The Housing Bubble

What I see is a statement that most of the people receiving healthcare in Brazil are women and children, so that means that the uninsured in America are mostly women and children.

It’s just math. In the USA, 51% of the people are female, 25% are under the age of 17 therefore a majority of Americans are female and/or children. Therefore if women/children compose 76% of the American population it is logical to assume the majority of Americans without health insurance or lousy health insurance are women and children.

So, let me see here, you say that 51% of the population is female? Ok, I will agree to that. You say that an additional 25% are children? Are you sure that the 25% under 17 aren’t already counted in the 51% that are already female? I think you are double counting female children in your stats.

Marxist Math.

You just make up the numbers.

Are you sure that the 25% under 17 aren’t already counted in the 51% that are already female? I think you are double counting female children in your stats.

My mistake. You’re correct. Good point. Thank you. 51% + 12.5% = 63.5 rounded to 64%. (Correct?)

Not 76% but 64%. 64% is still the majority of people in the USA. And that 64% are women and children -the group most males have protected throughout history. Why? It’s been our role.

Thanks for the math correction. My point still stands.

Marxist Math….You just make up the numbers.

The sociopath FPSS waits for his chance and pounces because he don’t like me…lol

Ryan made a good point and I’m glad he did. He was correct on the math. My point still stands. 12% less does not much weaken my main point.

You said you never get political. But you just did with me. I know why. Because I have your number Pussy. Because I’ve shown many times you don’t even know the history and traditions of America. And you are a lousy person. A poor soul.

BTW, are you a foreigner? There would be nothing wrong with that because I am a foreigner down here but I don’t pretend to know most history and traditions of BRZL. But you have the ignorance of a foreigner in America.

(I know I upset you because I point you out as a narcissist and the sociopath that you are.) Too bad.

“what can you say about a society where most white males will stand up and scream about any small tax increase “punishing” the “producers” but then (when it comes to health-care) we throw our wives and kids under the bus?”

overreaching leaping to conclusions, please stop it. It doesn’t encourage the meaningful discussion.

“Leaping to conclusions”? LOL How? I used mathematics, percentages, ratios and logic to come to a conclusion that you can’t debunk. And you know it. That’s why you can’t have a “meaningful discussion” because there’s no way you can do a good job disproving my conclusion. So you strike out like a pouting child and call names. That don’t cut it.

Dude seriously you should stop posting.

Not a chance dude. People like you give me resolve. Thank you

Go Rio Bravo!

Would be curious to hear the arguments if we were in the 1840s, during the height of slavery and factories gone wild. All those nasty, unfounded conjectures about working conditions. Making up numbers, and all, you know.

As much as I hate commies I have to say honestly the 30 years that I was a consumer of health care in Soviet Union, health care was about the same what we have here in U.S. last 5 years. I have been in Hospital maybe 3 to 4 time and payed to doctors and medical personal (only under table) 20% of my monthly salary. Hospitals of course weren’t as clean as here in U.S., but healthcare was free and doctors for their work were getting as much as any other Soviet intelligent educated middle class worker…Clinic doctors visits were little better than here, even if you have insurance here you have to wait in a doctors office at least 40 minutes. If your employer doesn’t pay for insurance than you are in big hole…But I should say I’m happy to be here any way…only there are a lot of things to be fixed in our ” greed” oriented consumer capitalist society…

Gaylen . It use to work pretty well here but now the balance of power is pretty messed up .

Blue Sky

Would you of believed that Wall Street and the Banking Industry would of been able to throw on a faulty lending leverage Ponzi-scheme to raise the price of real estate
,only to have it crash leaving people in ruin ,while they got bailed out ,and they are still being bailed out .

Some people think that its the peoples fault because they
went along with the scheme that was to good to be true
in which they were given that kind of leverage without qualifying .

Would you bank at a bank who gave loans to anybody and fraud was ok on the application and it wasn’t checked and they based loans they gave on a notion that the investment is going to go up. Also, they could rate the paper AAA and sell it to others,and their fraudulent lending would make the price go up for a while, and it doesn’t matter if the person doesn’t qualify ?

And further if that same Bank encouraged you to get in on the scheme ,and you didn’t have to qualify ,just sign the loan papers, because the value of the real estate is solid ,who would you blame ? And would you buy those investments that were rated AAA ,that were based on fraudulent loans in which the people didn’t qualify ,or the information wasn’t checked in a proper manner .

