Frankly, I feel sorry for the ramen eaters. You can tell they're getting to the breaking point now.
This realtor defense comes from a realtor marketing firm. I guess they're getting hungry too. Got Ramen?
May 31, 2007
Ramen Eaters continue to blame the messenger - watch the goobers take on 60 minutes here
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
50 comments:
Wow, first mortgage brokers in drag, and now real estate agents in drag: what "professionals" these people are, huh?
I understand your position on the speculators, fraudsters, idiots, and others who created the housing bubble and are now desperate to find themselves in a mess they have created.
As well as the anger at the brokers, financial institutions, government agencies, and media who enabled or ignored the problem as it was created.
But, seriously, can you lay off making fun of ramen?
Having to live on them while I was at college hasn't turned me off them forever. I still enjoy them from time to time. Plus, a little respect for Momofuku Ando wouldn't go astray in the same year that he died.
I'm just saying.
Mike F
To all you realtwhores:
The McJobs program is taking applications. It may not be for you, though, since McDonalds will actually require you to work and produce.
The ONLY reason a 6 percent mafia cartel employee could sell your house for MORE than a discounter is BECAUSE THEY PRACTISE ILLEGAL BOYCOTTING and wont show the discounters property.
It only takes half of the mafia to 'poo poo' the property or steer sheeple away from the discount listing. PUT EM IN JAIL.
BREAK UP ALL MLS'es!!
murst!
Ok seriously that better be some sort of parody or I will have to vomit. If it wasn't that was the lowest of the low the NAR could stoop to. If that is real then any drop in prices we have predicted has just become even worse than we expected.
Couldn't watch more than 20 seconds. You're right Keith, pathetic. Desperate. Sad. And revealing.
.
.
.
.
.
PATHETIC!!
Two RE videos in two days featuring shitty actors, and bearded weirdos in dresses.
Must be the same ad agency.
Hey renters, how's that 5% CD treating you while the stock markets are setting records every day?
About that housing crash and the supposed lack of buyers....
EMERYVILLE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--According to results from the ZipRealty (NASDAQ:ZIPR)(www.ziprealty.com) first quarter 2007 Housing Market Perception Survey, buyers and sellers perceive an improvement in home pricing trends and believe the housing market is beginning to stabilize, indicating sellers are more realistic with their pricing and expectations and that fewer buyers are “fence-sitting.”
ZipRealty’s survey results, announced today, reveal a shrinking percentage difference between buyer and seller views of home price trends, a sign that both are beginning to see eye-to-eye. The percentage difference between buyers and sellers who believe prices will decline decreased from 26 percent in the fourth quarter 2006 to only 19 percent in the first quarter 2007, while the percentage difference between buyers and sellers who think prices will increase declined from 10 percent to six percent.
“As we enter the prime summer real estate season, we believe sellers are more realistic with their pricing and are more willing to negotiate and work with buyers,” ZipRealty’s President Patrick Lashinsky explains. “Our recent survey results support our belief that the current market continues to favor buyers, but that buyers are actively looking to submit an offer once they find the right home at the right price.”
Good luck with that whole 50% price drop fantasy.
I'm speechless. You'd think it was a parody of realty clerks doing a parody, but I think they're actually serious. Wow.
from Bloomberg:
May 30 (Bloomberg) -- Taher Afghani was working for discount retailer Target Corp. near San Francisco when friends told him about the riches to be made in California's Mortgage Alley.
It was 2004, and the U.S. real estate market was on fire. Down in Southern California, a hub for lenders specializing in loans to people with weak, or subprime, credit, Afghani's pals were making a fortune pushing risky mortgages on homebuyers. After tagging along with a buddy on a company trip to Los Cabos, Mexico, Afghani quit Target, headed south and began hustling loans at Costa Mesa-based Secured Funding Corp.
``I had never seen so much money thrown around in one weekend,'' Afghani, 27, says of the Cabo getaway. ``It was crazy. All these kids, literally 18 to 26, were loaded -- the best clothes, the cars, the girls, everything.'' Soon Afghani, who'd made $58,000 a year managing a Target distribution center, was pulling down $120,000.
http://tinyurl.com/2w2ry2
grassroots baby, comon boys and girls, have you donated $10 ro Ron Paul today?
