The Jon Sanchez Show
11/5- Which presidential candidate is better for the housing market?
It is Ryan Seacrest here. There was a recent social media trend, which consisted of flying on a plane with no music, no movies, no entertainment. But a better trend would be going to chumbacacino.com. It's like having a mini social casino in your pocket. Chumbacocino has over 100 online casino style games, all absolutely free. It's the most fun you can have online and on a plane. So grab your free welcome bonus now at chumbacacino.com. Sponsored by Chumbacocino, no purchase necessary. VGW Group, void where prohibited by law. 18 plus terms and conditions apply. - Good Tuesday afternoon to you. Welcome to the John Sanchez Show on this talk, 780K. It's a pleasure to be with you on this election day. What a day it is going to be. I should say what a night it's going to be. Hopefully, hopefully we'll have some results, but I don't think so. Anyways, you've heard enough about elections. Let's get down to our introductions. Around the horn we shall travel. Let's go to Corrie Edge of Edge Realty, big C. How are you doing, my friend? - I'm doing great. I'm loaded up on coffee and coffee room. I can show them the muckers they like. - The Snickers bar is ready to go. I'm with you, man. I'm with you. I think-- - It's just like New Year's, right? If you can make it to midnight, maybe it'll-- - Exactly, exactly. Yep, I think I'm going to do the same thing that I do on New Year's every once in a while, because I cannot stay up until midnight. So, I think maybe a little hour or two hour nap, after the show, and be good to go, and the results start coming in around six o'clock or so, how about that? (laughing) - Good, I'll call you 1 a.m. - Perfect. Perfect. - It wouldn't be the first time that we've spoken those crazy hours. (laughing) - Oh, my goodness. Don't wipe my lard of synergy when I'm lending. How are you, my friend? Welcome back. - I'm doing fantastic. You guys are very optimistic, aren't you? I'm going to bed, and I think Friday will know. - Yeah, yeah, I wouldn't doubt that. Yeah, I wouldn't doubt that. - Oh, no, don't put words in my mouth, Dwight. I'm not being optimistic. (laughing) - Well, all I do know, John, all I do know, John, is that Donald Trump, New Year's, should I call them to the show? - I know, I know. Yeah, yeah. - It's Tuesday, how many years ago, so you say you called it about this time? - Yeah, 2016, about this time he called in. That's exactly right. I know, I know, we've just lost our mojo. Dwight, you know, we're just not, not well-known nationwide anymore, I guess. (laughing) - Well, I told you guys all worked out. - Do you remember how we got that interview? Did I ever tell you the story behind the whole? - No, I don't. - Yeah, my older daughter, Brooke, who, you know, not involved with our firm or anything, she just, I don't know how she got his number, but she called him up like two hours before the show, and he's like, yeah, sure, you know, love Nevada, we need Nevada vote, so yeah, oh, come on the show. So yeah, Donald Trump Jr. joined the show the night of the election. (laughing) - What if you remember? - If you remember. - 17 minutes. We had him for 17 minutes. - You remember that, oh my gosh. - Oh yeah, we didn't go to break. - No, that's right. - We kept him on for 17 minutes. - Yeah, at least, good memory, good memory. What's that, Corey? - I know, I was all excited about it. I remember saying, you know what, I think we, I think we got this one, and we all thought it was crazy. I don't think we were praying for you, but then, sure enough, I mean, more crazy night. - Yeah, it was, oh my gosh. We have a flashback here. Yeah, you guys are bringing back some memories there. Yeah, definitely, what a night it was, and I'm sure, like we said, what a night it's probably gonna be tonight, or maybe a couple nights, who knows, but, oh my goodness, I know many of you are sick and tired to talk about the elections, as well as we are, but we're not done yet, we're not done yet, because some of you are still gonna be going to the polls, not that I think any of you listening, and the shot of my voice are gonna vote for the other side, but if you are happy to be on the fence, we're gonna help you out a little bit, because we want you to think about how each candidate differs when it comes to housing. Because of this, before you cast your vote, you have to be familiar with the housing plans for each candidate, right? We have gone so many shows, done so many shows, talking about the economic differences between the two candidates, et cetera. And we briefly have touched on the housing side, but tonight we're gonna go into details of the housing differentiation between the two candidates. So we're gonna show you how each promises to tackle the housing market from the areas of rent to home prices, and I have to laugh at it, so forgive me guys and forgive me with my dear audience. If I laugh when we get to this portion of the show, and that is how each candidate is going to tell us how they're gonna differ, or how they're different, and what they're gonna do when it comes to mortgages. - So, Dwight, please explain to the audience that no president ever