Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

13% of all U.S. homes are vacant

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Viva_La_Revolution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:03 PM
Original message
13% of all U.S. homes are vacant
Source: cnn

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- High residential vacancies are killing many housing markets, as foreclosed homes sit on the market and depress sale prices and property values.

And it's only getting worse: The national vacancy rate crept up to just over 13% according to last week's decennial census report. That's up from 12.1% in 2007.

"More vacant homes equal more downward pressure on home prices," said Brad Hunter, chief economist for Metrostudy, a real estate information provider.

Read more: http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/28/real_estate/us_housing_vacancy_rates/index.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. And not one fucking banker in jail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scuba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
2. Plenty of families living in cars, motel rooms....
... all because...



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Thank God none of the empty housing stock is being "wasted" on homeless families!
Wouldn't want any "downward pressure" on those tax-subsidized banker bonuses, now would we!?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MikeW Donating Member (554 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #3
28. you apparently didnt read the article
Most of those are second and or summer homes.

Just because a home is vacant doesn't mean it lacks ownership.

If its a second home or a summer home then it makes sense that its vacant for a good portion of the year

unless the owner rents it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reorg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #28
34. no, you apparently didn't
The article doesn't say "most" of the vacant homes are second or summer homes. In fact, the numbers in the article suggest that only about a third may be.

If you back out the vacation properties from the statistics, the states have very similar vacancy rates: 6.1% for Connecticut and 7% for Maine. Some states have high vacancy rates even after backing out the second homes: Florida's is about 10%; Arizona's is 10.7%; and Nevada's 11.4%.

Besides, all those houses occupied during the squatter movements in Germany in the seventies and eighties had owners but were left vacant deliberately. Ownership does not appear to be the issue here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 11:34 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. There are many bankster apologists that come and go on this site
They make sure to let it be known how the thought of homeless kids with otherwise unused roofs over their heads profoundly offends them....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Los Angeles 13,000 shelter beds, 91,000 homeless people. A statistic mentioned on tv last
night.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #9
37. Amazing -- and too little discussed here at DU -- !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-29-11 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #37
42. I heard that o tv last week, during the rain downpoar. So no matter what there are going
to be 70+ thousands people sleeping outside every night just in this one city......I stopped short. I hadn't realized. I sort of assumed there were shelters available....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. Extraordinary. Nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. If vacant homes are at 13% and real unemployment at about the same
or a little higher (?), does this mean a lot of families are doubling up with parents or kids or roommates?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #10
20. I can't say for sure - but I would guess that would be the case. Nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
5. And yet I still can't afford one.....
at least not one that isn't miles away from where I work, and live now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coyote_Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
6. A lot of those vacant houses
are monuments to excess consumption.

The builders were both short-sighted and greedy - as were the hucksters who financed them. And the buyers? Too many gave no consideration in their financial plans for financial reversals - unemployment, declining purchasing power of their wages, declining home values, increasing mortgage payments under those ARMs. Too many simply did not understand the terms of their lending agreement. Yes, some were mislead and deceived. But some, like a psychologist friend of mine, simply did not ask the necessary questions. And a lot of these buyers simply bought far more house than they needed. In doing so they concentrated their financial risk in the housing industry. Otherwise intelligent people can do some incredibly stupid things to undermine their own interests at times.

Those big, luxurious houses sometimes come at a premium price even now - and inevitably they carry large utility and property tax bills. You can find lots of these houises in most markets. But your options are considerably more limited if you want a small to modest size home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #6
18. Did anyone in this thread actually read the article? Did you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freshwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #18
25. Yes and it admitted the flaws in the percentage saying a lot of those weren't primary residences.
Lot of vacation homes that belong to people with enough money to leave a house vacant most of year. So it didn't make a lot of sense.

Wonder how this story will be used in fixing of rental rates as they increase according the presumed need for housing those pushed out these homes -- or maybe not.

A foreclosed list or perhaps an number of house actually for sale, not 'vacant' would be better to make an assessment how bad this news is.

The housing paradigm does need to shift. We're doing it wrong...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #18
50. I'm glad I read it before commenting
I recommend doing that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLPanhandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
7. So what's normal?
It says in 2007, at the height of the boom, the vacancy rate was 12.1% Now it's 13% or a .9% delta.