Would you say that it was the responsibility for the people or the investor in loans to know that it was a scheme that would crash and it was based on fraud and faulty ratings and the fraudulent inflating of a real estate market ?

Would you hold the creators of the scheme responsible and their breach of duty to prevent fraud in lending and fraud in rating investments ,or would you blame the sheeple and investors who wouldn’t of engaged had they known that it was a crime spree ?

Careful there, your line of thought might extend to would you live in a country where this is allowed!

I moved in 2001 from a Bubble area to a pre-bubble area, trying to get off the Great Debt Hampster Wheel, so I’m trying not to feel too guilty myself. Those that moved the other way, I sense they have some responsibility for the consequences.

And I would add for people to consider the effect of large institutions having investment rules related to third party assessments (to give their managers justification to not get fired if the investments went bad).

In other words, if large institutions didn’t have rules that said their investment managers needed to buy securities only rated AAA, would there have been such a push to rate everything AAA?

What would it have looked like if institutions told their investment committees to ignore ratings, but that they needed to do their own homework on every investment?

I think this may be partially where we are today (for some institutions but not others), but I fear this “discipline” of direct diligence from some will be short lived–and soon we’ll be back to relying upon someone else’s homework (who has no stake in the transaction).

Where are those QRM standards?

So all ratings ,or assurances ,are meaningless . I don’t remember them selling those securities saying “You BUY AT YOUR OWN RISK .” No longer is fraud in ratings a no no and you should of known that it was just hype because retirement investments weren’t allowed to invest in anything but AAA paper .

Not one of the KINGPINS of the Lending fraudulent Ponzi-
scheme is going to jail .

Ok ,so I can’t believe anything that Corporations say as to ratings ,or I can’t even believe what they say they are giving me as a product, because fraud in business is a acceptable practice and I should of investigated their claims that they put in writing before I bought . SO OK ,a big BUY AT YOUR OWN RISK should be put on every product sold today ,if the law isn’t followed anymore .

I haven’t seen the documentation that went along with the sale of the mortgage securities, but if the sale of those securities is anything like other prospectuses I’ve seen, there would be 20-50 pages of “Risk Factors” (which would highly likely include a statement that would say the ratings may end up being inaccurate, no guarantees, etc.). However, without seeing the prospectus, I can’t say for certain, but I don’t think either of us can say that they did or did not say “buy at your own risk”.

What I’m simply saying is that the culture at large institutions got to be that their equivalent of “not getting fired for buying IBM” became “not getting fired for buying AAA”. And because of that, the institutions became complacent that trusted the ratings too blindly.

Making a mistake on a rating is not fraud. It may be incompetent, but it is not necessarily fraudulent.

IMHO, ratings should be considered a PART of your diligence, but not the whole of it. It got to the point where some were looking at the rating as the entirety of their diligence.

But the AAA rating was so far from anything close to the rating ,or the responsibility to put in the package what you say is in the package . If I put a bunch of posion in with some good food and market it as good food I am implying that no posion is in it .

But if some small print disclaimer that I might be giving you something the opoosite of what I say it is takes away Good faith in Business and gross misreprestation, or false advertsing laws or fraud laws ,than we are doomed ,because business law would be based on illusion .This was such wide scale fraud that cause the real estate market to inflate .

Absent the lending fraud and the securites selling fraud ,or the breach in duty to prevent fraud as a lender or seller ,the real estate market would not of inflated ,therefore it had a fraudulent material affect of
causing loss to people that this fraud would not be expected .
Your acting like disclaimers give licience to commit fraud ,or any conceivable bad faith in business or intent to hoodwink for gain . This would make business impossible and no transactions would be possible because the extent of research that it would require would be impossible ,nor would you be protected from anything that is done after the fact that you had no knowledge of after you signed on the dotted line . I know this is the new wave legal trend to redefine foul play as something that is not measurable .And if the Culprits say they didn’t see it coming ,thats suppose to release all liability . Toyota could say that also about their break problem and walk away from liability because the customer didn’t test the breaks with a garage and its the customers fault to believe they bought a new car that didn’t have faulty breaks .

Unrepentant squating bed wetters?

Repeat Carnival Cruise Line customers?

Shadow Rats?

Rentally challenged?

S’mores?

Sreyap llib?

I can’t stress enough that as long as the drum beat of this
Nation is profits over people as the highest goal ,than
you are going to get a increase in deadbeats that play the
system and crime and all the ill effects of a amoral Nation
and a rutterless ship that can no longer tell the difference between right and wrong ,or destructive verses constructive .

