The Housing Bubble

Shouldn’t you be complaining about Brasil’s inequality? I just saw the gini out of the bottle and Brasil’s worse than USA.

May be good time to move back to USA for a more equitable society?

Shouldn’t you be complaining about Brasil’s inequality?

Brazil is not my country. I just live here for now. Besides, see below:

I just saw the gini out of the bottle and Brasil’s worse than USA.

“Just saw”? Just realized that? You’ve got to be kidding me. What planet do you live on?

May be good time to move back to USA for a more equitable society?

Actually the 20 year trend in Brazil is a more equitable society while the 40 year trend in America is a less equitable society. On inequality, Brazil is turning into America while America is turning into Brazil.

Maybe the meteor will strike my boss at the exact moment he is chewing me out.

This was my thought - I had SolarCity come out last year and a) we don’t use enough electricity for it to pay off, esp becuase our heat is natural gas b) not enough sunlight to really get maximum benefit and c) solar panel prices are decreasing… why buy now when we could buy later (if it makes more sense in future).

I’m very familiar with GM no longer being government motors… All the details are on our network right now, the deal has been in the works for months.

Big fees for us. Thanks taxpayers!

Oxide, re: Bethesda from yesterday, here is what I consider an average house in Bethesda. http://www.trulia.com/property/3099398920-7117-Fairfax-Rd-Bethesda-MD-20814

Over 1MM, but still very little land (5,000 sq ft) and not that much house (1,200 sq ft).

Nicely kept but smallish bathrooms and kitchen. Kitchen in particular has nothing fancy, might not even have a dishwasher from the looks of it. Chair rail in dining room, but no wainscoting. Neighborhood with above-ground powerlines.

Overall, pretty meh, but this will still sell for about a mil., going off recent sales within a few blocks.

By the way, whoever buys that house will probably want to put in a whole house generator because of all those above ground powerlines and the fact Bethesda is very leafy. Lots of big mature trees. I bet that area was without power for at least 2 or 3 days in this past year.

Thanks for the reference. I don’t have time to find the listings, but yesterday I found a couple similar houses in the $715K range. This one cost more because it’s within a long walk of the Metro.

And whoever buys that house will need to knock down the wall between the kitchen and dining room and build a kit/liv combo. No way is that cramped kitchen acceptable for Bethesda.

whoever buys that house will probably want to put in a whole house generator because of all those
The entire grid has become less trustworthy. Anyone would could afford to pay that much $ for a house can certainly afford a whole house generator and an automatic fire suppression system, among other things.

If one installs a whole house generator, would they need the fire suppression system too? Or would it at least be advised? Because I’m pretty sure generators increase the risk of fires. (I never lose power so have never considered a generator)

Because I’m pretty sure generators increase the risk of fires.
Back up your sureness with a citation. I’ve been following the issue for years. Few news items I’ve found are in the range of someone setting themselves on fire by adding or spilling gasoline into a hot portable generator. Other harms include carbon monoxide poisoning, virtually always the cause is running a portable genny inside or right next to a house.
This is an altogether different category from whole house generators, which are nearly always constructed at a distance from a house, on a concrete pad, with nothing flammable nearby. They can run on diesel, gasoline, propane or natural gas. Sometimes on more than one of these fuels.
Built-in fire suppression systems should be considered an essential part of any house over about $750,000, IMHO. This is a separate issue from power failures. Natural or manmade disasters can take out whole neighborhoods and overwhelm local fire department response, refer to superstorm Sandy, or to last summer’s wildfires out west. Of course the nature of the system chosen would vary with the risk. Grade school classmate in the foothills of the Rockies has a huge tank of fire retardant in the garage with a network of ready-to-deploy special fire hoses. Last summer she strung those hoses all over her structures as wildfires raged nearby. All she needed to do was flip a switch to smother her house in fire retardant. She did not have to do that, but it was a close thing. I don’t know if she has a fire shelter, but that would only make sense.
What doesn’t make sense is the very wealthy putting tons of money into bling and overpriced housing that is basically good for nothing in a disaster. Hell, at $1 million, why not install a buried fuel tank that holds a 2-year supply of No. 2 diesel? Also a water tank.
Instead of a fireplace, hire a competent mason to build a masonry furnace instead. Masonry furnace may look like a fireplace, but when suitably designed, can heat an entire house with a minimal amount of wood. Technology is actually centuries old. Costs from $10K upwards, needs to be designed with the house for best results.
It is possible to power a house from a hybrid vehicle idling in the driveway. People have done it for days at a time. Wiring to accommodate this, plus a transfer switch, costs a lot, and there is a built-in premium the electricians like to add, since they know they are dealing only with only customers. I recently got a quote on just a simple transfer switch for my house,it was more than the generator cost.
I’m not in that price range, so the details are my speculation. Not to mention solar power. But the basic principle holds.

tresho - I know this won’t make sense (nor should it) but a 1MM house is just some average 1200-1500 sq ft house in that area. Usually 3/2 but sometimes just 2/2. I’ve even seen 2/1.5 for 1MM in that area. And while these people would be wealthy in the normal sense, they don’t really feel it, they feel average. They also don’t usually have the option of living much further away (outer suburbs) nor can they become equity vultures and move to some rando place in FL, NV, or AZ unless they retire. And, as I mentioned the other day, it doesn’t necessarily make sense to move because if you’ve owned a house long enough in Maryland, your taxes are far below what they “should” be, due to Homestead tax program.

