|
Re: Rybak's
comment he would like to get real estate (housing) tax incentives
restored that had been taken away in the 1980s, specifically
1986.
The new mayor is on
the right trail, if those tax incentives were restored you would have big turn
around in private investment in real estate of all
kinds.
Before '86 we had
Z&S properties., Zollie Barratz got his high income friends to
invest in three story walkups (in 1970s); gave them mortgages for
collateral and thousands of new housing units came into being
in Minneapolis area, with no public investment at
all.
That besides the
building boom in the 1980s, all cities in the country got big new sky
lines.
Then abruptly in
1986 Congress passed the tax bill and the whole thing was Deed in leu
of foreclosure; Trammel Crow, and etc.
That was
when Washington was full of old time Democrats who
complained about tax breaks for the rich. The result was that the
investor market for real estate was illiminated, cutting the market
value of commercial real estate by about 40%.
The banks, loaded up
with commercial mortgages, took a hit of 40% on those assets, which,
when the regulators came around, overseeing asset credibility, lots of
banks got closed at huge expense to FDIC insurance fund -and putting such fund
20 billion in the red!!
You darn near
had a 1930s type economic disaster in the country.
Then for years
after, members of House and Senate, i.e. Majority Leader Mitchel -when
pointed out to them the collosal errors of the tax bill, they said they weren't
going to give back tax breaks to the rich.
Little old humble
JEJ wrote that maybe it was that in back room they decided to 86 the
Japanese who were then buying up America. They
did stop the Japanese and threw the economy of that country also into
series a of decade long economic
disasters.
It would be a
Hurculean task for anyone to get the Congress to reverse the '86 tax bill, but
such -or just reversing part of it- certainly would change the housing
environment.
James E Jacobsen
Whittier (so called)
|