That was a long sentence ,but I’m not going to change it .

It’s pretty much a law that a ship without a rutter steers wrong.

a ship without a rutter steers wrong

Nympho needed for navigating?

That’s the way we make it work on the Blue Skye.

“Ditto your whining about the lack of free-lance gigs.”

What is a free-lance gig?

What Slim does for a living.

“Rentally Challenged” works for me. Nice, Unk. As for steering without a “rutter”, alpha gets the snork of the week.

Thank you for the clarification.

What “clarification”? What is “heretical” about “fundamentalism”?
Are you suggesting that “Christians” who haven’t read their horoscope, checked to see what holy day is assigned by Rome, or don’t have a “connection” with some Karmic ideology and can’t discern the “ying and Yang” are somehow “heretics”?
Amazing. Just Amazing.
Perhaps Rome can re-start the Inquisitions and burn the Witches and Heretics. You may be unaware that the current Pope was formerly the head of the Successor of the Doctrinal body that formed the Inquisition. (The Church maintains it’s doctrines, while adding more.)
In Papal declarations he has stated clearly that those who fail to conform to the Doctrines of the Church should be meted out appropriate punishment (not defined) in the encyclical, but previously the punishment for heresy is “death”).

You do realize that over half of American “Jews” are atheists. So, I guess the Orthodox Jews are heretics, since they are now a minority amongst their own people.

Wow. Looks like I hit a nerve.

“You do realize that over half of American “Jews” are atheists.”

i dated an atheist once once whose mother married a jewish man and then converted from catholocism to judaism.

i said “ohhh so you’re half jewish?”

she exclaimed “No!~ i am 100% jewish”.

i quickly changed the subject to the Great Pumpkin.

Why did you then have to talk about the Great Pumpkin? Judaism doesn’t do half-Jewish. You either are or you aren’t. If your mother is Jewish at the time of your birth you are Jewish. If you convert, you are Jewish. Assuming her mother converted and she was born (in that order), her statement was correct.

exactly.

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/45132/jewish/What-Makes-a-Jew-Jewish.htm

well this was enlightening.

i posted a link but it did not get in…i stand corrected.

Clearly I know much more than you which is apparently nothing.
“the poor you will always have with you”.
REally?
So, what should we do as a “government”?
Have a “WAR on Poverty”.
Seems we have a conflict.
While the Scriptures do warn of evil befalling both society and individuals for failing to “behave” in Godly ways and provide many punishments to be meted out in the OT, the primary basis IS individual behavior.
As a Corporate body, the CHURCH is the vehicle of group behavior, not the “government”.
The NT chastens the CHURCH to “keep ye separate”, NOT to go out and provide “inclusion” for Hindus, Bhuddists, Sheiks, and Wiccans. You can’t keep separate in a government of “inclusion”. You can only dilute and pollute the Teachings you seek to hold.
I agree you should try to hold to Biblical Teachings in Laws you pass. Providing ‘charity’ is not passing a Law, it’s stealing money from one group to provide for another.

The Book of Acts, chronicles how early Christians lived communally, handing over all their wealth to the community.

“While the Scriptures do warn of evil befalling both society and individuals for failing to “behave” in Godly ways and provide many punishments to be meted out in the OT, the primary basis IS individual behavior.”

Punishment for offenses like cutting your sideburns?

Punishment? As stoning your children?

Are you orthodox?

Why are you cherrypicking Levitical Law?

And the NT doesn’t talk about excluding anyone. Especially those of other faiths.

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

“The Book of Acts, chronicles how early Christians lived communally, handing over all their wealth to the community.”

Well geez….. hmm. How do the religious fundamentalists expunge that truth?

That’s right MORON, to their “community” of Christians. Not to the STATE.
Are you really that stupid?
You can’t see the difference.
Their are constant arguments about America as “Christian” Nation. The left is vehement that it isn’t. WE are a “secular” State, and we have a Secular Humanist ideology, according to them.
So, which is it?
It is clear that the Majority of People in the Country claim to be “christian”, but the STATE is not a Christian State as it is SEPARATE from the “CHURCH”.
So, Please, if you want to claim to be an expert in Biblical Doctrine, point to one passage that says the MISSION of the Christian is Not to Preach the Gospel, but to Provide a “vote” for Government programs.

Colorado, let me preface this by saying that I’m not religious.