The Baltimore Sun did several stories on this in recent years–how much benefit really flows to multimillionaires with very expensive houses. Yet the populace always backs the Homestead credits, thinking that the benefit to middle class owners is worth the cost (it isn’t).

“Overall, pretty meh, but this will still sell for about a mil., going off recent sales within a few blocks.”

Way north of Fannie/Freddie financing, so someone around there has real money. Can’t even imagine $5k/month for 1200-sqft.

GAAA! What a hideous claustrophobia-inducing pile. The kitchen should be condemned and the interior design person taken out somewhere and shot. And all for only a mil….

No wonder we get such out-of-touch legislation coming from DC. (And I’m coming from the RE perspective of coastal southern Cali.)

Luckily Mrs. Bad Andy wouldn’t touch the stuff…so if you’re going to share, probably share it this way.

she going to do me

Well, good luck with whichever strategy you end up going with!

Ooh, how is the Santa’s? I’ve been meaning to try it, what with a Rogue taphouse not 2 miles from my house.

The Ninkasi Sleigh’r, Bridgeport Witch Hunt, and Double Mountain Hop Lava been keeping me busy this fall/pre-winter.

Widmer OKTO and Pitch Black IPA are good choices too.

I’m a spoiled boy in this town!

I agree with that, it is just too bad that the rest of us have to suffer too!! It is like in Animal House acting for another swat of the paddle.

asking= acting

it is just too bad that the rest of us have to suffer too! ??

Welcome to my world 2000-2008……

Its either they dont go or they will kill you if take their picture

I don’t go to gun shows but I assumed all this time that “ghetto thugs” didn’t go to them either.

Sure would make a good hidden camera expose. Send in a bunch of thug-types, asking which gun would be best for cappin’ cops. I’d love to see the reactions from the rednecks.

“Hey! Gun show registration loopholes are for white guys only!”

I don’t go to gun shows but I assumed all this time that “ghetto thugs” didn’t go to them either. Was my assumption incorrect?”

they are there right along with the Nazi Booth a surreal experience at least in CA

The reaction?

They would call the cops and NOT sell anything to those jokers.

Probably why ghetto thugs get their guns illegally from somewhere else.

Funny how obama won’t go after THAT source…too messy.

Easier to deal with white folks who obey the law.

Now excuse me while I slap another coexists sticker on my Civic…

Sure would make a good hidden camera expose. Send in a bunch of thug-types, asking which gun would be best for cappin’ cops. I’d love to see the reactions from the rednecks.

they are there right along with the Nazi Booth a surreal experience at least in CA

That would be a sight to see.

What if they send in a bunch of thug-types asking about which guns were best for sport-shootin’, you know, the kind which give you more quality time with the target without bothering with all that pesky reloading. Make sure the thug-types know al the proper redneck vocabulary. Would the rednecks still call the cops?

all that pesky reloading

You might want to have at least a cursory knowledge of the demographics of gun ownership before making sweeping judgements and grand proclamations.

Source: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/in-gun-ownership-statistics-partisan-divide-is-sharp/

– White voters were substantially more likely to own guns than Hispanics or blacks. But white Republicans were more likely to own guns than white Democrats.

–Gun ownership rates are highest among the middle class, rather than the poor. Households making $50,000 to $100,000 per year were slightly more likely to own guns than those that made a little bit less or a little more.

Also, interestingly enough, there is an inverses relationship between education level and gun ownership. The more education you have the more likely it is that you will not own a gun.

Would the rednecks still call the cops?

Probably not, thus proving that most “racism” has everything to do with social norms and little to do with skin color.

What would they expect the cops to do? It’s not illegal to ask which gun is the best for killing cops.

Easier to deal with white folks who obey the law

Like Adam Lanza and James Holmes did until they didn’t.

The more education you have the more likely it is that you will not own a gun.

Because your income enables you to insulate yourself from the more troublesome populations. While fervently believing in diversity, of course.

I thought about posting something like that and didn’t bother. Also, until things break down you have other more civilized weapons at your disposal to get what you want. As long as society is functioning you don’t need a gun if you can afford lawyers and law enforcement is on your side. Except for that occasional black swan event.

And the Democratic ones.

thinking that the House has to do what he wants is acting like a dictator.

He thinks they have to do it for political reasons, not because he’d round them up and hang them if they didn’t.

That’s a key difference between him and a dictator, something that seems to get lost in the hyperbole.

Alpha, the man even poses like Mussolini, if he had the power to be a dictator he would. He is a Hugo at heart. No, he cannot hang the members in the house but I actually believe if he had the power, he would. Killing Americans with drones comes easy to him. Despite what some believe, I believe he gave both Hillary and McCain the middle finger when he beat them and he loves revenge. He has a very sinister side to him.

thinking that the House has to do what he wants is acting like a dictator.

What about the House demanding that the Pres has to do what they want? Is that not also a form of dictatorship?