Thursday May 31, 2007
It was only two weeks ago that 2008 Presidential candidate Ron Paul was listed at Sportsbook.com with odds of 200 to 1. In fact, early in the month he was not even offered on the political betting menu. My how things have changed in the past month.
Carrie Stroup here with some startling news concerning Ron Paul. Sportsbook.com (see website here) had experienced such a dramatically insurgence of betting action on Mr. Paul over the past two weeks they were forced to slash odds from 200 to 1 to the current 15 to 1 odds.
The whole class is now stupider for having seen this.
Didn't putting trust in full- service brokers wipe a lot of people out in the 2000 stock bubble collapse?
Wonder how many stock brokers became real estate brokers?
Lawl, amazing, I won't ever, ever use a Realtwhore. "Highly trained, educated professionals"?, LMAO!
The graph of death...good luck to ya!!!
http://www.belowthecrowd.com/photos/ackman.jpg?ref=patrick.net
RECESSION HAS BEGUN
Hey my CD just set another record today! That's like the 500th day in a row too.
That was one of the stupidest, most poorly executed and conceived videos I've ever seen. Sort of a comment on the intellectual level of realtors, eh?
Was that supposed to be funny?
Who's the realtroll who keeps saying the markets are setting a new record everyday? The DOW consists of only 30 stocks, some of which replaced bankrupt or failing companies from the past few years. The NASDAQ is still less than half of its high from seven years ago. The S&P still hasn't reached its highs from seven years ago either.
Anyway, homedebtors and realtrolls aren't making any money because it's all tied up in their depreciating homes with high taxes and insurance. OUCH
“As we enter the prime summer real estate season, we believe sellers are more realistic with their pricing and are more willing to negotiate and work with buyers,”
I thought the "prime" season was spring? In three months we'll hear about the prime fall real estate season.
"...buyers and sellers perceive an improvement in home pricing trends and believe the housing market is beginning to stabilize, indicating sellers are more realistic with their pricing and expectations and that fewer buyers are “fence-sitting.”
They got one thing right, there are fewer buyers.
"According to results from the ZipRealty (NASDAQ:ZIPR)(www.ziprealty.com) first quarter 2007 Housing Market Perception Survey, buyers and sellers perceive an improvement in home pricing trends and believe the housing market is beginning to stabilize, indicating sellers are more realistic with their pricing and expectations and that fewer buyers are “fence-sitting.”
Remind me again, what is ZipRealty's business? Ah yes, selling houses.
Ok ..I almost PUKED. I think HP has to get the ball rolling on making a comeback video. Theres a lot of geeks on here so I know it wouldnt be a problem right? We need someone to play the part of Greg Swan, Leriah and Suzanne. Its on bitches!
"We need someone to play the part of Greg Swan, Leriah and Suzanne. Its on bitches!"
can I play the part of the husband Suzanne told "You can do this" six months after he "did it"? I can bring my own machete.
Hey renters, how's that 5% CD treating you while the stock markets are setting records every day?
That's still way better that the negative appreciation on your shitbox debt trap. Heck even if you HELOC'd your home to the limit at 7-8% interest and invested it in stocks returning 10-12%, a renter putting all his cash in a 5% CD is still better. Who's the have-not here in this case? Your life pretty much sucks, huh troll.
"That's still way better that the negative appreciation on your shitbox debt trap. Heck even if you HELOC'd your home to the limit at 7-8% interest and invested it in stocks returning 10-12%, a renter putting all his cash in a 5% CD is still better. Who's the have-not here in this case? Your life pretty much sucks, huh troll."
OHHH Sssssnap! That troll got owned AND bitch slapped all in one post. Dont funk with the HP crowd you punk ass BIOTCH. Hi-five Joe!!
When Will We Hear the Truth About Housing?
May 30, 2007 -- Everyone from the Fed Chairman to the Federal Reserve has taken time to reassure the nation that housing is on the comeback trail and that the subprime spillover won't be enough to drown the economy. While it is nice to think the future will bring nothing but sunshine and roses, the reality is much darker. Will we ever hear the truth from agencies like the NAR and the Fed?
The Federal Reserve and the National Association of Realtors (NAR) are two organizations that carry a lot of weight in the news media. Representatives from both are frequently quoted in articles, and are considered by many to be 'authorities on housing'.
