In An Abrupt Reversal, The Vultures Are Circling
The Canton Repository reports from Ohio. “Several Stark County residents featured in two Repository articles about home sales were in discouraging predicaments last spring. All were able to extricate themselves from their situations. But for the home sellers, it came at a price. Tim Manning put his former Lawrence Township home on the market in August 2006 at $174,900. After lowering the price numerous times and hitting other snags, he finally sold the house.”
“But he had to make payments on both that and his newly built Tuscarawas Township home until that happened. ‘We thought, ‘Oh my, we’re not going to get rid of this house,’ recalled Manning. ‘We’re going to be stuck with two homes. We went through hell to sell that house,’ said Manning.”
“Nancy and George Niarchos put their two-bedroom Jackson Township condo, bought for $137,900 in 2003, on the market in November 2006. The move came as they bought a larger single-family home elsewhere in the township. The couple, who asked for $139,000 for the Villages of London Square condo, didn’t receive an offer for nine months and considered selling it through an auction.”
“In the end, an elderly woman moving here from Florida bought the home for $123,600 in August.”
“‘We took it for less than what we paid for it, which was disheartening,’ said Nancy Niarchos. ‘We hadn’t had any offers. … we both looked at each other and said we have to sell this condo to this lady.’”
The Beacon News from Illinois. “Bettye DeRamus, the director of Aurora-based Consumer Credit Counseling Services, had more resources and repayment programs to offer her clients in 2007 after mounting foreclosures nationwide became impossible for lenders and government agencies to ignore.”
“Foreclosure proceedings filed in Kane and Kendall counties, which jumped to 1,600 in 2006 after hovering around 1,000 for years, approached an unthinkable 2,700 in 2007.”
“Only about a quarter of foreclosure proceedings in this area tend to end with the home being auctioned off in court. But even homeowners who escape that fate must skimp on necessities, declare bankruptcy or struggle for years to escape a mountain of debt.”
“Most of the homes affected by the mortgage crisis were sold between three and five years ago. Around that time, lenders began courting people with lower incomes and spottier credit histories. They competed to offer sub-prime loans that offered borrowers artificially low monthly payments for the first several years.”
“In the Fox Valley, where developers were building homes at least as fast as residents could move into them, lenders were only too eager to follow that trend. Over the past two years, as area homeowners have started reaching the end of the low-payment period, they have seen their payments skyrocket. DeRamus says she has watched some clients’ bills double, from $500 to $1,000 a month.”
“‘From Big Rock to Burlington to Sleepy Hollow, no area doesn’t have a foreclosure,’ said Lt. Tom Bumgarner of the Kane County Sheriff’s Department, whose coworkers are stretched thin monitoring the resulting paperwork. ‘There’s no town or village in the county that hasn’t been touched by this.’”
The Chicago Tribune from Illinois. “The vultures are circling. In an abrupt reversal, the commercial property industry that started 2007 giddy about its prospects enters 2008 facing falling property values, a seized-up credit market and concerns a slowing economy could dampen future leasing and rental rates.”
“The downtown Chicago leasing market faces 6 million square feet of new offices in development that will start coming online in 2009. Also, some older office buildings that had been eyed for conversion into residential condominiums may remain in the office supply.”
“‘It seems pretty obvious now that many buyers will have problems meeting pro forma [rent and income] projections and that there was too much optimism in these deals,’ said David Funk, director of the Cornell University Program in Real Estate.”
“In Chicago, office building sale prices fell 17 percent in the fall compared with the spring. Last month, only two properties sold for a total of $91 million, compared with a year earlier when 16 properties sold for $2.3 billion. Nationwide, the dollar volume of sales is off about 55 percent, reported Real Capital Analytics.”
“‘Commercial property performance always comes down to jobs,’ said Jeff Samaras, an executive VP at real estate firm Cushman & Wakefield Illinois Inc. ‘If the economy gets into a mess, all bets are off.’”
“The new year could bring a new reality for landlords and investors, said Christopher Carroll, managing director of a Chicago-based financial-services firm. ‘No one can bet on selling a building for a higher price unless they have a plan to create value through sound operations,’ Carroll said.”
“‘In 2008, I expect to see [lenders] repricing properties on a grand scale, saying you can have this at 30 or 40 cents on the dollar’ for certain buildings in some markets, said Carroll.”