And besides, the House is wrong. They DO have to do what the Pres wants. If they don’t, he won’t sign, as per Article I Section 7. Now, if the House wants to pass a bill without doing what the President wants, they have provision to do so, but that requires 2/3 of both Houses. All perfectly Constitutional and non-dictatorial.

The Pres does not “have” to compromise. Nor is he writing his own laws. He is simply allowing the existing laws to proceed, as written and as duly passed. And those laws as written included a 10 (or 12) year sunset.

He has to compromise if he wants a bill to protect the 98%. But if he really wants everyone to get a tax increase despite his rhetoric than no he does not need to compromise.

the man even poses like Mussolini, if he had the power to be a dictator he would. He is a Hugo at heart. No, he cannot hang the members in the house but I actually believe if he had the power, he would

That’s exactly the kind of nutso personalized hatred that Obama was talking about impeding the ‘fiscal cliff’ negotiations.

It’s hard to have rational political discourse with someone who thinks you’re the Manchurian candidate, based on their own inner fears.

He has to compromise if he wants a bill to protect the 98%.

Still no evidence to sustantiate the accusation of “dictator…”

People had similar views about Nixon and they were right. What is said on this board about CEOs also applies to people that hold high political office. Sociopathic personalities ofter tend to rise to power. This is precisely why the founding fathers put in checks and balances. His inability to compromise raises legitimate concerns about him. Accepting a proposal by the leading democrat in the House should not be that difficult nor should it have been difficult to accept the Simpson/Bowles result which was accepted by the majority of the bipartisan committee, he appointed. It is easy to call people nutso but he has never shown any ability to compromise.

he has never shown any ability to compromise.

You do realize the #1 complaint about Obama from the left is that he’s way too willing to compromise with the GOP?

So perhaps we’re just seeing some partisan perspectives here.

“So perhaps we’re just seeing some partisan perspectives here.”

Ya think?

It seems like the ‘fiscal cliff’ negotiations have brought the RNC trolls out of their post-election torpor.

He has a very sinister side to him.

I’m a pretty conservative guy, but I don’t see that. For me Clinton was a much easier guy to dislike, but neither seemed sinister.

“He has a very sinister side to him.”

Ignore the RNC character assassin.

“He has a very sinister side to him.”

The president is left handed? I didn’t know that.

Actually, Polly, he is. As were Truman, Ford, Reagan, GHW Bush, and Clinton.

Bottom line is many on the right (no small number) despise the man…Reasons are up for debate, but the color of his skin is surely part of it…

Bottom line is many on the right (no small number) despise the man…Reasons are up for debate, but the color of his skin is surely part of it…

I don’t see that. I suppose I was was little younger to remember the Clinton presidency. I was in my teens and early 20’s during the Clinton Presidency. Remember the VRWC?

IMO The hatred towards O is nowhere closer to what Clintons got. Weirdly enough I think it’s because of O’s race. We still have to wait and see what the second term brings….

“he has never shown any ability to compromise.”

Perhaps my memory is failing, but I recall that Obama wanted to raise taxes on those making over 250K, and then last week raised that to 400,000.

“raised that to $400,000″

..and was promptly given the nickname “Captain Caaaveman” by the liberals. In R-speak, “compromise” means “give us everything we want.” R’s are stunned that O isn’t giving in (as much) this time.

thinking that the House has to do what he wants is acting like a dictator

That’s rich. My advice to you: (besides start drinking heavily)

Read the USA Constitution and bone-up on American history. Our branches of government are working as designed in the Constitution.

Alpha, the man even poses like Mussolini,

Give me a break. If he didn’t stand tall you’d be saying his slouching disrespects the Presidency and proves he’s a Communist.

His inability to compromise raises legitimate concerns about him.

I think you’re describing 95% of Republicans.

Actually, Polly, he is. As were Truman, Ford, Reagan, GHW Bush, and Clinton.

And all bad presidents. Don’t let the lefty in the white house.

Bottom line is many on the right (no small number) despise the man…Reasons are up for debate, but the color of his skin is surely part of it…

Much of the hatred for Obama is because he’s Black. I’ve heard it personally many times and in many forms back in the Good ol’ USA and on blogs.

“I want my country back”

(Well you ain’t gettin’ it “back” Jack)

“..and was promptly given the nickname “Captain Caaaveman” by the liberals. In R-speak, “compromise” means “give us everything we want.”

Exactly, though Boehner does have to make a good show for the tea partiers. A good case was made that 250,000 is less “rich” in some areas than others, so 400,000 should be seen as a reasonable compromise. Whether he made that concession too soon is another question.

“Much of the hatred for Obama is because he’s Black. I’ve heard it personally many times and in many forms back in the Good ol’ USA and on blogs.”

Got any proof commie?

Got any proof commie?

Yes. Mitt Romeny’s campaign made a concerted effort to use coded racial buzzwords in his campaign to stir up fears and prejudices of Obama’s blackness - and that he was “different” than the average American.

“Muslim”, “not-American”, “Socialist”, “Dictator”, “Dangerous”, “Hates America” “Kenyan” “Not one of Us” etc. etc.

If you’re not dumb and not clouded by your failed dogma, you’d realize that it’s true.

I happen to agree with this.

If I were Obama I’d say, “You want cuts, then let’s go over the cliff. There are your cuts.”