The problem is that the information the public receives from the Fed and the NAR is often either a sugar-coated version of the truth or a bald faced lie. And when the half-truths are published as cold, hard facts, it can be very misleading for individuals who are seeking solid information on the housing market.
A good example of this debauchery occurred in 2004 and 2005. Despite vocalized worries to the contrary, the NAR was adamant that there was 'virtually no risk of a national housing price bubble' and that housing activity was sure to 'remain healthy for some time to come'.
This wasn't merely bad forecasting. The NAR had the same information that many of the economists and housing bubble bloggers who were screaming housing bubble at the tops of their lungs. The NAR simply spun it to serve their personal agenda. Remember: the NAR's business is housing. If housing is performing poorly so is the business. In other words, somebody is losing money.
The NAR continued their scamming ways into 2006 when they finally were forced to acknowledge the existence of a housing downturn. They began using terms like 'soft landing', and stated numerous times that the housing market had 'finally hit bottom'.
Of course, there was no soft landing-especially in areas like Florida where housing values saw double digit declines. There is also still no evidence that we are anywhere near bottom. Many housing experts like Warren Brussee, author of The Second Great Depression, predicts housing prices will drop by another 25 percent in many areas before bottoming out.
What is unfortunate is that the Federal Reserve, an organization that most would assume is dedicated to giving unbiased and expert advice, isn't much better than the NAR. Officials like former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan helped to create the current housing mess in 2004 by encouraging lenders to offer and American consumers to seek out alternatives to the traditional fixed rate mortgage.
Lenders and consumers took the advice, and now it is estimated (by the Center for Responsible Lending) that 2.4 million people may be facing foreclosure as a result.
Current Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke, is predicting more foreclosures through the end of the year and throughout 2008, but claims the problems will not be widespread enough to derail the economy.
'We do not expect significant spillovers from the subprime market to the rest of the economy or to the financial system,' Bernanke said in a recent speech.
In response, Senator Charles Schumer was quoted as saying, 'I hope Chairman Bernanke is right when he says that a slumping housing market will not affect the broader economy, but I would not bet the house on it.'
There are many others besides the Senator who are holding the same opinion. Greenspan, who is now feeling more comfortable deviating from 'Fed Speak' now that he is no longer Fed Chairman, disagrees and predicted earlier in the year that there is a one in three chance the U.S. will end up in recession.
Chances are, we will never hear this doomsday prediction from Bernanke. As Walter Brussee explained in a recent interview:
'We don't know what Bernanke thinks. Even if he thought that we were heading into a recession, he couldn't say it because that would make it happen.'
Fight for Your Rights
It should be noted that it isn't only the Fed and the NAR who is glossing over realities in the housing market.
Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Economy.com, recently vocalized concerns in regards to the numbers being pumped out by supposed authorities in the housing field: RealtyTrac and DataQuick. Zandi charges RealtyTrac with overstating numbers and DataQuick with understating numbers.
Zandi isn't alone with his opinions. Colorado Division of Housing Director Kathi Williams told the Rocky Mountain News earlier this month that RealtyTrac is 'ridiculous and irresponsible'.
'No one is measuring the truth,' Zandi told the LA Times. 'This is a problem when formulating policy.'
It is also a problem for potential homebuyers, current homeowners, and investors who are trying to find a nugget of truth in the mountain of deception. This leaves many people wondering if there is any way to fight for the right to get information that you can count on from agencies like the Federal Reserve, the NAR, RealtyTrac, and DataQuick.
If you are one of these people, there is only one path to follow: get active. In other words, question the information you read, seek confirmation from other sources, and if necessary, dodge the mainstream media-you will be amazed at what you can learn from housing bubble blogs and others news sources who do not count on advertising money from industry insiders.
You can also send letters to your state representatives, join online communities, and do your part to spread the word. Above all, demand the truth. Get vocal and let these organizations know that we need honesty.
As the popular blog HousingPANIC so eloquently recommends:
'Just tell it how it is. We can handle it. Even if it sucks.'
The backlash from the 60 minutes piece is nothing less than exhilarating. The following is from the NAR website, along with some comments:
Here are some examples of the misinformation:
Error: The six percent commission is "sacrosanct."