The Fond du Lac Reporter from Wisconsin. “More and more Fond du Lac residents are losing homes as foreclosure rates increase across the nation. The Fond du Lac County Sheriff’s Department has recorded 210 foreclosures so far this year. That’s up 54 from the 166 foreclosures in 2006 and more than double the 99 foreclosures recorded in 2003.”
“‘I have never seen foreclosures on a daily basis like this before,’ said Len Bacon, owner of Century 21 Fox Valley in Fond du Lac.”
“Bacon, who has been tracking local real estate for more than 20 years, said the increasing number of foreclosures is not related to the nationwide mortgage crisis or subprime lending.”
“Many foreclosures are the result of buyers taking on too much debt, becoming overextended and not being able to make their payments, Bacon said.”
“Bacon said many homeowners borrowed too much, often more than the value of their home. ‘It’s difficult for the average American to turn down what appears to be a gift horse,’ he said.”
The Small Business Times from Wisconsin. “There is finally national concern in the news today about rising foreclosures in the housing market. Unfortunately, this is last year’s news.”
“I wrote about the rise in residential foreclosures in December 2006 and touched upon it again in January 2007. Most of the national business news channels hadn’t really featured this until late in 2007. Why’s this suddenly an issue? It has been an issue for more than a year for many people.”
“Will there be a lot of new houses and condos for sale at bargain-basement prices? Don’t count on that. Builders will take less money, sure, but they won’t give houses away. As for condos, some buildings will become apartments until the market bounces back. This is happening already.”
“There is one house north of Racine, in a small suburb called Wind Point on Lake Michigan that was foreclosed. The bank or the real estate agent thought they could get a huge return on it. They put it on the market for $595,000 more than a year ago. Though it wasn’t worth it, they thought it would command that price because it was in an affluent neighborhood.”
“The taxes on the property just went up several thousand dollars. The assessor thinks it’s worth a lot. That house is now $410,000 without one serious offer on it. Looking at it more than a year ago, I said it should sell close to what the mortgage is on it. That would be somewhere in the upper $300,000s.”
“More and more Fond du Lac residents are losing homes as foreclosure rates increase across the nation. The Fond du Lac County Sheriff’s Department has recorded 210 foreclosures so far this year. That’s up 54 from the 166 foreclosures in 2006 and more than double the 99 foreclosures recorded in 2003.”
At some point, our law enforcement agencies will be spending more time delivering the final verdict, than doing anything else…
Some especially fun quotes today:
“…after mounting foreclosures nationwide became impossible for lenders and government agencies to ignore.”
“It’s difficult for the average American to turn down what appears to be a gift horse”
The Small Business Times guy (last article) is a good ranter. Ben clipped his several paragraph rant on city governments and school districts for paying $300,000 salaries to administrators who (he fears) can only govern in a rising property tax market.
it will be easier to hire senior managers in government at lower salaries when there are many former senior managers in private industry who are folding jeans at the Gap.
gov never reacts to the market- it’s the gov
they overpay for everything
“‘I have never seen foreclosures on a daily basis like this before,’ said Len Bacon, owner of Century 21 Fox Valley in Fond du Lac.”
“Bacon, who has been tracking local real estate for more than 20 years, said the increasing number of foreclosures is not related to the nationwide mortgage crisis or subprime lending.”
“Many foreclosures are the result of buyers taking on too much debt, becoming overextended and not being able to make their payments, Bacon said.”
Ben, you’ve got to be kidding, right?
The large number of foreclosures is not related to the mortgage crisis? Foreclosures are the result of taking on too much debt? Of course the are, Len Bacon.
A new low point from the mouths of used home sales persons.
I think maybe he is trying to say that the foreclosures are not subprime mortgages, but rather prime mortgages where the borrower financed too much debt. Sort of combine his two statements into ‘many foreclosures are the result of overextended borrowers who were not subprime’ .
Read somewhere and posted it last year that Wisconsin was the 13th highest in Home Equitity Withdrawals (HEW).
The flips and subprimes may not be KILLING them YET but the Home ATM withdrawals is starting to suck these TURNIPS DRY
Even the cheeseheads are throwing in the towel?
Come on fellow vultures. We’ve got to stick together and wait this out for the real deals. You know the carrion doesn’t taste proper until the maggots are wriggling in the rotten flesh.
