a contract (as a seller) which features an obnoxiously high option fee, 15% over asking price, waiver of appraisal, free lease back, and absolutely not one single item from the inspection.  This was five days after listing, and we jacked up the listing price after consulting with our agent by about 15%.

We wound up about 40% from what we were going to sell for last fall when we first started talking about moving out of state.  I've done my math and I'll pay more in income tax briefly before I fully retire/consult, but I'll pay way less in property tax.  I may be cashing in equity too soon (time will tell) but I have more than doubled from the purchase price less than 5 years ago and my net profit based on cash in is actually about 5x.  

I am also heavily involved in the development of raw land as well as delivery of finished lots, so I have very intimate knowledge of the financial proposition right now.  There isn't enough inventory and as a result people are doing really stupid things.

This market, and the taxes associated with it, are going to strangle growth in Central Texas.  Raw land in large acreages for development is selling for 3 to 4 times what it was four or five years ago.  I am going to continue to work in the field but I have this 2007-2008 feeling again despite things being very different.

I am taking my money and paying cash eventually for a much smaller house on much less land in a much more out of the way place.  It has been expensive for a long time but all of a sudden is actually a value proposition and unlike my stock picks I do well with real estate.

Shout out to @UTPhil2006 if you ever need a mortgage guy - he and Thad have been solid and reliable on at least three or four transactions I've had with them. 

All I know is the SALT limit did me in and caused me to reassess my thoughts about Texas, then TCAD came in and cleared the bases for me.

[mchookem 16225]

29 minutes ago, Hefeweizen said:

I'll add my two cents as someone departing the shit show I helped create.

I've just gone hard on a contract (as a seller) which features an obnoxiously high option fee, 15% over asking price, waiver of appraisal, free lease back, and absolutely not one single item from the inspection.  This was five days after listing, and we jacked up the listing price after consulting with our agent by about 15%.

We wound up about 40% from what we were going to sell for last fall when we first started talking about moving out of state.  I've done my math and I'll pay more in income tax briefly before I fully retire/consult, but I'll pay way less in property tax.  I may be cashing in equity too soon (time will tell) but I have more than doubled from the purchase price less than 5 years ago and my net profit based on cash in is actually about 5x.  

I am also heavily involved in the development of raw land as well as delivery of finished lots, so I have very intimate knowledge of the financial proposition right now.  There isn't enough inventory and as a result people are doing really stupid things.

This market, and the taxes associated with it, are going to strangle growth in Central Texas.  Raw land in large acreages for development is selling for 3 to 4 times what it was four or five years ago.  I am going to continue to work in the field but I have this 2007-2008 feeling again despite things being very different.

I am taking my money and paying cash eventually for a much smaller house on much less land in a much more out of the way place.  It has been expensive for a long time but all of a sudden is actually a value proposition and unlike my stock picks I do well with real estate.

Shout out to @UTPhil2006 if you ever need a mortgage guy - he and Thad have been solid and reliable on at least three or four transactions I've had with them. 

All I know is the SALT limit did me in and caused me to reassess my thoughts about Texas, then TCAD came in and cleared the bases for me.

basically ditto lol

 

[jimmyjazz 45560]

2 hours ago, immamac said:

Explain to me how I'm directly benefitting from this value appreciation.

If you want to quibble over the definition of "directly", then have at it.  I don't care enough to argue.

You own an appreciating asset, and I assume you're leveraged.  It's still relatively low-risk.  Try leveraged products in the stock market and get back to me.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

2 hours ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

Booms and busts are inherent to capitalism, but the pros vastly outweigh the cons.
 

Unfortunately we are living through the end of a debt super cycle and it will likely be chaotic. These things have happened before. Eventually there will be massive debt restructuring/forgiveness, followed by a brief return to sounder money and we’ll start over the whole thing. By the time we reach the end of the next one,  we’ll all be dead and most people living then will think they have it figured out. Rinse, repeat. 

Ughh, I do not want to give you rep, but this is absolutely correct.  

[Texas Jeff 1932]

Some thoughts about how to make things better.

We should optimize the parts of the town that are going vertical.  Today's Statesman had an article about "The Republic", a 48-story tower that is going to go where the Travis County civil and family courthouse was going to go, which is where an Austin art museum was going to go.  The courthouse would have taken that block out of the tax base.  Now the county is going to get $430 million in lease payments over 99 years -- tax we don't have to pay -- and I suspect the value of the building is going into the tax base.  That helps.  A downtown library does not help.  City Hall looks comically small and half of that city block is just a giant plaza/occasional campsite.  That block could be another tower, cranking out tax dollars.

We have too many capitol view corridors, some of which protect views that are impossible to see.  Each CVC prevents development, which reduces the possible tax base.  Cut back to just the iconic views.   I would like to see some "new views" put in place that are more pedestrian friendly, like a building that blocks a view but provides a public space 4-5 floors up that gives you a place to sit and have some food and enjoy a great close-up view of the capitol, rather than protect a lot of car-centric views.  The capitol is starting to look really small among the other buildings.

If we are going to have rail, maximize the use of it.  Every stop should have a ton of tall stuff around it, and the big zoning changes should go around the rail stations.  We need to enable folks to live within walking distance of one stop, ride 2-3 stops max to another stop, and walk to their job.  We should not build a light rail station unless there is a serious commitment to developing the area around the station.