Fact: All commissions are negotiable. The average commission rate is not 6 percent, but 5.1 percent, according to Real Trends.
Dictionary.com defines "Sacrosanct ” as "extremely sacred or inviolable." Can we agree traditional agents believe that? The Traditional Realtor in the piece stated if a potential client had an issue with 6%, she was not the agent for them. Sounds sacrosanct to me.
I don’t have access to the online segment of Real Trends, so I could not verify this. No need, I’m sure; Real Trends data is generally solid. The point, however, is regardless of whether the commission is 5% or 7%, the basis for such a rate is disconnected with reality. Every argument I hear is based on the consumer paying for an inefficient market. Sure, commission rates are negotiable, but if you reduce your fees you are a pariah.
Error: NAR is the industry's "governing body."
Fact: NAR is a trade association. It does not govern the industry
No, it does not govern from a legal standpoint, but it does lobby to days end. It does so quite effectively, I might add. And so, even though that statement is technically false, is it so far from the truth?
Error: In 2003, NAR issued new rules of its own that threatened to block Internet discounters' access to the MLS.
Fact: The Virtual Office Website policy did not block access to MLSs for discounters or any other brokers who are members of the MLS.
I can actually see the benefit of requiring brick and mortar. Not doing so would open the market up for even less qualified, under funded people working from home and flooding the market with internet only brokerages. However, was it an anticompetitive move to stifle the rise of a new model- you bet.
Error: The MLS is the database that lists virtually every home for sale in the country.
Fact: There is no single national MLS. Rather, there are more than 900 local and regional multiple listing services. These are not simply "databases" but private exchange of offers of cooperation and compensation between real estate brokers.
“MLS” is a commonly accepted term that applies to the collective system of listing information throughout the industry; that’s semantics. Was the purpose of the MLS “private exchange of offers of cooperation and compensation between real estate brokers”? Sure, but isn’t it much more than that now? Since nearly every national real estate site uses MLS to populate its listing store, if you are blocked from MLS, you are blocked from participation.
Error: Eight states have "minimum service laws" that require REALTORS® to provide a level of service many Internet discounters can't afford.
Fact: "REALTOR®" is a trademarked term and should never be used synonymously with "real estate agent." The intent of minimum service laws is to ensure consumers receive a minimal level of service from licensees.
Okay, but if an agent is not a REALTOR®, they do not have access to lockbox systems and in many cases the MLS. That aside, whose standards dictate the levels of minimum service? Certainly, we can’t say the consumers standards as in most cases they have no idea this battle is even being waged. Can we say the NAR has influence over this through local and state boards? I think so. So again, if an agent is not a REALTOR®, they don’t have access to many aspects of market participation. Then, if they fail to conform to a “standard” of service, heavily influenced by the NAR, they are barred completely (in certain states). Sounds like anti-competition to me. I am all for standards for licensure, I even believe they need to be much more stringent, but standards dictating what services you must provide- no.
" a level of service many Internet discounters can't afford"- okay, what services? Newspaper ads that don't work? Lets see: signs- check; MLS- check; internet advertising- check; house brochures- check; direct mail- check; contract writing- check; negotiations- check; closing coord- check; local print media- check. Sure I missed a few, but- check, have those as well. For buyers: ID prospects- check; show homes- check; write and negotiate offers- check; coordinate inspections/closings- check; follow up- check. Missed a few there too? Check.
I would love to see a list of useful services internet discounters can't afford.
Error: The brokerage industry has a powerful lobby. Eleven states flatly prohibit rebates.
Fact: The intent of anti-rebate laws is to prevent kickbacks in real estate transactions, not to limit brokers' incentives to attract customers. The brokerage industry does not lobby for anti-rebate laws.
The intent of rebates is not to prevent kickbacks. If you buy a home and the agent rebates you a portion of their inflated commission, paid by the seller, is that a kickback? Is that agent paying you a fee for referring yourself? No. RESPA is for preventing kickbacks- which, by the way would not even be an issue if commission rates were not so inflated. “The brokerage industry does not lobby for anti-rebate laws”- that does not say “The NAR does not lobby for anti-rebate laws.” Hmmm.
Just one man's thoughts- how do you feel?