Oh, trust me, us real vultures are still in our roosts, biding our time. The carrion isn’t nearly thick enough on the ground to interest me.
Was there a bubble in Wisconsin? No National Bubble - LMAO!!
According David Stark, president of Stark Company Realtors in the Wisconsin State Journal (12/30/2007) “I don’t see that rising foreclosures will be a big issue.”
According to Stark, Dane County current inventory “is down 9% from September and down 6.6% from December 2006.”
This decline in active listings is seen as promising, as it will help keep values up.
It’s nice that Stark can provide these numbers, since it seems to the MLS six weeks to report these numbers, so the November sales should be out this week. Conveniently, there’s no way to refute his statement.
But, looking at sales for October, 2007, (the most recent available to the public)….
Sept (942) to Oct (920), 2007, sales declined 2%. I know, month to month is no big deal, so check out YOY.
Oct 2007 (920) to Oct 2006 (1048), sales declined 12.2%
Oct 2007 to Oct 2005 (1177), sales declined 21.8%
Oct 2007 to Oct 2004 (1200), sales declined 23.3%
Oct 2007 to Oct 2003 (1025), sales declined 10.2%
In the subdivison in which I’m renting there are about six homes for sale - all within 10K of each other and have been on the market six to nine months. Question to big name realtor that accepted last listing - if there are already six homes (three identical) in this area at the same price that have not sold why are you listing at the same price?
Within the next few months there will be at least one foreclosure - it’s been vacant for three to four months. This home is identical to at least three homes having been listed 6-9 months. It will be interesting to see what the bank will have as a sales price.
Maybe local Sheriffs can deputize out-of-work realtors to deal with foreclosures, while the Sheriffs deal with weightier matters.
“Will there be a lot of new houses and condos for sale at bargain-basement prices? Don’t count on that. Builders will take less money, sure, but they won’t give houses away. As for condos, some buildings will become apartments until the market bounces back. This is happening already.”
I will offer to pay half the asking rent. Of course, they won’t give away the rent as well. BUT it’s a “take it or leave it” offer.
50% of X is better than 100% of 0.
‘ Builders will take less money, sure, but they won’t give houses ‘
- The dude from the ‘Small Business’ has shared a comment that is ‘So 2007′!
These soon to be ‘out of business’ builders will take what they can get or just prolong the agony.
The bigger question is why ppl were giving houses away throughout this Nation’s history and then finally woke up in the year 2000. Is it because we now finally have government that works thanks to the Bush administration and our schools are saved by the no child left behind movement and other great ideas which has produced a populace with 20/20 vision?
I think not.
Of course builders are going to “dump” the properties..they have to..1)They have a construction loan that has to be paid off in order to move on and get financing for the next project and 2)When a property is completed they have to pay the carrying cost of that property..which of course they don’t want to do..
Builders are already dumping, with as much as 50% off the original price..better to get something than nothing..
“They have a construction loan that has to be paid off in order to move on and get financing for the next project”
Are these loans huge? Are more builders going to just walk too?Will we see builders in DC looking for bailouts?
When I used to sell real estate I sold a condo once and the whole amount of the sale had to be paid on the builder’s loan. He wasn’t allowed to take one penny himself. That’s what will happen with these builders. Bankers still have liens against the developments and that lien will be paid off piece by piece. So if builders have no money coming in, how are they going to pay any workers or buy supplies to keep going. This is going to get a lot worse for them before it gets better.
“Nancy and George Niarchos put their two-bedroom Jackson Township condo, bought for $137,900 in 2003, on the market in November 2006. The move came as they bought a larger single-family home elsewhere in the township. The couple, who asked for $139,000 for the Villages of London Square condo, didn’t receive an offer for nine months and considered selling it through an auction.”
“In the end, an elderly woman moving here from Florida bought the home for $123,600 in August.”
We saw a bubbling in our area starting around ‘02. I think our peak actually hit about late ‘04. We kept saying that housing could not sustain the economy forever before it went too high and burst. Glad I’m not in the business anymore. I got out before the financing got totally crazy, because I just knew 90% of the deals were law suits waiting to happen. One thing I can’t stand is dishonesty, so I was definitely in the wrong career. Back then the most dishonest were the realtors, followed by the sellers.
“Bacon, who has been tracking local real estate for more than 20 years, said the increasing number of foreclosures is not related to the nationwide mortgage crisis or subprime lending.”