Is 12.1% the baseline to measure from?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:36 PM
Response to Original message
8. The market's not dead, it's pining for the fjords...


How long will the bankers pretend these empty houses are as valuable as they claim?

It's a damned shame people are homeless or barely hanging on just to prop up these imaginary numbers the banking industry insiders pulled out of their asses.

If they want to make these absurd numbers real we'll need much higher wages and more jobs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
former9thward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. It is not just the bankers.
There are the homeowners who overpaid for their houses and are in denial about that when they want to sell. It is also local governments who refuse to lower the assessed value on houses to what they really are because that would mean they would get less in property taxes. Everyone has had a role in this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freshwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #14
26. Exactly!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MountainLaurel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
54. +1 - n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
11. the overall vacancy rate is potentially very misleading, because real estate is all about location.
for instance, detroit is in serious trouble economically, and many people have moved out seeking greener pastures elsewhere. that contributes to the vacancy rate in detroit, but often when people move, especially to escape a troubled economy, they move into an apartment at first in the new city, hoping to save up for a home once they've repaired their finances, gotten comfortable in their new job, and researched the local neighborhoods.

this effect has been repeated in a number of cities, and simply is a sign of movement, rather than a sign of overall trouble in the real estate market. there are vacant houses in the now-less desireable cities and what may be a raft of ghost towns, but not necessarily a glut of housing where people actually want to live.


that's not to say that the mortgage crisis hasn't played a role; of course it has. it's just that the article doesn't give much guidance in terms of how to interpret the numbers or the context to put them in or the full picture of the underlying causes. how much of the problem is that there are plenty of would-be homeowners who are renting nearby and would love to own if only they could qualify for a mortgage, especially ones who would have qualified under the lending standards of a decade ago (before the boom & bust) but don't qualify now? that's more the real question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLPanhandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. They included properties such as ski lodges & beach houses too
Further skewing the numbers.

Here in Florida there are a very large number of vacation, snowbird & beach homes. That makes Florida look much worse than it is.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. excellent point. it's hardly a disaster if the big problem is fewer people owning 2nd homes.
again, of course there ARE genuine problem in real estate & real estate financing these days, but there are also many ways in which the problem is overstated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfwriter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #13
27. Record homelessness AND record numbers of second homes...
That does in fact sound like a problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MikeW Donating Member (554 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. why should people not own vacation homes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plumbob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. Why should some people own vacation homes before we have at least
one home for everyone?



You can re-read Animal Farm for the answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MikeW Donating Member (554 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-29-11 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #32
43. ah I see so no one can own anything they can afford
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #29
38. That's not the Q ... it's why these foreclosures/losses are happening + role corps played in scam..!
Whether a Wall St. stock scam or a scam in RE it amounts to the same thing --

someone owned something now it's gone.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfwriter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #29
46. If a society produces both...
Record second home ownership and record homelessness, it is in a state of failure.

The owner of the second home is merely a symptom of the problem, not the cause of it.

Or do you just think you live in a society where all problems are caused by people being lazy and undeserving? I think there are structural reasons you have massive ownership of second properties in a downturn and they all have to do with wealth redistribution from the bottom to the top.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Major Hogwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
15. More empty houses sitting on the block longer than ever before.
We have entire subdivisions sitting empty out here!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WatsonT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
16. Seems the stimulus money could have been better spent buying up many of these mortgages
at cost, then renting them back to the original homeowners at some reasonable rate.

Maybe take a hit in the long run due to bankruptcy and inflation but if worked out properly it wouldn't be that much. And putting people in houses will likely save on a lot of social costs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfwriter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #16
23. Can yu imagine if we bought $700 billion in mortages and then sold them back to homeowners?
That would result in a spending boom on home improvement and furnishings... Stimulate local tax bases... Bolster house prices...

<sarcasm> It's obviously a stupid socialist idea. </sarcasm>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #23
48. What do you pay for a mortgage when the amount of the mortgage exceeds
the market value of the home? It would only be another bank bailout--and we'd probably pay them handsomely to take our money, too. Beside, owning the mortgage is not the same as owning the home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #16
47. No, thanks. Taxpayers have already bailed out banks more than we should have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfwriter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-11 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #47
59. Oh, I was thinking of market rate....
which is like pennies on the dollar.