Yes it does say that they lived communally, it also says that Sloth is one of the deadly sins. How would that community feel about those who don’t contribute to the good of the community? In that time, that would have included labor as well as wealth.

Dio, take some time out for quiet meditation!

Dio…. you just don’t know what you’re talking about. Theology isn’t your strong suit.

The people.

However, people need jobs. And for people to have jobs, business environment relative to the global economic system needs to be considered.

Finally a good question.

Our government (the United States) has been established to preserve individual, God-given freedoms. That’s an odd statement to make, since I’m conservative yet not at all God-fearing.

However, conceptually, it’s a the best approach out there since it’s all about an Idea.

Our government should always be focused on pushing freedoms down to as close to the individual level as possible.

That means that very few decisions should be made in Washington. Some should be made at the state level, even more at the local level. Most decisions should be made at the individual level.

That we’re rapidly heading away from individual freedoms as a concept is disturbing to say the least.

You can blame it on corporations all you want. But it is not the corporations job to preserve individual right to pursue life, liberty and happiness.

It is the job of government.

The problem is that our government isn’t the least bit interested in performing the task ASSIGNED to it.

Thats right ,the Government has become a Government for the 10 per cent and the Powerful Corporations and BIg Business lobby bribing ,and the protections for the individual are lost . Of course I blame it on the Corporations and Big Money Interest because they are the
“Bribers ” and the bribed is their counterpart .

When a government creates a marketplace that is counter-productive, what you describe is the result. Why would it not be?

The U.S. now taxes its corporations at a higher rate than any other country in the world.

Expect what dismays you to continue.

Because our Corporation tax structures are suppose to be based on the United States ,not comparing other Countries tax structures . The Constitution said for the people and by the people of “THe United States of America “. It didn’t say for the people and by the people of the ‘UNited States of the World .”

Other Countries have different standards of living and
different ways in which they collect taxes and dole out benefits ,so you can’t compare .

What are the specific needs of the United States and how is that to be taxed .

You don’t tax based on needs, whether defined or not.

Taxes available should be determined solely by revenue receipts. If revenue receipts take a massive dip, so should allocation of taxes.

How it is allocated should be determined by where money should be spent to raise greater revenue receipts.

Only when a country becomes a revenue-making machine should any question of tax allocation be addressed.

Right now, all tax revenues should be spent on that which creates economic expansion.

When we had the greatest expansion in this Country( after World War One ), is when the rich were taxed at 70% and we had a even higher Corporation rate . That which would create economic espansion is the higher brackets being
taxed more ,but a better solution would be if they gave the employees more and didn’t take the jobs outside Country to begin with . In fact, Corporations should pay a
penalty tax for any job taken out of Country or is a product of outside Country manufacturing . All we are getting now is a ongoing gutting of jobs and manufacturing plants in favor of cheaper labor elsewhere
and the cash flow is being taken out of the USA . This won’t allow us to collect enough tax revenue here for our costs .

The wage earner and consumer has to be paid well enough
to contribute to tax revenue and buying power and more important they have to have jobs opportunities to do that .Right now we are rewarding Companies for taking
money/cash flow ,jobs ,and tax revenue out of the Country ,and all this keeps the welfare needs higher .Paying low wages isn’t going to do squat but create less economic activity . No doubt it will create more activity in the luxury purchase sector ,but not enough overall .

The taxes we choose to enact goes a long way toward directing economic activity ,but more important good wage jobs float all boats . Do you think the Baby Boomer
population would of been consumers if they thought that
they were not going to have health care and Social Security or Pensions promised when they retired . Those Social nets allowed Big Business to be properous for about 70 years now ,otherwise business would of had must lower
profits .

So, where should the tax dollars go to ? Miltary only ,or maybe only to mutually used roads or bridges ,or maybe fire fighters and police only and maybe a public school system . Where should the tax dollars go ,or should there be any tax dollars at all ? Should charity be only relied on by the Church or voluntary contributions ?

Everybody has their idea of where the tax dollars should
go . We just saw them bail out the Bankers in the trillions using tax dollars . We bail out a insurance Company called AIG who was making a bunch of credit default swap bets without any money to back their bets ,and than Goldmans was bailed out by that pay off . Is that your idea of where tax dollars should go ?

Did Jesus hold out on the ne’er do wells? Did they get kicked out of the loaves and fishes party?