“Many foreclosures are the result of buyers taking on too much debt, becoming overextended and not being able to make their payments, Bacon said.”
That is correct. A nation with over-leveraged debt obligations has nothing to do with the mortgage and subprime meltdown. The depth of ignorance in the realtor “profession” defies description.
Wisconsin cigarete taxes went up 130% yesterday, from $0.77/pack to $1.77/pack.
Interesting observation.
It’s amazing how politicians think they can target certain segments of the population and screw them with higher taxes.
I foresee a DECLINE in revenues for Wisconsin as smokers cross the border to buy cigarettes by the case.
I quit smoking 9 years ago, but am not a vigilante seeking to curtail other peoples rights. This simply isn’t fair, but the “majority” can get away with such tactics if the courts don’t step in to protect the rights of these minority folks.
but you HAVE TO pay for the universally FREE-er healthcare- it’s like home ownership - it’s good for you
Wow, that’s quite a hike in cigarette taxes…I’ve been cigarette free now for 2 days and hope this is the year I’ll finally quit for good…
talk about a regressive tax…it’s not the health conscious consumer (generally well heeled) who takes one for the team when it comes to the cigarette tax.
I hope you’re able to quit, Hondje. When I stopped smoking, it took about two weeks for the nicotine jones to hit, and when it did, it was a mofo. But I was younger then, and had so much more willpower.
Good luck!
(food tastes a lot better after quitting , too)
Come on man, you can do it. Think of all the benefits.
I foresee a DECLINE in revenues for Wisconsin as smokers cross the border to buy cigarettes by the case.
I’m pretty sure cigarettes are still cheaper than in Minnesota or Illinois.
And we cross into Delaware to purchase cigarettes for the smokers in our lives.
You have smokers in your lives?
When we go to Thailand we stock up on heroin for the junkies in our lives. Because that’s what love’s all about.
LMAO
bwhahahahahaa…..
You have smokers in your lives?
Yes, of all varieties.
Yup … as of 2007, the highest combined state-local tax rate is $3.66 in Chicago, with Evanston, IL, second at $3.30 per pack.
Other high state-local rates include Anchorage at $3.10 and New York City at $3.00 per pack.
The overall state average is (was?) $1.11 per pack.
Linky (PDF)
I’m sure glad I never smoked. So what does a pack of cigarettes actually cost in Chicago? Just curious.
$8+ for Marlboros
Ouch. And I thought prices in SC were too high.
Nine dollars a pack in Canada.
Interesting link. Not surprisingly, the states with the lowest cigarette taxes are Southern tobacco states.
I wish KY would ban smoking from restaurants, but this may never happen.
As far as I know, Lexington is the only local city or town to ban restaurant smoking in KY.
First off, I’m not a smoker.
I have no problem with Wisconsin raising the tax as a deterrent to smoking except Madison seems intent to fund ongoing programs with the “extra revenue.”
Nowadays I use more Nicorette than tobacco, but I still buy the smokes from the Indians in Albuquerque. Like, $12 per carton.
Raising cigarette taxes by 130% will probably increase cigarette smuggling by 1000%, and lead to a net decline in tax revenues. Idiots….
Good to see the government profiting from the drug trade and addiction. Have you seen the number of Hummers around Wisconsin municipal buildings lately? I heard the sales of gangsta rap CDs are going through the roof there. Talk about about some real Ballas. They are considering enacting a new law pursuant to which all jeans must be worn below the underwear line.
Good to see the government profiting from the drug trade and addiction.
I think this is the reason marijuana will be legalized at the federal level in 20-30 years. Not because “enforcement” has been ineffective or because weed will have suddenly become more popular, but because the government will be looking for new things to tax.
This has already happened with gambling.
Marijuana is currently valued by our society as being worth almost half as much as Gold, per ounce.
Talk about tax temptations?
Yup, what a great revenue stream going to waste.
Of course, if growing it is legal, the prices will come down quite a bit. (I would imagine. Ahem.)
I suppose there are all sorts of regulatory taxes that could be imposed on growers and distributors as well.
I cant wait to see the internet gambling sites with the government approved stamp. They were never fighting over the concept, just their share of the profits.
Right. I understand online betting on horse racing and sports fantasy leagues were specifically exempted, along with a couple categories I think. Those groups just have better lobbyists, for now.