has, nor will a president ever be able to influence mortgage prices. They may be able to influence the bond market, which in some ways may be able to do that, but it's not like Donald Trump can call up and call up Senators U.N. Lindy and say, "Hey, this is the DJT, guess what? "I want you to drop that 7% 30-year down to 2%." You know, they're going after you. - Well, I'm sure we're price gouging, John. - Right, of course. - To define it, right? You guys are price gouging, and the market, you know, and the problem is, I mean, and real quick, is that there's one candidate who don't think that really even truly understands how the wheel spins, you know, and the other one probably knows a lot more, and that's why perhaps they think they might be able to be more influential, but you're right. I mean, it's, you know, John, if you can't get to Powell, I mean, it's just gonna be what it's gonna be. You were gonna have to lean on these traders and calm fears down, you've always said it. Uncertainty and fear drives everything, and they've been very peripheral and very, you know, not feeling very secure and a lot of things, so it'll be interesting. It's gonna be a wild ride, either way. - Yeah, CNBC just posted a story a few minutes ago, and I thought of you, of course, Dwight, and the title of the article is, 10-year yield to 4 1/2% question mark. Rates could also see a big move on the election outcome, so it goes on to the article, goes on to talk about how higher bond yields could follow if Trump wins, because again, everyone's fearful that inflation will skyrocket because of tariffs and tax reduction and income tax reduction and so on and so forth. So, you know, matter what, the bond market's gonna do what the bond market's gonna do, and, you know, as y'all are gonna learn tonight when we start going through this differentiation between the two candidates in regards to their housing plans, majority of it on both sides, as we've said so often during this election season, is a bunch of hogwash. I mean, what these two candidates wanna do is they're vote getters, as I've said a million times. Majority of it, they are not gonna be able to do whatsoever, and so, you know, take it with a grain of salt, it'll be a good entertainment on a very stressful day. How about that, guys? And we don't think hardly any of it will come true. We'll highlight what we do think is something of reality, but there's not gonna be much of it. You know, I'll just, like I said, I'll kind of let the cat out of the bags, it's not gonna be much that we're gonna share with you that can actually become reality. But what indeed was reality was the stock market rally today. Guys, I gotta be honest with you, I scratched my head today as this market just kept propelling higher and higher and higher, and, you know, really finishing the session. Let's see, 42, 258, yeah, 42, 258 was a high on the dial, we closed it, 42, 221, not too far off of it. But it was a remarkable day to see this market, again, with so much unknown, so much unknown in regards to the economic policies of both of these candidates, et cetera, moving forward. But, you know, as Jason and I were talking just a little bit ago, today, for, you know, for what it was worth, today was definitely a day where it felt like the market would, and I'm just talking, the market was confident of a Trump victory. You saw the financials move up, you saw the oil stocks move up. You saw a lot of areas that, again, are coined to be very favorable in the Trump administration. Caterpillar, this one kind of shocked me. Caterpillar was very strong, up $8.18, which, well, I shouldn't say shocked me, but, again, fueled the fire because if he implements tariffs on, you know, China and some of these other countries that import, you know, things like Kamatsu's and some of the other heavy equipment that's out there, yeah, there's the reason you saw that. Goldman Sachs today, up $15.49, over a 3% gain. Financials, again, are one of the sectors that are supposed to do very well if he wins. You know, American Express was the fourth best performer. I mean, the list goes on and on and on. And so, you know, like I said, it was a very, very interesting day, and one that I was, to be honest with you, I absolutely shocked that this market powered as high as it did, you know, again, because there is so much unknown. Before we get started, guys, I want to do something. - Can I ask you a quick question? And I don't know if you want to answer it, you know, somewhere after the break, but explain to me, I mean, I understand what tariffs are, right, but Trump's a smart businessman. He surrounds himself with some of the best talent out there. I mean, doesn't he know when to hold him, when to fold him? I mean, isn't it a poker game? I mean, you know, it is, it is. - You've got to, you've got to start looking for out for your own, your own citizens, your own, you know, your own manufacturing. I mean, do you think he would go so deep on tariffs that it would just lead to, you know, obviously what the other side would say, catastrophic results? Or do you think the guy understands it? - And you know, put it this way. I'm going to answer the question differently now that