If you have read ANY of my many post, I have consistently said that there should have been NO “bailouts” for Banksters and that they should ALL be in Jail including Hank Paulsen, Ben Bernanke, and the host of Governmental and non-governmental agents responsible for this “THEFT”.
We should have LESS taxes. And yes, the public’s money should be spent for PUBLIC PROJECTS. I don’t care what that is. IF it is a PUBLIC project, then everybody uses it.

Public Housing in NOT public housing because I don’t have one, and must “qualify” for it. If you have separate “means” testing it is NOT public, it is public money converted to private use.
Public Beaches are Public because EVERYONE uses them. Roads the same. Libraries. Waterworks. Airports. Docks.

“Public” support programs take money from one group to provide for others and are FILLED with FRAUD and misallocation of Funds. They are not “Public”.
While we need some support programs for the truely unfortunate or handicapped or incompetent, they have grown to include way, way too many people who have taken advantage of a cozy, retire without ever having provided a working day in your life, “benefit” system to those who know how to game the system. They need to be shut down, not “expanded”.

Well, no, everyone who came to here him speak was fed. And they were given the “gospel” message.
That message was about the Kingdom of God.
Jesus did not say, not “go out each of ye, and contribute monies to the State to build houses for the poor. Provide government health clinics and places of food taking for those who provide no work”.
You are all completely deceived about the Teachings of Christ and so-called “Charity”.
I think you will find it more appropriate that if a man doesn’t work, he should not receive food or be fed.
Christ fed those that were their to hear him speak. He did not start a “mission” to feed the poor.

But the current welfare needs are in part due to the rigged decks and advantage and heist of the criminal bankers and the one percenter that took the money and ran and left the economy in ruins for the working class ,with limited
opportunity .

I can understand that you have a group of deadbeats that
play the system ,but that will increase as long as you have a system that is decreasing opportunity ,lowering pay ,raising prices , imposing austerity to bail out the bankers and all that . Which came first the chicken or the egg

Ok ,they need to do a better job of weeding out the deadbeats from the true needy . But a secular reason for
providing charity is it lowers crime ,it lowers riots from the starving and jobless and a whole host of social benefits and it might allow a person to get over a hard luck period and move on .And Charity is usually immediately spend
causing it to prop up business income that they otherwise would not of gotten .

But what is going on now is more of a deconstruct of the
Society to even be functional by having to much of the population lacking opportunity or liveable wage ,and prices for needed items like health care being
just so beyond reach for to many . These people can’t even pay more of a share of taxes, and the rich don’t want to pay more ,so you don’t have enough revenue .The go into debt scheme didn’t work rather than liveable wages floating all boats .

Governments CONFISCATE money from people and give it to other people.

Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, like Jesus said. He never said the government shouldn’t aid people.

Thats why I want the End of PBS and “public” radio because its not…its government approved media

The public is not welcomed at a “public” radio station

I want them to give back licenses and then the FCC can give it to schools colleges community groups to provide a diversity of opinions….

IF it is a PUBLIC project, then everybody uses it.

It’s evidence that I’m a winner. I get all I want while “they” get the ER only.

I get all I want while “they” get the ER only.

Ah yes, the simple pleasures of watching others suffer.

For some things (like vaccinations), it is less about being a “right” and more about free vaccinations being the best for society. As would be prenatal care, etc.

And before you call him a “typical conservative”, I spent the next hour hearing about his support of Obama…

I would never call him a ‘typical conservative” given that his views put him well outside the Republican party. In fact I think you could sum up his health insurance ideas as “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need”.

Yes, but also recognizing that “need” is not absolute, and cost benefit needs to come into play, which is distorted when many providers and recipients of care don’t understand or bear any portion of the cost portion of the cost/benefit analysis.

cost benefit needs to come into play, which is distorted when many providers and recipients of care don’t understand or bear any portion of the cost portion of the cost/benefit analysis.

So you’re saying we need death panels and co-pays based on income. You’re probably right- but again, it’s not a very ‘conservative’ stance.

Can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to pay through the nose for the same medical care that white trash druggies and illegal aliens in the bed next to me are getting for free on my dime.

Nothing like being taxed to pay for employee’s (or worse, charity patient’s) surgeries you can’t afford for yourself. There must be a better way….

If the US devoted one tenth of the resources to its medical research system that we do to our provacative military, we could be an international center for cutting edge genetic and interventional technologies.

Declare neutrality, withdraw from all our military bases, put our troops to work developing our infrastructure, and let the rest of the world come to us for medicine and genetic engineering like they do Switzerland, Bahamas, Singapore, Monaco for financial sancturary. Same thing with energy technologies.