Ramen happens to be a delicacy in my country, Mexico.
for the 100000000th time
NOT
EVERY
ONE
HELOCED
THEIR
HOME
DUMBASSES
While you were paying rent over the past 12 years I have been paying down my mortgage. I own a home that is worth $750K . I have $79K left on a mortgage that was originally $187K that was paid down every year including all bonuses. And yes it is $750K based on comps in the past 3 months.
Anyone who thinks renting long term is better financially needs their head checked. Short term renting can work, long term, no way.
lol...they have nothing else to do all day...
Nationwide prices are up 4.3% YOY. And yet in HPland renters think they will be buying homes at 80% off next yeat. Keep dreaming idiots.
Appreciation in U.S. housing prices continued to slow but, nationally, did not enter negative territory in the first quarter, according to the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.
Nationwide, prices were up 0.5% compared with the fourth quarter, the OFHEO said, and up 4.3% from the first quarter of 2006.
"While you were paying rent over the past 12 years I have been paying down my mortgage. I own a home that is worth $750K . I have $79K left on a mortgage that was originally $187K that was paid down every year including all bonuses."
A few things:
1) no one on this site has ever said renting is ALWAYS better than buying, just over the past 4-5 years that has been the case
2) your home is "worth" what someone is willing to pay for it, and that number won't be 750K for long
3) using "all bonuses" to pay down your house note sounds like you have all your eggs in one basket, not a wise move.
Economic Growth Slows to a Near Halt
Thursday May 31, 6:35 pm ET
By Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer
Economic Growth Slows to a Near Halt in First Quarter in Worst Showing in 4 Years
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Economic growth skidded to a near halt in the first quarter, with the worst showing in more than four years raising concerns about how long the country's sluggish spell will last.
The Commerce Department reported Thursday that gross domestic product increased by just a 0.6 percent pace in the January-through-March period, much weaker than estimated a month ago. Government statisticians slashed by more than half their first estimate of a 1.3 percent growth rate for the quarter.
ADVERTISEMENT
The main forces behind the downgrade: the bloated trade deficit and businesses cutting investment in supplies of the goods they hold in inventories.
"We got close, but the economy did not slip under the waves in the first quarter," said Joel Naroff, president of Naroff Economic Advisors.
What largely prevented the economy from going under: consumers, who showed an even bigger appetite to spend.
For nearly a year, the economy has been enduring a stretch of subpar economic growth due mostly to a housing slump. That in turn has made some businesses act more cautiously in their spending and investing.
The economy's 0.6 percent growth rate in the opening quarter of this year marked a big loss of momentum from the 2.5 percent pace logged in the final quarter of last year.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke says he doesn't believe the economy will slide into recession this year, nor do Bush administration officials and many economists. But ex-Fed chief Alan Greenspan has put the odds at one in three.
In fact, many economists believe the first quarter will probably turn out to be the weakest point for the economy this year.
"I think the worst is behind us," said Richard Yamarone, economist at Argus Research. "While we did have a miserable quarter in the first three months of the year, it doesn't look like it will be repeated any time soon."
The National Association for Business Economics predicts the economy will expand at a 2.3 percent pace from April through June. If that happens, the economy would have staged a rebound but would still be growing at a pace below its average, which is around 3 to 3.25 percent, analysts said. Yamarone, however, thinks the economy is poised for a bigger bounceback in growth.
On Wall Street, stocks finished nearly flat after the weak GDP reading muted investors' enthusiasm over a new spate of acquisitions. The Dow Jones industrials, which had set a new closing high on Wednesday, lost 5.44 points to close at 13,627.64.
GDP measures the value of all goods and services produced in the United States. It is considered the best measure of the country's economic fitness.
The first-quarter's performance was the weakest since the final quarter of 2002, when the economy was recovering from a recession and GDP eked out a 0.2 percent growth rate.
In the first quarter, there was a larger trade deficit than first thought. That ended up shaving a full percentage point from the GDP. Businesses cut back on inventory investment as they tried to make sure unsold stocks of goods didn't get out of whack with customer demand. That lopped off nearly a percentage point to first-quarter GDP.
Economists, however, were hopeful those negative forces would be reversed, helping the economy gain speed in the current quarter. But there are still wild cards, including how consumers will behave given rising gasoline prices as well as the condition of the housing sector.