we know what he has done in the past, compared to if he was a brand new candidate, threatening the same thing as far as tariff increases, right? Let's go back, guys. Let's go back to when he was president and what he did do on tariffs. Now, we are all for tariffs on China, right, for all the legal activities they do and the things they do, you know, to our country. So everybody is for that one. But Dwight, to your point, what got everybody was when he went on his rampage and started implementing tariffs against our allies, Canada, Mexico, European Union. And remember, what did they do? They immediately retaliated. They immediately said, you know, we're going to start, remember, European Union. One thing that stands out, they're going to start, you know, implementing the tariff taxes on, I think it was whiskey, right? I mean, something that was the list, I remember going through the list on the show. And I mean, there was crazy things like, like, obviously whiskey, there were razors, there was just bizarre things, but it was a tip for tat type of relationship because of what he implemented. So that's the fear. That's why everyone on Wall Street is so terrified that we would see inflation just skyrocket because of that. Now, to your point, you would think there's, I hope, and I pray, if he wins, which I hope and pray that he does, I hope and pray that he would take it, he would go after the tariffs in a little bit more calmer fashion this time, a little more strategic, a little more tactical, meaning, okay, go after China, give our corporations like a caterpillar as an example, big incentives to build their products, their manufacturing products here in the US, but don't go after the allies 'cause that's what spooked Wall Street is when he, remember, he felt, I don't know about you guys, but I felt like we were the lone soldier in the entire world. We had upset our allies so bad, it was like the world was against us. And so I hope that he learned for that. Now, remember, he did back down. So I think he kind of went on one of his rampages when he did implement those against the allies. So I'm hoping that he backs down a little bit this time and, like I said, as more statistical, more tactical with tariffs because you can use them as a threat, do I, back to your point, but there comes a point where too much is too much, right? Again, going after the allies. So we will see, we will see on that one, by all means, that's one of the things that has Wall Street very fearful, to be honest with you. All right, speaking of Wall Street, when we come back, I'm gonna share with you some data that came out of Goldman Sachs this afternoon. They've modeled out some election outcomes and along with that, how the S&P 500 will react under different victory scenarios. It's fascinating data that you don't wanna miss. I'll share that with you when we come back. First, let's go over to another fascinating lady. And that, of course, is Kristin Snow. She is always busy in the right now, traffic center. Hi, Kristin. I'm Sanchez Shaw on his talk, 780-KOH with Kory edge of edge related to white melard of synergy when lending. All right, here's how we finished up. Pardon me in one second. It's just my microphone. 427 gain on the Dow, 1.02%, close in at 42,000, 221. Now as I gain 259, 1.43%, and the S&P at 70.0, 1.23%. We even throw in the Russell 2000, a 1.88%. So as, like I said, broad base strength right across the board. 6/10 of a percent increase in oil, close at 71.92, a barrel, barely budged on gold, just a fractional gain, finished at 27.50, 20 an ounce. Mr. Mallard quickly, two bases point declined 10-year, 429, how'd we do on that 30-year mortgage? We're still stuck above seven? Oh, yeah, 7.04. The interesting part, John, today was we reprised worse, and then we reprised better. So we kind of gave it away and then got it back. So everything I'm looking at, so the election's going to kind of dictate them up. I think that, yep, that took into the year probably. Yep, exactly, exactly. All right, now, let's, again, our topic this afternoon is going to be which presidential candidate is better for the housing market, but before we get to that, I want to share with you some interesting data that came out of Goldman Sachs today. So Goldman has modeled out some election outcomes, along with how the S&P 500 will react ahead of the results. The firm outlined four possible scenarios for the US presidential election and what it could mean for stocks in a close race, of course. Also, at stake is of control of Congress, as a sweep from either the Republicans and Democrats could mean a drastic overhaul of tax and spending policies that can affect corporations and how investors invest going for it. For investors, what is clear is that volatility will be heightened. With a volatility market pricing in, a 1.91% move for the S&P 500 through tomorrow's close, according to Goldman, okay? Even so, the firm expects any uncertainty will soon give away to optimism. Quote, "We believe a relief rally with all benchmarks up at the end of the week," they said in their note. We notice investors are waiting to add chips to the table, businesses are already to make decisions, election uncertainty out