Then gov't collects the interest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
17. this is the stupidest article.
It lists Maine and Vermont as having the highest vacant house rates but then goes on to explain that they counted vacation houses and if not for that they be on par with the state with the lowest vacant rate, CT.

Useless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MikeW Donating Member (554 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #17
30. i agree this article is complete trash
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Keith Bee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
19. 87% of Republicans' MINDS are vacant...
...and, since 13+87=100, we have achieved Truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
21. Vacant doesn't mean abandoned or foreclosed on.
It means, in the particular parlance of the Census Bureau, "unoccupied."

For example, "homes" for the purposes of the Census data are not necessarily multi-bedroom, detached houses. They are "housing units," which the Census Bureau defines as "a house, an apartment, a group of rooms, or a single room occupied or intended for occupancy as separate living quarters."

And a housing unit is considered "vacant" under a wide range of circumstances. Indeed, in general, a housing unit is considered vacant by the Census Bureau if "no one is living in it at the time of the interview, unless its occupants are only temporarily absent. In addition, a vacant unit may be one which is entirely occupied by persons who have a usual residence elsewhere. New units not yet occupied are classified as vacant housing units if construction has reached a point where all exterior windows and doors are installed and final usable floors are in place."

Also, year-round vacant mobile homes (those intended for occupancy at any time of the year, even though they may not be in use the year round) are included as part of the year-round vacant count of housing units.

Other categories of "vacant" units:

Vacant units for rent. This group consists of vacant units offered for rent and those offered both for rent and sale.

Vacant units for sale only. This group is limited to units for sale only.

Vacant units rented or sold. This group consists of year-round vacant units which have been rented or sold but the new renters or owners have not moved in as of the day of interview.

Vacant units held off the market. Included in this category are units held for occasional use, temporarily occupied by persons with usual residence elsewhere, and vacant for other reasons. A housing unit that is held for occsional use is one that is not for-rent or for-sale-only but is held for weekends or occasional use throughout the year. Time-shared units are classified in this category if the vacant unit is not for-rent or for-sale-only, but held for use for an individual during the time of interview.

A beach cottage occupied at the time of the interview by a family which has a usual place of residence in the city is included in the count of vacant units. Their house in the city would be reported "occupied" and would be included in the count of occupied units since the occupants are only temporarily absent. Units occupied by persons with usual residence elsewhere (URE) are further classified as seasonal vacant or year round vacant units.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #21
49. First sentence of OP says "foreclosed" (but article is poorly written).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #49
52. More than poorly written. Its misleading
The Census Bureau report on which the article is based doesn't break out "foreclosed" homes as a separate category. In fact, I don't believe that the Census Bureau measures the number of foreclosed homes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfwriter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
22. Capitalism is in a constant state of failure....
A friend was arguing Communism failed but Capitalism NEVER has and I responded that it always does, then I realized I was right.

Without CONSTANT government support and contravention, capital itself collapses under market forces and the least scrupulous actor.

We're in a visible failure right now and they have occurred before on a grand scale.

Record homelessness and unemployment is a failure in my book, but the unemployment at least is desired by capitalists.

Not saying Communism works, just that it's Soviet failure in no way comments on capital's success.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfwriter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Oh, it's worse than I thought...
"In Maine, more than two-thirds of the 160,000 vacancies were vacation homes in 2009; Vermont had a similarly high concentration."

So we aren't just talking about vacant housing, in some locations, 2/3rds of that stock is actually the 2nd to 5th home of someone else.

Essay question: Citing only Ayn Rand, the Wall Street Journal, Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute and Fox News, and given record homelessness and unemployment coupled with record ownership of second homes by the top 5% of Americans, why was Marx foolish to predict the inevitability of revolution in Capitalism?

I swear, I used to be a big capitalist, but I just can't afford it any more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #24
40. Capitalism is a ridiculous "King-of-the-Hill" system --
Capitalism is intended to move the wealth and natural resources of nations from

the many to the few --

Unregulated capitalism is merely organized crime!