I will sleep well tonight after reading your thoughts. Our portfolio is up about 2% in the last few hand-wringing fiscal cliff days.

Watching the far right’s dying bleats is cracking me up. All that well-honed rhetoric is falling on deaf ears, just like the gazillions they blew on their sooper pacs during the elections, boxed into a corner of their own making and struggling with their increasingly feeble attempts at damage control. CSPAN is the best entertainment on television.

Obama’s off to Hawaii on a well-deserved break with his family, and I suspect he’s laffing his arse off at the endgame. Tell it to your constituents come January 1st, guys. Even your own party thinks you’re contentious dorks.

Time has come to pay the piper. Period.

reflating the market value of housing back towards bubble-era levels.”

20% above in many areas like pacific palisades in CA

interesting still down in most lower to middle class areas but flying high in the wealthy pockets.

the new normal ?

The bubble is back, here in the Bay Area.

Prices in San Francisco dropped about 30% between 2008-2011 and now everything is going back up, up, up. Remains to be seen if this is sustainable. The money here is staggering, and our City by the Bay is becoming Manhattanized.

I am glad we bought. Emotionally, waiting a decade in a rental that was merely adequate took its toll.

Had we waited even another 6 months, we would not have been able to find a place in our price range. I don’t/didn’t have the patience to wait another 2-5 years or however long it is going to take (I had been waiting since 2003 during the last bubble) for this current mania to subside.

Got 2 more chickens yesterday and now halfway through building our new racoon-proof chicken coop and run. We have been fostering dogs and that is also very satisfying (3 dogs in 3 months and we found each one a great home).

Next project=greenhouse made from old windows.

A strong economy needs no inflation to induce people to put their wealth into circulation.

A strong economy needs no inflation to induce people to put their wealth into circulation.

Why not?

But prudent people will save, right? And we (the economy) would prefer they didn’t save under the mattress, right?

That or insurance must cover boob jobs. It’s womyn’s right issue after all.

Insurance covers reductions only.

Insurance covers reductions only.

Unfair!

Insurance covers reductions only ??

Not so…What about Viagra…

And it’s the Standard Deduction that gets ignored by “analyses” to show the MID is a “middle-class tax break.”

To the 0.1%ers, people like you are nothing more than a “bug splat” (term from article Ben posted about drone strike pilots). You are not a Master Of The Universe. You are not a “producer”. You are not doing “God’s Work”.

people like you are nothing more than a “bug splat”
The US economy is a bug looking for a windshield.

Jethro… The smartest guy in the room.

Jethro For President, 2016

Jethro… The smartest guy in the room.

The smartest guy in the room just bought a house. According to you, he’s going to lose a lot of money.

So how is he the smartest guy in the room?

+1 sloth.

Even if Jeff/moral hazard paid cash, he’s still underwater and he’s going to loose money. A lot of money.

The difference is always the price.

You got ripped off. Jethro didn’t.

From your lips to Satan’s ears, Pimp.

And you got bent over too. Boo hoo for U.

With all those facts you provide from reliable sources?

Oh, wait…….

They’ve been provided over and over again. You just don’t like those facts.

Carry on with your lies my little debtor.

Pimp, my house of 23 years was paid off in 2004. Debt-free.

When anyone asks you for evidence you tell them to “go look it up”. At least have a stockpile of standard links to put in your comments.

And you couldn’t get a fraction of what you have in it out of it.

And whenever you’re provided links, you run from them.

At least be honest with the reading public.

my house of 23 years was paid off in 2004. Debt-free.
…And you couldn’t get a fraction of what you have in it out of it.

This makes no sense mathematically. His house is paid off. Every month in saved rent he “gets a fraction of what he has in it out of it.”

Every month.

Of course it doesn’t make sense to a panderer.

Every month.

Every month is a loss.

Every month is a loss.

B.S. Not even.

Show me the math.

EVERY month.

Do the math lazy.

Lol. Thanks craterous.. Your trolling finally got the laugh it needed.

To everyone else.. ever heard of the reverse strawman? That’s where you take a position, then set yourself up to support that position with a bunch of stupidity so that when you get knocked down it looks like your position (or convoluted version of it) got knocked down so it looks like a stupid failure…

Well.. median prices are still more than 3.5x above median income. National debt is still increasing at a faster pace than GDP growth. Real income at the household level is declining. Your share is about to get a bit smaller with payroll and tax rate increases. Big problems and headwinds still face the macro economy that are not being dealt with. This bodes poorly for owners, and renters alike.

You can’t control national politics, but you can control your own spending and saving, so everyone out there buckle down and figure out how to save, diversify and minimize your enrichment of the corporate overlords. Starve the beast if you can.. close your BofA, chase, and JPmorgan accounts if possible.

median prices are still more than 3.5x above median income.

What does that really mean in the context of interest rates being lowest in our lifetimes? IMO, it means that old metrics as the one cited above have to be adjusted for the reality of the cost per month we see today. Not 10 years ago. I’ve never been a “how much a month” guy but my reality is not the reality of today’s reality.

It’s math and the culture of how much a month. Unlike me, most people could never buy with cash. That’s the way it is.

If we reach the point where people say anything would have been better than this, we’ll have a pretty good idea.

if we reach the point where people say anything would have been better than this
Being able to say “Anything else would have been better than this.” is for survivors.