of the way will be risk positive. Now, here are the various scenarios that Goldman Sachs thinks can happen. Okay, you ready for this one, guys? Here we go, listen closely. First one, Trump wins and a Republican sweep of Congress. There's a 25% likelihood, they said. And with that, the S&P 500 will rise 3%. And when I say, when I'm giving you these market predictions of how soon the market's gonna rise, we're talking like, as soon as the results are known, okay, the day after, we'll say. All right, so 25% likelihood, Trump wins and a Republican sweep, S&P would rise 3%. Within the sectors, this outcome will be especially beneficial to financial stocks. Regional banks set to pop 3% in the Trump win. Domestic cyclical names will outperform global exporters. Meanwhile, the NASDAQ will do well, but may have a quote skinnier rally than previously expected, the note read, okay? Now, what about if Trump wins, but the government is divided like we have now? They said there's a 30% likelihood that that's gonna happen. If that does occur, the S&P would gain 1.5%. This scenario would still be positive for markets with the S&P 500 set to gain 1.5% afterwards. In the event, a lower tenure-churager yield could outweigh the risk of a more fiscal debt. Quote, event risk is out of the way and lower tenure yield with Trump, no pun intended, the negative on fiscal, but it likely means that the stock market rally is short-lived. Tariffs and deregulation still happen. More fiscal becomes quite difficult, but long-term rates likely decline to reflect less fiscal. So there you go, Dwight, there's your best scenario. Trump wins, government's divided. All right, what about Harris? How about if Harris wins and there's a pure democratic sweep among Congress? Goldman's putting only a 5% likelihood that that's going to occur. If it does happen, the S&P 500 will fall 3%. This scenario is the least likely outcome to fruition, according to Goldman, which assigned a just 5% probability. A Harris win with a democratic controlled Congress could mean a 3% pullback in the S&P 500 as investors worry about the possibility of greater corporate taxes. Quote, "A democratic sweep opens up the possibility that corporate taxes can be raised from 21% to 28%, but this will be difficult with a very small majority as it was in 2020." Similarly, deregulation theme loses momentum in a Harris sweep outcome. The combination of the risk negative, but somewhat offset by event being out of the way and lower rates weaker dollar. Now, what happens if Harris wins, but the government is divided? There's a 40% probability of that one with the S&P falling 1.5%. This scenario has the greatest likelihood to come true of the four possible election outcomes, they said. Let me repeat that. This scenario, Harris wins, governments divided, the greatest likelihood to come true of the four possible election scenarios. However, investors could step in and buy the dip on the S&P the firm said. And again, the scenario, they're predicting an immediate 1.5% drop in the market. Quote, "S&P's knee jerk dip likely gets bought as lower rates, weaker dollar, and less volatility could lessen the sting of less deregulation and animal spirits associated with a Trump victory." Harris would divide a Congress should benefit consensus crowded areas of the market. Secular growth aims will likely outperform with a NASDAQ in this scenario. Renewable stocks could surge 6.8%. Chinese and global exporters are set to be big winners here as would defensive over cyclicals. So what do you guys think of those scenarios? - I'm surprised that they have Harris winning and they have the top, I mean, just based on everything. I'm surprised that that one. - I am too, Corey. I thought that was the first thing I saw in this article, 40% probability of that one. Yeah. - Yeah, I don't think what they didn't talk enough about, you know, and again, I get what they're saying, but there's going to be another push on the green new deal. You know, this push away from... That's going to drive prices and products and everything through the roof. I mean, I don't know. - And under Harris, it's very shallow and very short-term side into me, not long-term. - Yeah, I thought the same thing, but I think most importantly, you know, let's focus on the probabilities because obviously this is an article. They can't go through all the details of, like you just said, Dwight, but let's just kind of conclude this with once again, going over the probabilities. Trump wins in a Republican sweep, 25%. Trump wins divided government, 30%. Harris wins in Democratic sweep, only 5%. Harris wins with the government divided 40%. So once again, you know, the odds of her winning according to Goldman, better, you know, 10% better than Trump. And, you know, we will see, you know, again, this is just one firm's prediction. Every firm out there has different sets of predictions, but I thought everyone would enjoy hearing with one of the most prominent banks on Wall Street. Pretty good about predicting things also. I had to say about it, but Lord knows it's anybody's guess. Not even Goldman can nail this thing 100% by any means. All righty boys, great job on that segment. Let's get things