The Richwing Koch Bros. Funded the DLC --

http://www.democrats.com/node/7789

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x498414
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Psephos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #22
31. No one killed more people in the 20th Century than Mao.
50 million, give or take a few million, is the consensus.

http://necrometrics.com/20c5m.htm#Mao

Stalin did give him a run for his money for a while there, at 20 million.

http://necrometrics.com/20c5m.htm#Stalin

Scroll the site a bit. Communists look very bad when you run the numbers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plumbob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. Do you truly feel Mao or Stalin are communists?
Or perhaps they're just ruthless dictators who label themselves as such?

Believe the only communists you'll find are the kibbutz.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/kibbutz.html


They've been in constant existence since 1909, which I could read as success.


Also mindful that Stalin was our ally in WWII.

At your own link, the following deaths are listed:
Congo Free State: 8,000,000
WWI: 15,000,000
WWII: 66,000,000

There's 89 million dead in capitalist wars. Don't believe I'd be so quick to judge our "communist" regimes.

I have conveniently left out the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, where no communists are involved, either, just a very large, violent country that has claimed to be a shining beacon to the world.

Something's on fire, all right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #31
41. In both cases you're talking about TOTALITARIAN communism ....
which isn't communism -- and not that anyone is arguing for communism.

However, J. Edgar Hoover, always made it a point for some reason to make that

clear re the USSR -- "totalitarian communism" -- a dictatorship.



Also keep in mind that the original NAZI party in Germany embraced true social

values -- women's rights/abortion -- labor -- unions -- medical care -- education -- etal.

When Hitler took over the NAZI party it was turned upside down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Psephos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #41
53. Oh, TOTALITARIAN communism!!!! Well, then, nevermind! :)
And here I was thinking that communism could be judged by its actual results, instead of its noble intentions. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfwriter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #31
45. And if we started racking up teh deaths attributable to capitalism?
Not Capitalism as practiced by a single totalitarian whack-a-doo mind you, but general old profit over safety an mass starvation caused by resource control, I wonder how many people that would be?

Or are you saying Mao and Stalin are representative of the writings of Marx, and Marxist theory led to those deaths?

If so, please articulate the connection, because you haven't. You just said they were Communists.

You do understand that actual Marx, not what was edited down and taught in the U.S.S.R., assumes that everything a free marketeer or neo conservative would claim about markets is true don't you? Marx starts with the assumption that all market theory works perfectly and then goes on to predict a world very much like our own do to the inevitable concentrations of power.

Here, you can also find this on the iTunes store: http://davidharvey.org/

It is the easiest way to absorb Capital.

And I'll clue you into another secret. Real capitalists, of the Koch variety, know Marx and apply it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Psephos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #45
55. The analysis you actually want is to look at deaths attributable to unchecked political power.
Corrupt power cabals and tyrants can arise in communism as well as capitalism, in progressive systems as well as conservative systems, in agrarian as well as technological societies...in other words, anywhere that political power can be concentrated without checks and balances.

Power that arises from wealth is only superficially different from power that comes from high office or other forms of control over others. The only antidote to tyrannical rulers and corrupt political elites is to distribute and dilute power, and be rigorous in preventing its aggregation.

To attribute the problem to one economic/political system or another is to be ignorant of how corruption arises, and of how opportunistic abuse of power is a defining human trait that will sprout and grow if given fertile soil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #22
36. Great end point.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-28-11 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #22
39. Capitalism is not only a scam -- it's suicidal exploitation of nature and humans --
We need to move on to Democratic Socialism --

MEDICARE FOR ALL -- and end this national security state!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Codeine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-29-11 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #39
44. Lemme let you in on a secret;
socialists exploit nature too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freshwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #39
56. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #22
51. A society that has produced more homes than there are families who need them is certainly a failure
:crazy:

(Please READ the article.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 11:50 PM
Response to Original message
57. All fine candidates for.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gtar100 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-11 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
58. To put that into a perspective I can visualize - that's over 1 out of every 10 houses vacant.
That adds up quickly.

And what about all the warehouses that are empty and other buildings abandoned by businesses that failed or took the jobs overseas? It can feel mighty unjust to see all that and be homeless at the same time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC