This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Not necessarily. If more people are buying with cash, you can have both rising prices and people unable to get mortgages. And many, many more people are buying with cash. Either because they are older and have assets in hand, or because they are using OPM to invest in housing, or because they are just wealthier. Cash offers have become very common around here, to the point where even people who are using a mortgage can't put a mortgage contingency in the offer if they want to get the house.
Mortgages are a tool to allow people to afford a home without saving for decades. If they aren't available at a competitive price point, then people can't afford a home unless they save for decades first. This is generally considered Not Good for the economy for a variety of reasons, and certainly precludes widespread homeownership for young people.
You seem to assume that only one thing can be wrong at a time, but this is America in 2025, everything can be wrong at the same time.
Nope, share of purchases that are for cash has been largely the same for 20 years.
https://www.redfin.com/news/all-cash-home-purchases-2021/
That has a graph up to 2021, and in 2025 it continues to hover around 30%.
More options
Context Copy link
You could, but that wouldn't stop developers from building. Unless cash buyers are somehow only interested in existing homes.
I don't think it's actually possible for unavailability of mortgages to dissuade developers AND for home prices to be rising precipitously.
It is theoretically possible for mortgages to be unavailable and for cash buyers to still drive up prices, though I think this article utterly fails to demonstrate that. But the price signal should work regardless of the source of the money. What's happened is the supply has become less elastic.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link