going with Greg Neff, news, traffic, and weather. And then we'll come back and talk about our topic this afternoon, which presidential candidate is better for the housing market with Corey and Dwight. Welcome back to the John Sanchez Show, a new stock 780K OHH with Coriage of Edge Realty, double white malartive, synergy and lending. All right, we finished up 4.27 on the Dow. The Nasdaq rose 258, the S&P gained 70. Time to move on to our topic. Which presidential candidate is better for the housing market? Corey, I'm gonna just start with you before we start going through the intricate details. And I want to show you just to pretend for a moment that you haven't read anything, but you're just gonna make this gut answer based upon what you know of these candidates, both present, past, et cetera. What does your gut tell you as far as which candidate is better for the housing market? Just your personal opinion. But if I'm just going off of the 10,000 foot view and I don't know anything other than their history, you'd have to fight with Trump only because if his history is a real estate developer, you'd assume it, understand the game, understand the levers that need to be pulled to get things done. I mean, that seems like a pretty common sense argument. Their plans are a little different, but I guess if you had no other information that would need a deciding factor. Right, and that is much more in tune with the economy and interest rates and so on and so forth. And she is, yeah. Dwight, same question to you. Yeah, I mean, we've been able to compare and contrast the last eight years and I would tell you, and again, I just think Trump is probably more realistic about being able to be more effective. You know, you can't throw some of the things that Harris was looking at throwing it and just hope it sticks. I just, I think knowing what I know, living through it the last eight years, I would take Trump and the policies we had. I mean, John, you gotta remember before the pandemic, before we threw $1.9 trillion out of mess, we were at four and a half rates. Things were cooking, you know, we were doing just fine. You know, and then the pandemic hit and everything got screwed up from there. But I mean, if you can go those up until those, the pandemic hit, it was, it was just, it was fine. It was, I mean, I'm not gonna say it was perfect, but it was, it was, it was good. - Yeah, no, I'm with you. Again, 2% inflation, 4% 30-year mortgage, yeah. No complaints whatsoever. So over the last five years, home prices have risen about 50% nationwide. Households, of course, struggling to try to find a home they can buy, which again, is getting tougher and tougher all the time. So what has come on Harris's housing plan? Well, she makes it personal, first of all, right? Politicians, Trump doesn't do this, but politicians always do this. Oh, I remember my mom had to save up to buy a home and it was the greatest thing in her life. And I don't care about that. What are you gonna do for me? All right, so here we go. So she wants to help first time home buyers with a down payment, take on companies that are jacking up rents, which again, we pick up our podcast. We did a show on this that is absolutely false, right? Cory, remember that last Thursday? - Yep. - We have the data to show that corporate America, you know, these publicly traded companies that buy thousands of homes, they only represent just a smidgen above 1% of all rental homes, so that's a flat out lie. And she wants to build millions of new homes. She said in a speech this week that she plans on increasing the supply, providing financial support to aspiring home buyers and curtailing corporate landlords. Now, how's she gonna build a lot more homes? So Cory, tell me how this is gonna work. She wants to build 3 million new housing units, millions of housing units, we are short, of course. And she wants to increase the supply which would bring down rents and mortgages. So how do you bring down mortgages because there's more houses? I don't get that one either. Many housing experts agree that this focus on supply is a good approach to amp up the construction, especially at the cheaper end. Harris wants to expand the existing tax credits that are used to build affordable rental housing. She also wants to create a new tax credit that would incentivize building more starter homes. So Cory, let's pause right there. This is down your alley here. So first question that I have for you is, if you build more affordable housing, which no argument, all three of us do agree that this country does need more affordable housing, but tell me, Cory, how do you help the housing market out with every one of our listeners that aren't in affordable housing as a landlord, how does this help the housing market by bringing on more supply of that specific type of home? - Well, it's always an interesting argument, right? Like this boils down to supply and demand. And so to give her credit, and I don't think it was her idea, I'm sure somebody told her that, "Oh, you need to increase the supply." Oh, that kind of makes sense. Does it help the housing market? Of course, it doesn't help the housing market depending on which side of the housing