As China's Economy Stumbles, Homeowners Boycott Mortgage Payments – Slashdot

Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system
Nickname:
Password:
Nickname:
Password:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Even a dictatorship will have a hard time against large scale disobedience. Dictatorships aren’t immune to political and social pressures, and they can only shoot so many people. That’s what made Julius Caesar and Franco probably the smartest dictators in history. They certainly had the power of the state at their disposal to impose their will, but it’s always better to have the majority of the population happy that your the top banana as opposed to terrorizing them into obedience.
Maybe, but they can suppress the large scale disobedience from happening. See North Korea. The only thing that can foil North Korea’s dictatorship would be fully externally coordinated/sponsored assassinations, induced mistrust, or something like that.
One way is to make their current situation better, but that is not really appealing to the autocrats.
Another way is to FUD and make future scary, what the wrath of dictator would do to them, etc to prefer inaction to open disobedience
Another way they do is to create a hierarchy of autocrats, fiefs and vassals, who owe their power to the one above and
Franco was kind of a genius in this way. He was always hard to pin down, starting out pretty much as a typical 1930s Fascist, but unlike other Fascist leaders, he went out of his way to make his regime a friend of the Spanish Church (both Mussolini and Hitler were fundamentally critical of clerics), and in doing so made elements of Spanish conservatism feel pretty safe. He made a lot of economic reforms which did a helluva lot to modernize the Spanish economy and get it out of the century long malaise that
franco had no ideology, he was the perfect pragmatist/opportunist. this is why i frown a bit when he’s called a fascist. as much as he was a bloody psychopath, he never was an actual fascist. one of my favorite quotes from him is: “do like me, just don’t get yourself into politics”.
he managed to outsmart his (ideologized) competitors (mostly getting them into harm’s way) during the civil war already, and then simply modulated message and policy as to perpetuate his power. first thing he did was neutralizing
Pragmatism is the key. Mao was a damned good revolutionary, perhaps the greatest of them all, but he was an utter fantasist when it came to economics, as the famine brought on by the Great Leap Forward demonstrated. The Cultural Revolution he unleashed created political, social and economic chaos, though it did sideline his chief competitors, in particular Deng Xiaoping, who was all but thrown out the door during the Cultural Revolution. Deng Xiaoping, on the other hand, was the prototypical autocratic tech

The balance these autocrats need to strike is, more people should believe they are better off with their current situation than what the future might bring.
True. That works for all governments everywhere.

One way is to make their current situation better,
Which China has been doing very successfully for the past 30 years. It really is unprecedented.

Another way is to FUD and make future scary,
Which is the American / Western style version.
Vote for my team, because the other team is worse.
They’ll actually throw you in prison for that. It only takes a few to make an example in China.
Just do what the US Government is doing… 87,000 new IRS agents. Applicants must be willing to use deadly force.
Dead people cost way less than maintaining people in prison forever.
AC: “Trust me, I’m paying everything that I think the government deserves. Now excuse me while I expense the computer that I wrote this business-related post with.”
To be fair, professional trolls probably are entitled to deduct the cost of their computers.
I see you pulled out your most nuanced and insightful counter argument.
taking productive adults and throwing them into prison wouldn’t solve the issue. It would make a point to the rest of them but making Christmas lights isn’t as productive as working in other industries.
The issues are longer-term and have been brewing for a long time. Many projects being unfinished yet sold and mortgaged could lead to more developers failing and likewise banks who’ve funded the loans. The Chinese gov’t has no alternative but to bailout the banks and that will feed into the current economic t
I don’t know why they’re afraid to protest in that country. Each time there’s a protest the CPP definitely doesn’t respond. Just like in Tienanmen square. The CCP did nothing. Absolutely nothing. Definitely didn’t do a single thing. Proof that you can protest all you want!
Don’t worry, that’s not coming to the west…. https://mobileidworld.com/cana… [mobileidworld.com]
Uyghurs might have something to say about that… …though I agree they are better able to control the media post internet, and be slightly less repressive but it’s not out of a choice. Prior they would just control the newspapers, radio, tv rather easily as it took large capital to start a paper, radio, tv-station with the easy central control of such technologies.
Now they restrain themselves and do their best to censor internet.

Economists have learned that, in the long run, productivity-per-person drives pretty nearly everything you can possibly measure about a society.
Interesting thought

Western democracy is annoying
This could perhaps be generalized as, “other people are annoying.” Might not be a way to get around that.
If the locked down Chinese can do that, I’m sure there will be no problem doing that here in the free U.S. of A.!
Boycott coming. Eat that Chase!
—
Boycott is a perfectly legitimate form of democratic protest. – J. Jayalalithaa
The Chinese situation is a bit different than the U.S. In China, it is common to have to pay up-front for properties that are still in development. You are paying a mortgage on an apartment that does not yet exist. Part of the reason for the boycotts is that some of the developers have taken the money and then paused development, and are on shaky ground such that it’s not clear there’s any likelihood of the buildings ever being built. They aren’t rebelling against the banks for writing shady loans, they are rebelling against shady property developers who’ve taken their money and delivered nothing.
The government is worried about this because boycotts could send the house of cards tumbling down that is the finances of the developers. They were already operating like Ponzi schemes, where the money to build Building A (which had already been pre-sold) was financed by getting people to buy into Building B, which will in-turn be financed by selling a future Building C. Everything goes pear shaped when nobody wants to buy Building B and C and the developer can’t afford to complete Building A. The loss of confidence means that people are now becoming reluctant to pre-buy anymore. If the building A buyers refuse to pay their mortgages, they are are at risk of complete collapse.

it is common to have to pay up-front for properties that are still in development.
That is common in the US, too.
The difference is, the developer has to actually finish the project in the US. in China, there are so many buildings that have been built as only shells with no plumbing, wiring or fit-out and no intention of the developer to complete them – which was sort of “fine” when everyone was treating these investment apartments like supersized tulip bulbs, but now some people actually want to live in them or are finding they cant move them on to the next investor (and I use the term loosely) , they are justifiably
You can do that anywhere. The difference is that we are talking about mortgages on unfinished houses. I’m not sure of the USA, but I’ve never lived in a country where you start paying for a mortgage on an unfinished house. Normally you put a down payment down or get finance approval via a letter of intent and the mortgage / repayment terms start when the property is available.
The exception being when you buy land and construction separately, but the way I see it these people are buying homes in apartments o
I remember reading about people buying properties from people with the clause the seller gets to live in the property till they die, in Paris. So some people pay mortgage on property they cant occupy. But sooner or later the seller will die and you will get the property, if you out live them. The oldest French woman apparently out lived two buyers of her apartment.

I remember reading about people buying properties from people with the clause the seller gets to live in the property till they die
This sounds like a good premise for the plot of a murder mystery novel.

So some people pay mortgage on property they cant occupy.
Which has nothing to do with the Chinese situation. You are talking about a finished house that IS being lived in (just not by you), vs. a house that doesn’t yet exist, so NOBODY can live in it.
Even construction in the US is paid with installments as the work is going on, you don’t pay the builder all the money at the start.

How can they be locked down when their house for which they are already paying a mortgage is not yet built? I guess they lock down in a tent or someone’s closet.
Thank you AC. But our princess is in another castle!
Situation is basically different. These people are stopping payments on houses *that haven’t actually been built yet.* I won’t say that buying an unfinished house never happens in the US, but paying a mortgage for years on a house that doesn’t yet exist is something you don’t see much of over here. Don’t pay the mortgage on a house here, it gets repossessed and you’re evicted. Tough to do that with a house that doesn’t exist.

Don’t pay the mortgage on a house here, it gets repossessed and you’re evicted. Tough to do that with a house that doesn’t exist.
On the contrary. It’s much easier to evict someone who hasn’t moved in yet.
It’s all just paperwork. No locks to change. No stuff to throw out into the street. You don’t even need to repair all the vandalism.
Real estate bubbles can pop? What commie plot is that?
Our political categories & vocab need an update. In the modern world, the degree of capitalism and the degree of democracy (vs. dictatorship) have grown more orthogonal. Many dictators have learned to embrace a degree of capitalism over time.

This story is just meant to try to cause China some economic trouble when the US economy is actually grinding to a halt: https://slashdot.org/story/21/ [slashdot.org]…
Oh please. The US economy grindring to a halt? Are you serious?
Our amazing COVID vaccines are doing their job. People are able to work and produce here, unlike China where they’re still pushing COVID Zero lockdowns right and left. Just last month, there was no inflation at all, according to our 80 year old, completely COVID-free leader [yahoo.com].

Our amazing COVID vaccines are doing their job. People are able to work and produce here, unlike China where they’re still pushing COVID Zero lockdowns right and left.
vaccination rates:
USA: 68%
China: 90%
cumulative COVID deaths:
USA: 1,063,087
Entire planet: 6,460,550
China: 5,226

our 80 year old, completely COVID-free leader
https://www.bbc.com/news/world… [bbc.com]
you fanatics never tire of spurting out glaring nonsense with a totally straight face and without a care in the world, do you? i’ve been wondering who would actually pay to read the propaganda behind paywalls like bloomberg or the nytimes … maybe it’s you?
The Chinese vaccine isnt anywhere near as effective as the major ones we used in the US https://www.nature.com/article… [nature.com] .
As for that 5k death figure, the numbers China produces for a ton of national metrics are so suspect and this number is so absurdly small for a country that size I don’t see how anyone could think that number reflects reality at all. That number is like when you see those third world presidential wins where the “president” wins near 100% of the vote with 100% voter turnout. The odds are