The sour housing market continued to weigh on overall economic activity.
Investment in home building was cut by 15.4 percent, on an annualized basis, in the first quarter. However, that wasn't as deep a cut as the 17 percent annualized drop initially estimated. And, it wasn't as severe as the 19.8 percent annualized drop seen in the final quarter of last year.
Consumers, whose spending is indispensable to the economy, boosted purchases by a 4.4 percent growth rate in the first quarter, the most in a year.
Some economists wonder how much interest consumers will have in continued brisk spending, however, given high gasoline prices that have topped $3 a gallon in many markets. More money spent filling up the gas tank leaves less to spend on other things.
One of the reasons consumers have stayed so resilient even as the housing market has been stuck in a rut is because the job market has been good.
Fewer people signed up for unemployment benefits last week, the Labor Department reported. New filings dropped by 4,000 to 310,000. That suggests the employment climate is weathering well the economy's sluggish spell.
Another report, meanwhile, showed construction spending edged up 0.1 percent in April, down from a 0.6 percent gain in the previous month.
Spending by private builders on nonresidential projects and spending by the government on big projects each climbed to all time highs in April but that strength was tempered by continued weakness in residential construction.
Taken together, the latest batch of reports suggest: "The economy doesn't seem to be at serious risk of a recession," said Lynn Reaser, chief economist at Bank of America's Investment Strategies Group.
Let's see - record high inventories and the housing pumpers expect us to believe prices are going up and everything is fine. Why aren't the housing ponzi schemers buying up all that inventory in Phoenix, Vegas, and Miami?
Home prices are up that's why foreclosures have doubled and lenders are failing. I guess these people and lenders didn't want to sell their homes for a profit.
The tide has receded and the realtrolls lies have been exposed.
The stock market always go up, but if you buy at the peak, it could take decades to break even. The same goes for real estate. Florida land prices took 25 years to recover after the RE bubble of the 1920's. Prices there literally went for pennies on the dollar in the 1930's. How much will that McMansion in the middle of the Arizona desert be worth when energy prices double or triple in a few years? We all know it will happen due to China and India growing so quickly. There are 2.5 billion people in those two countries trying to live a middle class lifestyle with cars, electronics, climate controlled homes, and vacations. You can just hear all the oil and gas being sucked over there. Unlike housing, there is a real shortage of energy that drives up prices.
1895 - 1995 Travel Agents - RIP
1995 - ... www.expedia.com
1895 - 2008 RE Agents - RIP
2008 - ... www.redfin.com
So your house went from 179K to 750K in 12 years. That's growth stock like performance.
Do you think that's repeatable?
Will it be 3M in 12 years? So would you be able to afford it given that it would be 200K or so in interest alone per year?
If not, then who WOULD be able to afford it. Just the average typical homeowner making 400-500K per year? They're going to live in a shack like you have? Where will the middle class live? Cardboard boxes?
You're stating what everyone else is stating; house prices have soared to unprecedented levels. You're assuming that this is a feature of houses: they appreciate 15% a year or so, like yours did.
Kind of like how people in the Nasdaq in 2000 thought it was a great investment. How could it not be? It had gone up 5 fold in a few years. Who doesn't want to buy something that goes up 25% a year on average? How can that not be a good investment? How did that work out?
You invested at a good time, no one argues that. The question is the FUTURE, not past returns. Someone buying a house now doesn't get your past returns.
If you can't smell the writing on the wall then you are retarded:
In the 1980s, agents were the gatekeepers of travel, booking nearly 80% of all airline tickets. That changed in the mid-1990s, when airlines began hacking away at the commission rate until it finally disappeared after 9/11. At the same time, the first online travel agencies started to gain traction, and consumers began to discover that they could book their own tickets just as easily — and often for less. Sales plummeted, and the number of agency locations dropped by nearly 50% between 1996 and 2006.
@anon 9:21
First off, I don't think people on this blog are saying "it was a bad idea to purchase a home 12 yrs ago", but something more along the lines of "it's a bad idea to purchase a home TODAY".
The fact that your house value seems to have quadrupled (WOW) in 12 years does however seem to directly support the notion of a market bubble...