Weed is technicially legal in Alaska already from what I heard. In many states you get a slap on the wrist for toking. Anywhere from a $100 fine to up to 30 days in prison. I knew a friend who smoked weed and he got caught 3x. Each time, he was to serve 24 hours in jail. Thats close to legal with such a small “punishment”
I do hope they make drugs legal and just tax them. Why let the terrorists earn all the money when the government can do it themselves? If people are going to do drugs, tax them!
In CA the war on drugs continue. Instead of going after the people that run the so called marijuana dispensaries, the DEA’s is now sending letters threatening private landlords with asset forfeiture and possible imprisonment if they refuse to evict organizations dispensing medical marijuana to patients under state laws.
How do you tax something you can grow on a windowsill or in a closet?
Passthebubbly,
A couple thoughts. First, the people who made marijuana illegal are the same general group of people who control the black markets (Read “Barry and the Boys” for info on CIA and Bush family connection to drug smuggling)
It is not in these people’s interest to legalize Mary J.
Another point is that you are neglecting the revolution currently taking place among Mary J. users. Namely, they are discovering that they don’t have to “buy” their personal stash anymore. For a relatively small sum, they can go to their local Home Depot or Lowes and get everything they need to grown their own.
Mr. Green explains just how simple it is
Mr. Green: I Grow Chronic
You can grow your own tobacco too, or brew your own beer. It doesn’t seem to hinder Philip Morris or Budweiser.
You don’t need to even legalize pot per se, just decriminalize it to the level of parking tickets (explicitly less severe than speeding tickets, with points on your record and all that crap). Cop sees you with pot? So what, here’s your ticket, stick $50 in the mail, that kind of thing.
The US (note I don’t say we, since I totally disagree with what happened and no one ever asked my permission) sure did create a booming, incredibly profitable business for drug dealers, smugglers, and growers when it started the great war on drugs. Just like prohibition it created a very wealthy and violent criminal class, as well as giving lots of people jobs fighting crime. Too bad a little rational thought never went into the whole drug war thing. The only thing the war on drugs did was increase dealers and smugglers profits by activating the law of supply and demand. Not saying using drugs is good, but it happens whether legal or illegal; enforcement of draconian penalties for possession sure didn’t solve the problem, but only made the US into the country with the highest incarceration rate in the world. Just say no.
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2007/3437crocodiles_queen’s_island.html
Wall Street and City of London-based financial speculators will increasingly push to legalize the drug trade and other vices as derivatives, CDOs, and other financial instruments explode in their faces. Drugs bring in real money - remember Richard Grasso’s trip to Colombia to hob-nob with the FARC when he was president of the NYSE?
New things to tax, and less money that would need to be spent on enforcement. Seems simple doesn’t it?
gov rewards negative behavior
it’s what they do
FHA
FNM
smokes and gambling
Looks like alot of people are going to be priced out of the gross habit. About time they make smoking unaffordable. I never smoke and am against it!
I do not smoke, but know many that do. I have never known a single person that quit because of the taxes. If anyone does know such stories I would be interested in hearing them. What is really happening is that they are taking money that would otherwise go to childcare, etc. and redirecting it to feeding addiction. That’s what addiction is. It’s something that becomes your number one priority unless you are treated. Taxing the addiction means that lower priorities such as spending one’s money on their family will be where the sacrifice occurs. Economics is not hard. You just have to understand the pyschology and cash flows. Do you really believe that more money should be on spent on cigarettes and less on carrying for one’s family? That’s the result regardless of the intent.
I believe your argument that no one every quit because of the taxes. Nicotine is supposedly a very addictive drug, more so than Heroin if some studies are to be believed. I think studies have also indicated that while no one stops because of them, fewer start in the first place and become addicted when the costs are high. THe libertarian in me does not want smoking banned in commercial establishments although I am happy that my government office is smoke free, as it was not in the mid 80’s. Many of the restaurants here where I live went smoke free long before the city imposed a ban.
Second hand smoke is very harmful. I don’t care if someone smokes in the comfort of his own home or maybe in some rural area(not woods as this can start a fire) I am against alot of things, especially things that harm others. However I am open minded towards certain kinds of drugs(I don’t do any however)
Somehow I got labeled as “pro-smoking.” I find it amusing as I hate cigarette smoke and dont even allow it in my “rented” house. A more appropriate label would be a person that is against taxing addiction as a way to generate profit as it increases perverse incentives. Sometimes the easiest way to attack a position is to change it in your own mind to make it into one that is more easy to attack. I have never found it an effective strategy however.