market you're on. So at the three of us own homes, and our main criteria is high prices, we don't want the supply. We don't think that's helpful to us. If we are home buyers, or we have kids that want to be home buyers, or we just think everybody should own a house for some crazy reason. If you live in America, you have the right to own a house, I'm not sure where that comes from. But then you think, oh, yes, this is a good idea because everybody should own a piece of property and it all should be worth the exact same amounts and nobody's above anybody else. And that's kind of the theory where she comes from. So, you know, is that the supply? Yeah, that's good. How would she drive down rents and drive down mortgages? Do I don't let you answer the mortgage side? But if you build 3 million new housing units, how would that drive down rents? If there are more housing. Oh, and again, you go back to politicians and you say, okay, I'm gonna build 3 million units are gonna drive down rents, which means theoretically, these are gonna be investors that buy them and they're gonna rent them out. Oh, on my other side, you know, when I talk about the other side of my mouth, I don't want investors buying houses. I'm gonna cut all their taxes, breaks. I want to make sure that everybody's got a fair shot. So, yeah, it's typical jargon. But to answer your question, if somebody could magically wave a lawn and increase the supply of livable units across the country by 3 million, 5 million, 10 million, whatever, it should drive rents down, but it's not gonna happen that way. If it's a general home, right? But not specific, low, not specific, affordable housing, that's correct. What is in here, Northern Nevada, Corey, what is the typical affordable housing? Is that a three bedroom, two bath, 1500 square foot? What is that right now? I assume they're talking about a pricing ban. So, if our average is, you know, 550 is affordable housing, 200, 250. I have no idea to be honest with you what the number is, but whatever it is used to be, the high watermark. So, it's an argument that is not easily solved. - Okay, very good. Dwight, the second half of this that she, again, by giving these existing or increasing tax credits, et cetera, to build affordable homes, she also wants to drive down mortgage costs. So, can you explain to me how she can drive down mortgage costs, Dwight? - Well, she can't. John, you have a better chance of doing that. You know, the reality of it is it's gonna come back to confidence in the market, confidence in your job. You know, an economy that's doing well. I mean, those type of things tend to breed lower rates, but John, I don't know if I share with you, I had to take my continuing ed today, right? So, I learned a few things. Do you know what the average home buyer age is right now, buying homes, 56 years old? - You're kidding. - That goes to show you how far out affordability has gone for the people that we want to attract. So, to both your and Corey's point, I mean, we're in a mess. And, but proofing three million homes into existence and dropping interest rates, you know, I don't know. I mean, calling your own policy. I need you to cut rates. You know, we just saw what happened. - It's still an affordability issue. Yeah, even if you give tax credits to the builders, you're not giving tax credit to Wearhauser, Lumber, and the sheet rock companies and the subcontractors, all the costs and the input costs that go into building a home. You're not giving any breaks to them. You're giving them to the developer. - He's not going to-- - John, look at my compliance cost. You want to bring rates down, you know, get Fanny and Freddie out of the way, get those low level price adjusters out of the way and get rid of the regular, the compliance, all this nightmare, if I make it a T, and I didn't cross it, you know, it's insane. - You can buy back the loan. - But see the PB is back out there again, John, looking to penalize everybody. - I get the emails. - So, you know what? You want lower rates, then get out of the way. - Yeah, get rid of the red tape. Okay, we're going to, I'm going to name this one, and then Dwight, I want you to mention, Corey's got to step out here in a moment. She's also proposing a $40 billion fund to spur new methods in housing construction, including more affordable home designs and new ways to finance. But here's the great thing. She wants to cut the red tape that slows housing construction and makes it more expensive to build. Corey, before you have to step away, last time I checked, there wasn't federal rules on housing construction as far as the red tape. That's more on a local basis. - Why am I not right on that? - That's absolutely correct. And you have to be careful, 'cause Obama tried this too. And these are the things that you need to keep an eye out on because they subsidize our town, for instance, gets a lot of federal money. So, it's just like the school. So, I'll say, hey, you want our federal money, start cutting zoning, put apartments on single family lots. Do anything you can for units, and that's where it really hits home and becomes, you know, a personal situation when they start talking like that. Yeah, they can't