-TVoR
"While you were paying rent over the past 12 years I have been paying down my mortgage. I own a home that is worth $750K . I have $79K left on a mortgage that was originally $187K that was paid down every year including all bonuses. And yes it is $750K based on comps in the past 3 months."
Sure buddy, you are rich. How's that retirement account, the emergency fund, the credit card bills, the car leases, the college for the kids, the superduper health insurance coverage (which you don't even know what it really covers), those white hairs coming fast, the miserable 2 weeks vacation, the gazillion hours per week working just to cover mortgage and credit card bills, the years of your life lost because you gotta have a house, your fat liver, your bad health, your dangerously high blood pressure, the gazillion hours you waste commuting to work, the shorter years you have to live, no sex life...man, just look at your pathetic life. Even your wife thinks deep inside that you're pathetic, but she keeps quiet, transferring the depression and the frustration into eating like a pig, or shopping for Chinese crap.
You may impress your neighbors, co-workers, and relatives with your synthetic feel good life, but deep inside you are nothing but a failure, and you know that. Now it's time for your kids to get fat-piggy like you, be a Chinese-Wal-Mart bitch, and bend over to Karl Rove, while asking Jesus to make everything right and protect them from the bogeyman Osama. You don't even have a degree to show, just a mortgage and leverage up to wazoo. You are just a tool and nobody here believes your "make me feel good" trolls. Go sheeple, be a creditwhore slave.
6:31 is another renter who assumes EVERYOBODY that owns a home has $50K in cc debt, drives 90 miles to work, etc etc. I've got news for you pal. That is the minority. Those are the people Keith keeps pointing to in his silly little articles.
It's funny how the same people who complain that houses are too expensive are the same ones who think Osama is a "bogeyman". It's the same delusion. House prices are too expensive because of some grand conspiracy by realtors and mortgage brokers and the fed and Karl Rove. Then terrorism is some grand conspiracy by some other parties.
It's always one big conspiracy to keep you down.
Here's some advice; get off the blogs for a while. Get a skill and/or an education. Make some money and you'll quickly see the conspiracies go away. You'll be able to buy a house soon enough, but not while spending all your days surfing conspiracy web sites.
Keefer, save this one.
It is precisely what we have been arguing here for the longest time.
The big question is
‘why in the world have housing prices gone thru the roof in the past 5-6 years?’
Massive population increase – NO
Huge increase in personal income – NO
Majority of the Milky Way suddenly vanished – NO
30 year fixed loans available at 2-3 % - NO
Building materials made of 24K gold since 2001 – NO
Large organized and sophisticated cartel (NAR) constantly pushing and maintaining
prices high for a cut if the pie – YES.
Point is, who really benefits from higher housing prices,
Many times the sellers
All the time the REIC
Majority of the population, hardly.
In this example it is clear that the REIC pushed up the price by a whopping $50,000 over
a similar property in the free market.
I wouldn't say it's a conspiracy that house prices have quadrupled in CA in the past 10 years...
More like a delusion brought about by cheap money, including loans where you don't even have to pay the interest...at least at first. In the old days $2000 a month bought a 350K house...now it buys a 800K house, well at least for a while.
People seeing house prices soar want to get in on the "trend" as it is assumed that house prices rising 20-30% a year is simply a trait of houses. That's what they do. Borrow at 6% tax deductible and buy an asset that goes up 30%. Even if you have to pay 10%, who cares! Even if you "can't afford it" who cares? The rising equity values will make it a moot point.
And that is exactly how it worked. People who bought houses they "couldn't afford" made huge equity windfalls...and more and more people rushed in to do the same thing.
In the short run there's a limited supply of houses in an area and that's why house prices soared. Who cares if a house costs 1M or 2M or whatever. So what if it was 250K 10 years ago. That just shows how GREAT AN INVESTMENT IT IS!!! No matter what price you buy your house will go up 4x in 10 years. Want to make more money? Buy MORE house(s)!!
Asking someone how much house they want to buy is like saying "how much money would you like to make?" A few hundred K (one house) or millions (two or three houses).
So that's where we are now.
Now what will happen in the future to this can't lose investment now prices have leveled or fallen a bit and the people who "couldn't afford them" are getting thrown out?
Post a Comment