We also have the Red Line, which takes a few people a day from Leander to downtown.  It's dumb to put someone on a train way out and bring them all the way in, keeping that seat full for the entire run.  Instead we should build 2-3 stops in the empty Robinson Ranch land and build high density around each stop, with double tracked rail and trains every 10 minutes.  It was zoned for tall stuff 15 years ago but the city is focused on fighting with current residents to up zone existing neighborhoods.  It amazes me that there is this huge undeveloped site with great zoning right in the middle of the high tech boom with rail running through it.  Develop it and make it tall.

I think lots of folks would live in these types of neighborhoods, although most would be single high-earners or empty nesters, but they would grow the tax base and take some of the pressure off of the rest of us.

[High Plains Drifter 10978]

8 hours ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

The Malthusian argument is a tired one. 

The planet can sustain a growing population.
 

As to your second point, we may actually agree. Our economy needs an increasing population because it’s a debt based ponzi system. That’s the real reason western countries need immigration in the face of falling birth rates. 

 

sure, if we turn the world into a giant feedlot, we can "sustain" 20 billion.

 

 

[High Plains Drifter 10978]

5 hours ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

Booms and busts are inherent to capitalism, but the pros vastly outweigh the cons.
 

Unfortunately we are living through the end of a debt super cycle and it will likely be chaotic. These things have happened before. Eventually there will be massive debt restructuring/forgiveness, followed by a brief return to sounder money and we’ll start over the whole thing. By the time we reach the end of the next one,  we’ll all be dead and most people living then will think they have it figured out. Rinse, repeat. 

 

I'm glad you realize capitalism is the problem. That's progress.

 

[South Austin 52146]

12 hours ago, Hmbre97 said:

 

If only you could smell that picture.

[Huckleberry 32704]

9 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

If you want to quibble over the definition of "directly", then have at it.  I don't care enough to argue.

You own an appreciating asset, and I assume you're leveraged.  It's still relatively low-risk.  Try leveraged products in the stock market and get back to me.

The asset is rapidly appreciating right now while he's not selling. It's not like we haven't seen real estate bubbles burst before. Right now the value appreciation is only costing annual tax increases. There's no guarantee the current value appreciation ever becomes a real benefit to him. 

If annual taxes were charged based on momentary stock price instead of only actual sale price that would have a pretty big impact on the market and affect the perceived value of stocks pretty significantly. 

[jimmyjazz 45560]

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

The asset is rapidly appreciating right now while he's not selling. It's not like we haven't seen real estate bubbles burst before. Right now the value appreciation is only costing annual tax increases.

Everyone pays property taxes.  Beyond that, I'd rather be paying down my principal than paying down a landlord's principal.

 

Quote

There's no guarantee the current value appreciation ever becomes a real benefit to him. 

Someone looking for a guarantee needs to be in FDIC-insured CDs.  Oh, and building someone else's wealth by paying rent.

[Brisketexan 104628]

13 hours ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

Booms and busts are inherent to capitalism, but the pros vastly outweigh the cons.
 

Unfortunately we are living through the end of a debt super cycle and it will likely be chaotic. These things have happened before. Eventually there will be massive debt restructuring/forgiveness, followed by a brief return to sounder money and we’ll start over the whole thing. By the time we reach the end of the next one,  we’ll all be dead and most people living then will think they have it figured out. Rinse, repeat. 

 

11 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Ughh, I do not want to give you rep, but this is absolutely correct.  

Y'all forgot the solution, the answer to all of the problems.  Penelope, you know what it is........

CRYPTO!

[Judge Roybeanbag 11810]

I'd be completely on board with increasing the homestead exemption, and hammering anyone without one.  We need homeowners. 

[closetohumping 17404]

Paying coastal prices.....but no coast.

[Neonmoon 38127]

Housing Affordability Crisis 

- No Supply, Big Demand equals prices too high.

- Lack of Wage Growth equals no buying power

- Texas Property Tax System equals harder to become homeowner

- Zoning Laws restricts building of multifamily housing (NIMBY)

 

All of it contributes 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

I am not opposed to a state income tax.  I just don't trust that we would add it and then reduce or eliminate property taxes.

[gmr548 16517]

20 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

I'd be completely on board with increasing the homestead exemption, and hammering anyone without one.  We need homeowners. 

lol fuck renters amirite

[Brisketexan 104628]

2 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

lol fuck renters amirite

You can easily create an additional property tax break for properties that rent out at a rate at or below the market median, or tied to affordable rents for the local median income, etc.  It's a use of tax policy to incentivize both home ownership and affordable housing for those who can't buy a home.  Nothing's perfect, but ta bigger homestead exemption and something like this are some arrows in our quiver.

[Pato del Muerto 52342]

14 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I am not opposed to a state income tax.  I just don't trust that we would add it and then reduce or eliminate property taxes.

Vote huffines!

 

if we eliminated property tax tomorrow in favor of an income tax, what percentage of rental properties would adjust downward immediately so that the nonexistent tax burden was no longer passed to the tenant, so that the tenant could handle the new burden of income tax?

 

but yeah I’d much rather my tax responsibility be completely tied to my income, rather than completely independent of it. 

Edited April 21, 2022 by Pato del Muerto

[Immaculate Vibes 114]

40 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

Y'all forgot the solution, the answer to all of the problems.  Penelope, you know what it is........

CRYPTO!

Don’t lump me in with that weirdo Vitalik. 
 

Once you start connecting the dots around the debt cycle and the predictable trends that happen over time, it’s hard to ignore. You can then prepare yourself accordingly. Doesn’t have to be Bitcoin. Dalio has written extensively on this stuff and isn’t a big Bitcoin advocate…yet. 

Edited April 21, 2022 by Immaculate Vibes