The Chinese vaccine isnt anywhere near as effective as the major ones we used in the US https://www.nature.com/article… [nature.com] .
the real comparative effectiveness of all these vaccines is very hard to establish. i don’t think that link is anywhere conclusive. anyway, i’ll gladly grant you the effectiveness cookie. still, getting more people vaccinated even if the vaccine protection is less durable seems the better route to me. totalitarian states have this much easier, ofc.

As for that 5k death figure, the numbers China produces for a ton of national metrics are so suspect
metrics for this topic are all extremely suspect, from every country in the world, for a load of reasons. there are real horror stories. if you think the numbers
You do understand that Chinese official statistics have zero credibility, don’t you?
COVID-19 misinformation by China [wikipedia.org]
It’s 326 collectives, not 326 individual borrowers. If these are 326 large-scale developments, it could be thousands or tens of thousands of borrowers.
Even if the people are arrested for doing a mortgage protest, if people can’t pay, then they can’t pay. You can’t squeeze blood from a stone and this could cause very nasty damage to the Chinese economy, similar to the 2008 meltdown in the USA.
from the TFA and summary:

In more than 100 cities across China, hundreds of thousands of Chinese homeowners are banding together and refusing to repay loans on unfinished properties
There’s not enough prison space to lock them all up.
In China they might not bother with prisons. The Great Leap Forward happened in 1958. That was not all that long ago.

from the TFA and summary:

In more than 100 cities across China, hundreds of thousands of Chinese homeowners are banding together and refusing to repay loans on unfinished properties
There’s not enough prison space to lock them all up.
Not yet.
But you’re forgetting how quickly they built those Covid hospitals.
And there’s plenty of idle developers “for some reason”.
2 birds, one stone.
Not disagreeing with you because lenders *are* greedy bastards, but, the 2008 US real estate problems were also partially caused by the government demanding that these same lenders lower their requirements to get a home loan. The reason the government gave was to allow people with lower incomes to “participate in the American dream” and become home owners. There could have been ulterior motives, I don’t know. The lenders, being the leaches they are, went along with it. They (lenders and government) strongly
I think you have cause and effect backwards… the greedy lenders successfully lobbied (admittedly willing) politicians to deregulate the industry and allow suspect loans.
Canada, which has a much more strongly-regulated financial sector, didn’t suffer a subprime mortgage meltdown and none of our financial institutions were threatened with insolvency, because they weren’t allowed to be greedy unregulated bastards.
You have the Canadian propaganda version correct, but it’s still nonsense. The banking regulations were changed to force banks to loan to those unqualified for such loans. When those loans eventually went belly up, the banks were in trouble–only because the Feds forced them to. Your “greedy lenders” were forced to accept loans that were due to be bad. That’s not deregulation. That’s over regulation for social purposes. And if your definition of “greedy” means willing to lose money on overly risky inv
I still can’t believe that I had a better solution to the mass mortgage defaults than the entirety of the federal government. They just gave money to the banks to shore them up. Well, the banks simply said “Thanks for the money”, kicked people out of their homes, and did whatever was best for themselves.
The BETTER solution was to take that same bailout money, and start paying x% of individuals outstanding mortgages, and slowly ramp that percentage down over time. That exact same money would STILL reach

….government demanding that these same lenders lower their requirements to get a home loan. The reason the government gave was to allow people with lower incomes to “participate in the American dream” and become home owners.
I can’t beleive this stupid talking point is still around. 2008 happened becuase of the repeal of The Glass-Steagall Act in 1999. It had nothing to do with the government forcing banks to make loans.
In addition, lower income people should be able to buy a house. The only reason they can’t is because housing prices are too high.
The biggest cause of the 2008 meltdown was the fact that loans were being given out with teaser rates, on the assumption that the property could easily be refinanced in a few years with the increase in value. That dumb system only worked up until prices stopped going up.
The other issue was the ‘no documentation’ loans (i.e., lie about your income). I still remember an article about the area of my city where I lived (mostly new construction) was that the average income listed on loan documents was $80k.

326 loan defaulters
Um, no. From way down in the THIRD sentence of the summary:

hundreds of thousands of Chinese homeowners are banding together and refusing to repay loans on unfinished properties
The 326 you are referencing are property sites, which may contain hundreds or thousands of individual properties. Also from the summary, to give you a sense of the scope of this:

ANZ Research estimates that the boycotts could affect about $222 billion of home loans sitting on bank balance sheets, or roughly 4 percent of outstanding mortgages./quote.