Every time I see some A-hole throw a cigarette butt out his car window, I’d like to levy an on-the-spot fine of at least $500.
Sorry, you might not know anyone that quit because of the taxes, but I guarantee taxes are reducing smoking. Its a simple cost curve.
Between higher taxes and controls on where you can smoke, smoking is becoming increasingly more difficult. And maybe the point is not to stop current smokers, it is to stop new smokers. When I was smoking as a teenager I had a tough time cobbling together the $1.75 a pack on a daily basis. Not sure I would have been able to come up with $8.00. My mom quit because of the law in Hawaii saying no smoking within x feet of business entrance. She works on a hospital campus, which means a walk of half mile to smoke.
By bits and pieces, smoking is dying in this country and most of the west. Even France is cracking down on public smoking. Good riddance.
My comment had more to do the issue of whether trying to profit from the addictions of others is an appropriate government activity. The issue of whether the government should regulate smoking is entirely different. I don’t smoke or do any drugs for that matter, but have dealing with addicts all my life. Taxing impoverished addicts is not appropriate in my humble opinion. I personally think it is worse than illegalization.
Perhaps a Billion Dollars worth of Marijuana is grown in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada, by the Michoacan drug cartel.
The cartel pays no taxes and keeps all the loot…
The cartel pays off Mexican police forces, for instance: this week the entire Rosarito Beach P.D. was disarmed by the Mexican army, because of their entanglement in the narco-trade.
Why give the money to these later-day Al Capones?
There has been a big tax shift in Wisconsin in recent years from business and agriculture to the working stiffs and residenial property taxes.
I’m not for smoking but I bet if one of the companies offered to bring their operations and a few JOBS to Wisconsin, the State would roll over assbackwards to see that they paid the absolute MINIMUM corporate taxes as USUAL
That is FAIR……most smokers have been using up lots of end of life resources and most have been uninsured so Medicaid was picking up the tab.. So adding $1 tax per pack…is fair to us non-smokers
End of life resources…way to go a aMYCdj….rest assured that the states sin taxes money grab will afford everybody with a high end pulmonary function test and we shall all live Forever…or DIE in the Attempt.
Next…tax the “Demon Rum” out of those evil booze drinkers or give us a new Prohibition on ALL US licensed vehicle drivers for our “Guaranteed” Highway Safety
Next…A new State Tax all forms of human SEX, because it is known to spread …diseases, moral decadence and various forms of feeble thinking
“’It’s difficult for the average American to turn down what appears to be a gift horse,’ he said.”
That “gift horse” requires two full time operators. One to stand in the front to feed it, and the other to walk behind it wearing boots and carrying a shovel to scoop the poop. By the way, nobody has time to actually ride it.
FBs get the esteemed priviledge of working both ends.
Such a lucky pampered horse lol
It is hard for my to sympathize with these bozos complaining about taking their ‘loss’ on a $130K house when I am seeing all of the California folks with their $800K losses and dropping. And why did you buy a 2nd home before selling the first. Oh yeah, you wanted to double down and get that fast appreciation on two properties. Well, the cards went to the house. BOOHOOHOOO HOO HOOO.
I’ll give you a practical reason to buy the second before selling the first: It makes moving so much easier. You can take your time getting the new house prepped, painted and so forth, then you can move stuff from one directly into the other. In a “balanced” or “normal” market there is not a huge risk in buying your second house first.
Not everything is due to abject greed. Some people were just looking for the easy route and got caught flat footed.
10-4 I’ve owned 2 at a time - just the process of moving
“got caught flat-footed” describes it well. I do have friends who bought this way for convenience. If they’d been reading HBB they’d have realized it would make more sense to sell first, seek a short-term rental or storage arrangement, then buy after the first deal closes. (Or NOT buy! how about that?)
After the median price for existing homes dropped 1.9% in 2007 to a projected $217,600, NAR forecasts that the median price will rise 0.3% to $218,300 in 2008.
Here we go again!! The NAR trying to hang on to a sinking ship in the ocean that has no life boats. Where the hell do they get these figures. Maybe from palm readers!
Does this mean that our nation’s median income is almost $70,000? (I’m using the “median income times three gives the median house price” formula here.)