Under the GD-II scenario I was fairly confident of being a survivor and remaining free. Under the one we chose instead I have no idea how I’ll do.

“Did you miss the part about Obama reappointing BB?”

No. Nor did I miss the part about GWB appointing BB.

And your point is?!

When you appoint six out of the seven votes on the Fed, you own the policy. That is my point. Obama caused the easy money that you are complaining about it but you just can’t admit how bad a president, he is. I have no trouble stating how bad a president Bush II was since I never voted for him and objected to the very same core policies that he has in common with Obama.

What about when Reagan canned Volcker and appointed Greenspan?

That’s when it all began…

That’s when it all began…
What about when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? What about that?

Obama caused the easy money that you are complaining about it but you just can’t admit how bad a president, he is

Obama’s not a bad president. And he won.

The Fed could crash the economy by various means, which would naturally be blamed on the prez…

he dislikes the rich and wants to take their money away.

Are you 12?

No but defending his every policy does make him your hero. Dude.

FWIW, I recall him criticizing Obama on more than one occasion.

It doesn’t matter what I ever said about Obama, good or bad.

Merely pointing out on about one hundred different occasions what a steaming heap of dung AlbaquirkyDan’s Rasmussen poll numbers were sufficed to get myself labeled an “Obama hero worshiper.”

LOL! I recall him quoting them as if they were Holy Writ.

Is it cheaper sometimes and quite honestly I would rather cross the Canadian border. I could dust off my French or still speak English. Besides, I have a relative that is an ICE agent on the border and might be able to get a friends and family rate.

Even if you aren’t buying physical gold, but an ETF?

@rental ETF gold is taxed the same way as physical gold. It is a “collectible”.

Dude, enough with the Reagan propaganda. The only reason you global progressives hate Reagan is the fact that he pushed back and almost completely defeated global communism.

Damn Nick, I’m impressed. You actually can (kind of) write a paragraph. This is monumental! lol

Dude, enough with your tripe. Reagan did not defeat Communism. Capitalism defeated Communism. Reagan’s capitalism is an inferior form for most Americans but it was Communism’s last straw. In Reagan’s time, any moron practicing any form of “capitalism” would have defeated Communism. Come think of it……it happened.

But Reagan’s form of Capitalism doomed the middle class.

“But Reagan’s form of Capitalism doomed the middle class.”

+1 A huge impact felt today is policy that Reagan ushered into the economy. Back in the eighties when Reagan flooded the U.S. with cheap Mexican labor (the economic miracle) they had to erect barriers to prevent them from starting father and son businesses, and sending the money back home. For example, bonding and insurance required to bid on “real” jobs were structured such that they were out of reach for small business. The Mexicans were expected to work for someone else who keeps the lion’s share. Sole proprietors were collateral causalities. Fast forward to the present, the unemployed are confronted with these same barriers.

Ok guys, tell me how your brand of heavy handed statism is going to improve the the lives of the middle class?

Well speaking of statistics, I recall reading that school shooting for the past hundred years or so have remained generally flat. It’s only with the MSM’s hyping of tese incidents have obscure and unstable people considerd this a vehicle to fame and to let their retaliation be made globally pasted over every media outlet.

Statictically speaking, as many children as were killed in CT die in alcohol-related car accidents each week; the US goverment has killed ten times this amount of children with drone strikes in Pakistan (but they’re not children, they’re colalteral damage) - in shear numbers, it’s not a sttistcially huge incident, although it is horribly tragic.

I think putting police officers in (already cash-strapped) schools is an effective step (like the TSA) of having our citizenry, now at an even younger age, feel more comfortable with the increased paramilitarization of our society. Nothing could be better than this to promote the government’s objectives.

If the principal, school psychologist, or any of the teachers killed had been armed, then 20 young children may still be alive today.

And if guns were single-shot as when the 2nd Amendment was written, 17 young children may still be alive today.

Our founding fathers never envisioned 30 round pistol magazines.

“Our founding fathers never envisioned 30 round pistol magazines.”

So I guess you were there in a past life…this information has to be first hand…right?

Our founding fathers had better weapons than the “police” and they weren’t government issue. They invisioned a country where tyrany would be repelled by a bristling populace of freedom loving fanatics, for as long as we might choose to keep it so.

Single shot, lol. Muzzle loaders baby. Practically homemade.

“17 young children may still be alive today…”

You don’t get it. Psychosis and rage have many paths. There are millions of people in this country with the knowledge and means to kill hundreds of innocents before anyone would know what was happening, using stuff we all can access. There are also millions of untreated mentally ill and they sometimes get pissed off. Intersect the two and automatic rifles are not a requirement at all.

I read somewhere: Complex problems usually have simple solutions, which are almost always wrong.

You don’t get it. Psychosis and rage have many paths

You don’t get it. It’s called math.

Was a private citizen allowed to own a cannon, mortar or rocket in 1776? What about explosives? Ballistas, catapults, or trebuchets? These things are all arms that existed in the founding years of our country.. Why are there more paragraphs about restrictions on what things the “new gov’t” is not allowed to restrict, enforce or engange in than on what type of arms the people are or are not allowed to have? In effect there are about 50 times as many restrictions on what congress, the judicial, and the executive can do than on the people’s right to defend themselves with firearms (from that same government) …

Was a private citizen allowed to own a cannon, mortar or rocket in 1776? What about explosives? Ballistas, catapults

I’m not sure your point. I’m a Second Amendment advocate generally but in 1787 guns were single shot.