But nooooooo. The oiligarchy is too entrenched, and free-market economy doesn’t allow for an actual free market .

“If the US devoted one tenth of the resources to its medical research system that we do to our provacative military, we could be an international center for cutting edge genetic and interventional technologies.”

Just wait until Rmoney carves out special treatment in the budget for a military expansion.

You ain’t seen nothin’ yet…

You need a permit for that and they probably won’t give you one. Especially the well because it’s zoned residential and all they approve these days is agricultural, oil & gas or municipal because the water table is dropping. Why fight the the tide anyway?

No building dept has ever got in the way of me pulling a permit. Ever.

Yeah works great for a build it yourself guy but the story was about actual home builders. OK I get it.

“…No building dept has ever got in the way of me pulling a permit. Ever….”

LMAO. Obviously, you’ve never tried to build in CA. Try sinking a septic or drilling a well in Santa Monica and see how far you get.

Brava, SF. We come here for the convo, we leave with new perspectives. Mostly….

Do you have numbers for Carmel, Carmel by the Sea and Pebble Beach?

Aren’t Carmel and Carmel by the Sea the same place?

http://www.foreclosureradar.com/california/monterey-county/93953-foreclosures/listings

http://www.foreclosureradar.com/california/monterey-county/93923-foreclosures/listings

Not much in the way of activity.

No, I understand your point. I’ve just been looking at some other data that perhaps makes me inherently think that the backup is in the foreclosure process, not prior to issuing an NOD.

LPS is non-government, and they have been releasing data for Florida for a couple of years. They track non-current loan rate, but they also break it down between loans that are delinquent and in the foreclosure process.

What they show is that at the peak, the combination of the two numbers peaked at about 24%, and is now down to about 21%. However, over time there has been a shift in a greater proportion of loans being stuck in foreclosure than simply just delinquent.

At the peak (23.8% in February 2010), the 23.8% was made up of 12.4% delinquent, and 11.4% in the foreclosure process.

Now at 20.7%, there are 7.5% delinquent, and 13.3% in the foreclosure process.

“Normal” delinquency is about 4%, and I’m assuming that with so much underwater, we are going to run higher than 4% for some time (5%? 6%? 7%?), at least until the number of underwater homes drops to “normal” levels. My only conclusion is that they have pushed a lot of their excess delinquency into the foreclosure process.

They haven’t pushed all, and could probably push faster, but the bottleneck appears to be substantially the foreclosure process as opposed to banks refusing to file NODs.

Sorry, I responded to FL generally. However, in conjunction with my Daly City data, the LPS data shows much greater progress in California than in Florida (consistent with decreasing levels of distress).

Peak non-current in CA was 15.3%. It is now at 8.6%, again “normal” is about 5% of delinquent+foreclosure (likely to run higher until we have “normal” levels of underwater loans).

In contrast to Florida, California’s 8.6% is made up of 6.1% delinquency, and 2.6% in the foreclosure process (there must be some rounding there…).

Either they are lying about the delinquency rate or the whole pipeline is clearing out. I kind of doubt they are lying but I wouldn’t put anything past these guys. If the trend holds the distressed market will slowly clear to a more normal 4 - 5 % rate. That seems to be the trend nationally.

That could form a bottom in the market. That assumes we don’t sustain some huge shock. For example if they take away the mortgage interest deduction or rates skyrocket for example we could go into another leg down. The whole thing is based on easy / cheap credit.

However, I think specific markets may not conform and I’m thinking of higher priced areas that are predominantly vacation homes. I think the phase of distressed sales in these areas is shifted compared to the rest of the market. People have been holding on and now I think they’ll start to purge. But we’ll see.

“If the trend holds the distressed market will slowly clear to a more normal 4 - 5 % rate. That seems to be the trend nationally.”

This is where the judicial vs. non-judicial comes into play.

California is on pace to get to about 5% by the end of 2013.

Florida is on pace to get to about 5% YEARS AND YEARS later.

Thanks for the links for Carmel & Pebble Beach.

That makes sense that non-judicial states are clearing faster.

I have to admit it’s hard to move from being a cynical bear to an actual buyer but these stats are starting to look more and more like the mid-1990’s when the last big housing bear market ended and began the climb up in California. Is it time to take off the bear-suit and buy? I’m still curious what impact the election and fiscal cliff will have on the market.

Do you think things have improved partisan?