I think it’s around $47,000.00
That would make the median income in CA 160K.
WOOHOO! I’M RICH!
Remember that 35% of the population doesn’t traditionally participate in the house buying market and,, while they are definitely not the 35% with the lowest incomes, they probably are not evenly distributed among the entire population.
The metric for one household does not necessarily apply to a self-selected subgroup of the whole population.
I have never seen a chart that compares the median income of households that “owned” homes vs. median income of households that rented or median income of all households over the years, but I would love to see it.
Excellent point, one I made a year or so ago.
The median area salary is not a valid measurement if 30% of workers do not participate in the home-buying process and if, as you stated, that 30% is not evenly distributed. If you exclude the lowest 25% of salaries and then calculate a ‘home-ownership participation’ median based on the remaining 75%, then that would be far more useful.
@ the US census bureau site, under housing affordability it sort of addresses, or @ least skirts around that question by looking @ renters who could afford to buy.
my county is still spending like it’s 2005 - soon they’ll raise taxes for
the kids
the poor
the enviroment
Spending by state and local governments was up 2.5 percent while spending by the federal government rose 2.2 percent.
The CPI went up 4.4%.
“The CPI went up 4.4%.”
Hence govt. spending should go up as much.
Say, those were some attention getting quotes about Chicago CRE. 30 - 40 cents on the dollar? A huge dropoff in sales activity in 2007?
The NYT back in November wrote that NYC and Chicago financial jobs would get hit hard this cycle. The lion’s share of the city’s condoze schemes absolutely depend on those downtown F.I.R.E. jobs - the West Loop and South Loop especially so with all their new construction.
While there are many good paying jobs in the suburbs there are also many suburbanities who have those jobs already. A significant loss of F.I.R.E. jobs in Chicago’s CBD will knock the legs from beneath untold numbers of luxury condoze as they were built with specifically those CBD jobs in mind.
Just for grins, head over to thechicagospire.com and check it out. Trump’s tower is going to be more than 90 stories, but this thing is over 150. I’m not sure how far in the pipeline it is by now, but I can’t wait to put down multiple hundred $$$ for pre construction pricing. If we don’t hurry, we’ll be priced out forever!
Someone posted here a few months back that The Spire isn’t meant for us, it is for our new overlor…er…friends from Eurasia.
Is that you Arthur C. Clarke? “overlor…”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childhood’s_End
I thought the spire was meant to bring the tallest building in the world back to Chicago. No one cared if anyone lived in it. In true Chicago tradition, it would be filled up with dead people (who need an address to vote).
more like thegiantdildo.com
I tried to google this website but I couldn’t find it.
Lots of commodity traders/bankers in River Forest, Riverside, Oak Park, Hinsdale to the west and Wilmette, Lake Forest, Highland Park, etc to the north. While near Loop condos will be hit hardest, the suburbs will not escape.
Still think it doesn’t come down to price? House down the street empty for 10 months brand new was listed at 1.1 million sold Monday for 750k, it always comes down to money and the situation don’t be afraid to offer you just may be very surprized what you can get out there for your hard earned money.
“The taxes on the property just went up several thousand dollars. The assessor thinks it’s worth a lot.”
And he’d gladly buy it at his full appraised value, but he doesn’t want to put himself in a conflict of interest situation…
[i]“In the end, an elderly woman moving here from Florida bought the home for $123,600 in August.”[/i]
Sign of the times!
Not surprised. Everyone is leaving Florida, including me. My parents and a few friends I know are the only ones who like Florida.
nest time try it like this:
…
where x=i
Hey… off topic, but check out the price of gold today at $858/oz
Gearing up for another FED rate cut, I suppose.
Boom Boom’s a one trick pony.
In the end, an elderly woman moving here from Florida bought the home for $123,600 in August.
That’s still too much. I absolutely would not have offered more than $100K for the thing.
I wouldn’t offer more than $50k. I bet you will see $50k condos in Florida(not Miami) by 2012. I am already seeing $99k 2/1 condos here and I know theres cheaper cities.
Japanese Yen going down toward 105 or 106 within 2 weeks is my own speculation. Not sure how that will impact gold (own some, but don’t actively trade it).
“‘From Big Rock to Burlington to Sleepy Hollow, no area doesn’t have a foreclosure…”
The heedless loanmen of Sleepy Hollow?