Today the killing power is multiplied by so much more. That would not have changed the debate then?

I have no solution, just an observation of fact.

I was being facetious. I don’t own a gun. All of the (non-hunting) gun fanatics I know are either A). Very angry, B). Very fearful, or C). Mentally unstable. Or a combination of the three. And I used to hunt - both rifle and archery.

Thankfully I do live in a fantasy low-crime, don’t-lock-your-doors world. Besides, I really don’t have anything to steal. Though I do have a bad-a$$ed dog that would rip your face off if you came into my house uninvited.

Comment by b-hamster
2012-12-20 13:06:16
Besides, I really don’t have anything to steal.
————————-

You must not be female?

Nope. I’m not female. But I also tune out of the MSM. I just got back from my annual east coast visit and I am always aware of a palpable sense of fear and negativity. There’s also a flat-screen television inmost rooms of every home that I visit tuned to some type of news or current events show. Out here, none (okay one) of my friends owns a television. I equate the fear factor to the MSM, which wants to keep you in constant fear in order that you remain obedient. It’s your life; live it how you want.

I have two dogs that will demand pets if you break into my house uninvited. Lazy 47%ers!

All of the above may be true, but New York, DC, and their media fluffers in LA will decide what’s best for you yokels. And if they feel like they’re losing the argument, they’ll call you a Racist®.

We’re used to it. What amuses me is the honest belief among them that we have no good reason to refuse to vote for them and must therefore be stupid.

Do you really want only the police and military to have effective firearms?
Once again I will point out that the vast majority of innocent people ever killed by firearms, have been killed by police & military, nearly always under the control of dictators.

“It’s a real pain to have to stop and reload when we’re half a mile from the house in the middle of the night and trying to run a pack of coyotes off your newborn stock, or attempting to discourage a charging predator that’s seemingly impervious to our small caliber ammunition and lousy marksmanship.”

This is why I think we need to have some laws based on population density. Some things that are prudent or necessary in an urban environment are counterproductive in a rural area and vice versa.

When I lived in the eastern US, I was not aware of how close cougars and bears live to urban areas in the west. I live in suburban Seattle and cougars have been spotted about 3 miles from where I live. The glorious green belt that runs through my neighborhood provides habitat for coyotes and bobcats. Closer in neighborhoods have sometimes seen bears wander through.

This is why I think we need to have some laws based on population density. Some things that are prudent or necessary in an urban environment are counterproductive in a rural area and vice versa.

I think that could be a good conversation. But generally nobody cares that they’re screwing everyone else when they try to make rules that make sense for their neighborhood.

Guns are in a bubble, but if banned that becomes the “new, permanently high plateau”. If you knew there would be no ban, or that it would expire in 10 years again, then you could definitely play this market. But they don’t always go up, the previously banned models were definitely cheaper after the last ban expired and before Obama got elected.

It would appear that eventually the real money will be in primers if we continue along on a path toward more control.

We have plenty of money, it’s just being misdirected. 75+ years of progressive social engineering is to blame.

We have plenty of money, it’s just being misdirected.

To the rich, who don’t do squat with it.

Remind me again of the “wacos” for the gun bans of NYC and Chicago?

The sheep did nothing. They just hoped that Santa Claus government would protect them and give them even more free cheese.

Because free cheese is better than freedom.

Just ask the 47%. And they vote.

Oh, I can imagine a bounty system working pretty well to get a fair number of guns off the street.

Bring in your gun and get $1,000, or if your neighbor turns you in, he gets $2,000, and you get a $2,000 fine.

Not everyone will defend their (then illegal) “right” to have high capacity clips and assault rifles by shooting people–only the nutcases, who probably shouldn’t have those guns in the first place.

Read the comments section on any recent New York Times article about gun laws. The true believers, the koolaid drinkers sincerely believe that “the government” should round up all the guns.

Who is volunteering to go door to door and round them up?

Who is volunteering to go door to door and round them up?

The MADGO?

Mothers Against Drunk Gun Owners

Bring in your gun and get $1,000

LOL. Yes, and since I have over $2,000 into my AR, I’ll gladly sign up to take a loss. I know people are itching to lose money on their rifles, so I’m sure they’ll gladly turn them in as well.

What will happen is there will be a rash of “I lost my guns in a boating accident” excuses and the guns will be hidden away.

As to neighbors turning in neighbors, yes, I imagine a program similar to what the Nazis and the Soviets had would work in modern day socialist America…

I know people are itching to lose money on their rifles,

What about for a 20% profit?

If they want to make certain guns illegal, they will.

I’m guessing parts of the law could be hassle based (annual registration fees–like cars).

Parts of could be penalty based (heavy fines for possession of an illegal gun).

Parts will be incentive based–$ for weapons.

Lots of guns will come out of the woodwork. Of course many will remain.

There are too many guns already out there for there to be any sort of perfect solution.

So basically what you are saying is that “gun control” in nothing more than a way for government to “enhance” revenue but will do nothing to stop crime.