If you can’t see that this is an attempt at financial-social warfare by the US.
there is economic warfare going on and expected to escalate but it’s not this. this is just domestic propaganda, making china look bad lifts morale at home and distracts from local miseries. it’s just average clickbait.
places like china or russia strictly restrict freedom of press and immediately crack down on any dissent. europe and the usa have long discovered that by owning the major media outlets you can feed people any crap you want and monopolize the narrative, and any dissent there is is completely d
…but rather a storage of wealth (equity). Housing cannot be both affordable and a good investment [archive.org] because when it’s a good investment, it quickly becomes unaffordable.
Right now, we should be building like crazy to flood the market with housing and keep home prices from rising faster than inflation.
You are definitely correct, we should be doing that. But, as a homeowner, would you approve new housing in your area while believing it will suppress the value of your own house and potentially bring strangers to your neighborhood? Most people would say no — in spite of the fact that the reason they themselves have a home is someone else at some point allowed their home to be built. That’s why homes are unaffordable for many.
But, as a homeowner, would you approve new housing in your area while believing it will suppress the value of your own house and potentially bring strangers to your neighborhood?
Of course. I’m not a xenophobe, and upzoning the land that my house sits on makes the land more valuable to developers. The increase in land values offsets the lowered value of the building itself.
What I’d really like within a short walk from my house is a small store with some necessities, and popsicles [archive.ph]. But right now that’s illeg
As a homeowner, I would be completely fine with my house declining in value if it meant my kids and others could have a shot at affordable housing. My house is my home, not an investment, and I don’t care what its value does in the short- to medium-term because I have no plans to sell it until I can no longer manage the steps.
However, you are right: Most homeowners become selfish NIMBY pricks once meaningful steps are taken towards making housing affordable, because affordable housing necessarily means low

But, as a homeowner, would you approve new housing in your area while believing it will suppress the value of your own house and potentially bring strangers to your neighborhood?
Having personally seen the consequences here in California of not doing that I absolutely would and I currently vote for city council members with that in mind. Our state’s problems arent as bad as the partisan obsessed make them out to be but this state has far more problems then it did a couple of decades ago and it all has to do with the housing shortage. There’s a lot more that matters in this world then the risk of few percentage points off the value of ones home or (heaven forbid) “strangers”!
This is
Cuba really made an effort at housing equality, and it’s worth looking into [brookings.edu]
“Housing was one of the first public policy issues addressed by Cubaâ(TM)s socialist government. In revolutionary lor
Beijing Municipal Government Wednesday issued new rules limiting the number of homes each family can buy as the government steps up efforts to cool the property market. The new rules ban Beijing families who own two or more apartments and non-Beijing registered families who own one or more apartment from buying more homes.
https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/… [chinadaily.com.cn]
By this logic, Manhattan and San Francisco (the two highest density cities) should be the most affordable places to live in the US.
San Francisco won’t allow new housing.
A good example is the Sunset district, with a population density of 15,000 per square mile. Barcelona is 41,000 per square mile, without high rises, so even the most population dense city on the peninsula still has a LONG way to go!
Besides the easily-refuted bonehead statement you made about San Francisco, Manhattan is actually pretty low on *housing* density.
Housing does not include office space
And that’s what happened in China. They built like crazy because everyone wanted to be a landlord, so there was tons of money around.
There are entire cities in China meant to hold 3-5 million people, whose current population is around 100,000. Plazas and other attractions sit around disused and eerily empty because they built them, but the population did not come, and there aren’t even enough people to keep them open or maintained.
China’s got a real estate problem – they boomed too much, over built and now

There are entire cities in China meant to hold 3-5 million people, whose current population is around 100,000.
Bullshit.
Name one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?… [youtube.com]
China’s real estate market is like California’s on steroids. Homes aren’t for living in either California or China; they are investment properties. Except in China, the investment market has gotten fucked that they don’t even finish building the properties first before turning them into investment properties.
I believe those are exactly the same properties this article is about. They are unfinished and probably never will be finished.
The Chinese system requires you to pay up-front for a property which has not been built, if you want it. So these people are paying off a home loan but they ain’t got a home because so many Chinese builders have gone bust (often after the boss has legged it with a good proportion of the money advanced).
Rural Chinese banks are going to the wall in droves too, partly because of this mess.
You would think it was 1920’s America the way things are going. And we all know what 1930’s America was like because of it.
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Chipmakers Are Flashing More Warnings on the Global Economy
Windows 11’s Widgets Can Now Trigger Notifications on Your Taskbar
The Universe is populated by stable things. — Richard Dawkins

source

About Author