wave some magic wand and take a, you know, 90-day permit process and shrink it down to 30 days or, you know, it's, again, it's all just hogwash. All right, we'll come back. We'll talk about Harris' plan for first-time buyers and see if this one's legitimate or just a vote-getter. Let's wrap it up with Kristin Snow in the right now, traffic center. Kristin? Welcome back to the John Sanchez Show on News Talk 780KOH. A Mr. Edge had to step aside, but you know what, that doesn't mean we can't give you his incredible contact number 673-6700. Mr. Mallard, your contact information's up. Yes, sir, 240-2022. Thank you, sir. All right, our topic this afternoon has been which presidential candidate is better for the housing market. So, so far, Harris' ideas, nothing that can even come close to reality. Here's the next one that is not gonna happen, but many of you have heard it and maybe some of you would vote for her because of this, but please don't for this reason. So, here's what she is proposing in regards to assistance for first-time home buyers. She's calling for $25,000 in down payment assistance for first-time home buyers. With prices so high, down payment assistance for first-time buyers can really help people make that leap, says an executive director for the National Housing Law Project. Yet economists argue that with that support, just the opposite's gonna happen. Housing prices will actually move higher. Given that a bunch of people are giving a bunch of people an extra 25 grand will increase demands. As Michael Strain and economists with the American Enterprise Institute, a right center, right leaning think tank, and he says there's already a lot of demand. More buyers bidding up homes will lead to higher prices. Do what, I have a feeling you're gonna agree with that. It's a bunch of hogwash there and it's only gonna drive up prices. Amen, it's inflationary, John, and to the article's point, it says most events gonna go to the sellers and not to the buyers. I mean, John, we already have first-time homebuyer programs. Here to have things to help off the buyers. That debt's just not gonna help. That's gonna be very, very wrong. As much as we all were there, I was gonna say. We're gonna try that with education, college. Yep, exactly, oh yeah, that's right. Oh, maybe she wants to come in and be like her boss and just wipe out billions of dollars of this debt and that debt, I don't know. But we all wanna help first-time buyers. We were all there, I know what 25,000 sounds like, but again, it is not reality that it can happen and it can create a disaster. There needs to be other plans to help out those hardworking men and women that are first-time buyers. 'Cause it is tough. We all know that to get in. Final comments do I, 10 seconds. Yeah, I just think they're opposing forces. We're only gonna tell. God's not gonna be surprised by who wins. So we're just gonna give 'em all the information on your show. You got everything. You got our show, our show. All right, buddy, God bless everybody. We'll see you tomorrow on the John Sanchez Show. Have a great evening. This program was sponsored by Sanchez Wealth Management. The material in this program was intended as general information only and should not be taking a specific investment tax or legal advice. None of the information on this broadcast was intended to be a solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security. Further information is available by contacting John at santchesswealthmanagement.com or 775-801-01. John Sanchez offers securities and advisory services through Independent Financial Group LLC, a registered broker dealer and investment advisor. Member FINRA SIPC, securities only offered in states John Sanchez is registered in. Sanchez Wealth Management LLC and Independent Financial Group LLC are unaffiliated entities. Synergy One Lending Equal Housing Opportunity, and MLS #1907235, Dwight Millard. And MLS #24129, phone number 77524022. The information provided today is for educational purposes only. The position strategies or opinions of the show do not necessarily represent the position strategies or opinions of Synergy One Lending or its affiliates. All information loan programs, interest rates, terms, and conditions are subject to change without notice. Synergy One Lending offers home loan financing only. Synergy One Lending is not affiliated with the John Sanchez show. Any speakers, companies, or institutions feature. This is a paid advertisement. Every day when you log in to jumbacassino.com, the ultimate online social casino, you get a free daily bonus. Imagine if you got daily bonuses in other parts of your life. I chose French fries over loaded French fries. I asked Stewart from accounting about his weekend, even though I don't care. I updated my operating system without having to call tech support. Collect your free daily bonus at jumbacassino.com now. And live the jumba life. B.D.W. Group, no purchase necessary. If we were prohibited by law, see terms and conditions at 18 plus.
Well, election day is finally here. American’s will be going to their voting booths throughout the day. But before you cast your vote, are you familiar with the housing plans for each candidate