Comment by Rental Watch
or if your neighbor turns you in, he gets $2,000, and you get a $2,000 fine.
———————–

That will never work after the 1st neighbor gets a bullet in the head.

Matter of fact, that logic breaks down long before gun confiscation.

Right now in any ghetto USA nobody will talk to the police even if they see people breaking into your house.

Once you actually see people being murdered in your own neighborhood, you think before doing something for a reward.

Not only that, you also put your entire family at risk.

The learning curve is gonna be ugly for a lot of people.

@2Banana, if you waved a magic wand, and all guns disappeared in the US, people would find a way to kill innocent people if they so chose (homemade bombs, knives, etc.). Reducing the availability of things like assault rifles only makes it somewhat harder for those people to kill lots of people quickly with guns.

Assault rifles are already heavily regulated and taxed.

Heavily regulated and taxed is not the same as banned.

“There are too many guns already out there for there to be any sort of perfect solution.”

“Heavily regulated and taxed is not the same as banned.”

We already have a GBOT (Government Bot) and quite a few CBOTs/PBOTs (Communist/Progressive Bots)posting here, now we have an SBOT (Statist Bot).

We’ve got a hat trick of Bots

the Constitution is a “living document” meant to be adjusted to the times

The Constitution is a living document. Banning slavery and giving all the women the right to vote are good examples of its life.

Freedom is alive not dead.

Wow…. a Housing Hooker true to her name.

I would say this is typical for most realtors. They have no inherent talents and are too lazy to learn any.

Her “no inherent talent” was being ranked the number one women’s distance runner for five years straight and competing in three Olympic Games for the United States.

She’s a housing hooker. No big deal. There are millions of these crooks in the country.

I would hit that.

+1 !

There is very little for sale in Santa Clara County.

Per Redfin, total homes listed for sale in Santa Clara County:
On October 29, 2012 was 1,380
On October 1, 2012 was 1,570
On September 2, 2012 was 1,630

Per Zillow, the total sold during the month of November was 1,411.

Perhaps that roughly 1 to 1.2 months of listing inventory is why prices are UP 17% year on year for the median (Zillow data), and UP 17% year on year for the price per square foot (Zillow again).

And it’s not a “banks holding back” problem, only 3 per 10,000 homes were foreclosed in the month (Zillow again). And banks only hold REO of 882 homes (Foreclosure Radar); if ALL were put on the market simultaneously (and they can’t since there are always evictions and fix-up that need to happen), the “months of inventory” metric would still be below 2.

It’s a simple issue of demand outstripping supply.

If you want to pick on markets in CA that have some poor data to highlight, you should find somewhere other than Santa Clara County. Go inland. Merced is a nice place to pick on…how about Stockton? Perhaps Riverside County?

Continuing to try to pull data relating to Santa Clara County to justify your bearish sentiment on housing just exposes your ignorance of California markets.

There, now I’ve given you enough data (and sources from which it comes) you can stamp your feet and ask why I keep misrepresenting the truth, and am a serial liar.

Of course you lie once again. Why? Seriously.. Why lie?

The truth is there are 5500 houses for sale in Santa Clara County.

Again…. why is it that you continuously misrepresent the truth about housing?

Just answer. Just answer.

Do you have a source for your data? Or did that number come out of thin air?

ANSWER the question.

By the way, EVERY number in my post is verifiable, and I have given the source where I found the data.

You post no source for your “data”.

If you want to criticize my data sources, fine. I’ll seek an alternate source of data to make my point, but I won’t make $hit up, as are you are prone to do.

EVERY number in my post is verifiable, and I have given the source where I found the data.

From what I’ve read….You have to admit that is true. (even though his politics suck)

Now maybe he does not present all the data that would work against him, but the above has to be rated as “True”.

And to argue effectively against him, any data used to counter his arguments should be as verifiable and as numerous as his IMO.

I said this below, but to not miss this thread, Zillow has 1,763 homes listed for sale in Santa Clara County, including:

By Agent, By Owner, New Homes, Foreclosures

Single Family, Condo/Apartment, Multi-Family, and Manufactured

EXCLUDING Pending.

If you INCLUDE Pending, you get 2,041 listings.

I don’t include “pre-market” homes (which aren’t listed). In the “pre-market” category, it is worth noting that Zillow believes there to be a whopping 400 homes that have already been foreclosed and are on the books of banks, but are not on the market yet–this is less than the 882 that Foreclosure Radar has (that I noted above). The rest of the “pre-market” are homes that are in default, or in the category of “make me move”, which means if you want to pay their wish price, the owner will sell to you.

You lied about your construction experience, you lie about housing, you lie here, you just lie.

The answer to your question is that I’m not lying…I’m trying to share data that I’ve been pouring over for the last several years, and I’m trying to share the trends that are emerging right in front of our eyes with respect to California housing.

I’ve been giving the same information about the trend of non-current loan rates falling in CA for at least a year, noting late last year that we had 18-24 months before distress was largely out of the market in CA. At that point there was no clear price direction, but I surmised that as the downward price pressure coming from the sale of distressed housing was reduced, prices would likely go up.

Now, here we are 12 months later, that trend of decreasing non-current loan rates has continued for the past 12 months, and now we are within approximately 12 months of reaching “normal” in terms of distress levels. And we are already seeing year on year price increases in many parts of the state.

When that distress is gone, the only potential sellers will be “normal” sellers, and as noted over the past couple of days, those sellers are notably absent from the market today, which is why there are so few listings in San Diego, Santa Clara…really, throughout the state. The reason is either because they are underwater (a relatively small…and shrinking number now that prices are rising again), or because they don’t want to sell (ie. an unwilling seller at today’s prices, or because they have the perception that the market is weak).

In the meantime, in CA, vacancy rates are down at pre-recession levels, and below the US as a whole. We are adding more than 200k jobs per year (a faster RATE than the US as a whole), and building far fewer housing units than we need per year. Those two things combined are not going to help the supply/demand dynamics, unless you are a would-be seller.

And since the Fed is going to keep the punchbowl spiked because IL/NY/NJ/FL, etc. have sat on their hands for the past three years and still have years of foreclosures (and loan mods) to work through, the Fed is in no hurry to raise rates, which would otherwise help put a damper on prices in CA.

What do you think is going to happen in that context? Prices crashing? Sorry, I see nothing in the data to support that view.

In fact, the one thing that could derail the reduction in non-current rates is CA’s stupid new Homeowner’s Rights law. However, while it may slow the ultimate resolution of non-current loans (pushing my 12 month timeframe to 18 or 24, or more), it’s not going to increase the number of new delinquencies, or put any more distressed housing on the market to relieve the pressure.

Other than calling me a liar, do you have any constructive comments on the above? Does anyone see anything breaking the trends that I note are emerging in CA?

Mass exodus from the state because we have idiots running this place is the biggest risk that I see.

The problem with betting on mass exodus is that more than 50% of all venture capital dollars deployed in the US end up in the hands of CA start-ups (which is a higher percentage today than in 2001). Despite many people getting fed up and leaving, the population is still growing here. If it wasn’t, then we would start to see vacancy rates creep up…and they are not. If businesses were all leaving, we wouldn’t see the job growth.

Am I the only one who sees things this way in CA? (awaiting a snarky “yes” response from at least one person)

We invest in real estate. Construction is one line item in the budget. I never represented that I was in construction, just that I’ve seen my share of developer’s budgets (an invested in my share of projects) that include construction as a line item. And in that regard, we are not far off…you just seem to think there are no other line items (land and permits to name two) that affect the cost of building new homes.

Thanks Rio…I appreciate at least someone saying that I’m not making this stuff up.

In any event, with respect to data that counters my view, I welcome it. For me, it’s like trying to discern whether the tide is coming in, or going out. Even when the tide is coming in, there is an undertow from each wave. For that reason, focusing on month-to-month data in select markets, or data that is highly dependent on a limited sample (median prices in once City month-to-month) is silly.

I’m trying to look at the macro picture:

Current jobs per housing unit
Current population per housing unit
Vacancy rates (and their direction)

(all proxies for whether there is enough housing here)

Overall job creation
Overall housing development relative to my first three categories and current job creation
Overall sales relative to listings
Total amount of distress to hit the market (non-current loans as my best proxy for shadow inventory)
Apples-to-Apples sales comparisons (taking out seasonality, product, and location differences)

If there in any negative data that could turn my thinking on its head (where it justifies a view that the tide is going out, not coming in), in any of these categories, I would love to see it.

Thanks Rio…I appreciate at least someone saying that I’m not making this stuff up.

You’re welcome. You present a well-reasoned, logical case. Good reasoning and logic don’t always win out in economics but what else do we have?

I appreciate facts, data, logic and mathematics. I like politics but it will never override facts, data, logic and mathematics.

In fact, facts, data, logic and mathematics drive my politics but my politics will never trump facts, data, logic and mathematics.

lmao. Cowards and liars.

Cowards and liars.

“Cowards”? “Liars”? Are you kidding me??

Do you know what? I’m sick of you calling people your hateful and horrible names. This is a fu#$ing blog, not your anger therapy session because you lost money in housing.

I did too OK? Grow up and start arguing logically. I’m not a coward. I’ve done things that would make you pee your pants to do. I’m here. And I’m not a liar. Watch your name calling. It makes you look small.

Use some facts, logic sources and math. You’ve slipped down a notch.

And this is coming from some who admired your posts for years.

And you’re a drama queen too.

And you’re a drama queen too.

We’ve been accused of being cowards, liars, drama queens….because we speak against other’s non proved opinions. But…alas….could it be so? Could it be naught? Could it be, that they don’t know what is the conveyor of facts? Could it be that they are just leaves floating upon a river of perceptions of what they thought was but was not?

Or could it be that some simply call foul names to those who they’ve disliked?…..for lack of an answer?

And call them because they value drama over fact?

No. I think some call names because they are totally full of SH!T.

(Now that’s poetry!)

“Now that’s poetry…”

Maybe it was in 3rd grade. Now it’s called blathering.

Maybe it was in 3rd grade. Now it’s called blathering.

Nooo. Your hour thought out, one-line side-swipes could not come close to my 3 min poetic “blather” even if you had help.

And you know it. (Or you’d do better)

You just don’t like my opinions.

Your “opinion” we’re indifferent to. Rental Pimps lies we are not.