patrick.net

and why on earth do people care so much if someone does drugs?

Geez, let me guess, because illegal drugs have side-effects, leading to lethal overdoses, and induce addiction, forcing drug users willing to do anything, including killing and stealing, to get their fix? Okay, if drugs were all legalized, and the cost were nominal, so to speak, wouldn't the price eventually go up because of huge demands? What about criminals using drugs to get kids hooked up and do bad things, like robbing you? If you had kids (I doubt you don't), would you be thrilled seeing your kids smoking pots and injecting heroin in the third grade? All those, and I have not accounted the brain damage and the loss of productivity caused by illegal drugs.

I'm surprised to see the Australian media blow the whole thing out of proportion about that execution in Singapore. Just like the U.S. media, the Austrialian is chasing cheap sentimental stories. The guy deserved the death penalty, period. He was a career criminal, and so is his twin brother. I would've felt sorry for that guy if he had shown remorse before death, but he did not. The last request from the guy was to be allowed to chew gum on his way to the hanging. I'm glad the Singaporeans turned that "last request" down.

Don't take poverty to be your excuse. Low-income people in Australia receive government assistance every month (and significant, too), and the homeless in the SF get $400/month. There are jobs around, too. A decent person should rather stay poor than dealing and trafficking drugs.

I'm with the conservative government on this one. Liberal or libertarian are too soft on morals, which everyone nowadays seems to severely lack of.

Since everyone's chipping in on the drug topic, here's my 2 centavos....

My feeling is, if you want to take drugs, imbibe alcohol, gamble, see a prostitute, whatever AND you are not endangering anyone else by doing so (as in neglecting your children, driving under the influence, etc.) then why should it be any of the government's business?

Is the government my parent? My minister? Should it be?
I don't think so.

Now, are there some drugs that are so toxic/addictive, they should never be legalized (heroin)? Well, possibly, but like A1337 said, just imagine how much safer our streets would be if it weren't for the massive amounts of crime related to drugs. Just imagine what we could do with the $billions we're spending on our futile "war on drugs".

We can't engineer a perfect, happy, drug-free society simply by removing individual choice. If that were true, then totalitarian regimes would be the ideal form of government.

In free societies, people have the right to do stupid, dangerous things to themselves (but not others), even when you or I disagree with them. That's part of what true freedom is all about.

SQT,

I agree that all drugs --including "socially acceptable" drugs (alcohol and tobacco)-- when abused have always had a negative effect on communites. It is a huge leap of logic --and one not supported by the facts-- to say this is more so in societies where they are plentiful and legal.

Quite the contrary, in those few places where drug laws are more lenient, I've found the opposite to be true. I've spent some time in Amsterdam, and let me tell you, I felt a whole lot safer walking there at night than in most neighborhoods here in L.A.

look at this! I am shocked to see this news.. I thought we are out of recession

Why are you shocked? This is one of the things we all were predicting! Out of recession? The party hasn't even started yet!

@brightc,

Just for the record, I don't have a lot of sympathy for the heroin dealer --he knew the risks he was taking and knew what the penalty was. Too bad for him. What interests me more is whether or not criminalizing certain behaviors (drugs, etc.) makes society better or worse. I think you were on to something with this:

...illegal drugs have side-effects, leading to lethal overdoses, and induce addiction, forcing drug users willing to do anything, including killing and stealing, to get their fix? Okay, if drugs were all legalized, and the cost were nominal, so to speak, wouldn’t the price eventually go up because of huge demands?

History has proven that the price of ANYTHING once it is legalized, goes way down. Take a look at alcohol prohibition in this country, or prostitution in places where that's legal. If illicit drugs were as cheap as a pack of cigarettes or a bottle of beer, drug-related crime would plummet, as well as the drug cartels & Mafia's power.

What about criminals using drugs to get kids hooked up and do bad things, like robbing you? If you had kids (I doubt you don’t), would you be thrilled seeing your kids smoking pots and injecting heroin in the third grade? All those, and I have not accounted the brain damage and the loss of productivity caused by illegal drugs.

I don't condone drug use for children of any kind. They are incapable of making rational informed adult decisions. Once you're an adult, you must make your own choices and accept the consequences of those choices --good or bad. If, as a reasonably informed adult, you suffer brain damage or lose your job because you took drugs that you knew to be dangerous, then too bad for you.

I’m actually from Germany and my grandparents vividly described how all rules and limits got abandoned during the Roaring Twenties, and how this helped Hitler come to power (though there were more factors, surely). He created the authoritarian regime so many craved after so many unstable Weimar governments and virtues and values spit upon by so many.

Joe,

With all due respect for your grandparents, I don't think that rampant drug use enabled Hitler to come to power. My history's a bit hazy, but I believe it had more to do with the humiliation and poverty Germany suffered at the hands of the Allies following their defeat in WWI (and the ensuing hyperinflation, as the Weimar Republic attempted to print their way out of debt).

Learn more about Government Sponsored Enron. The GSE's business is just legalized crime;they rip everyone off and when they get caught, they retire the execs that got caught and give them a huge bonus package (more than some of us will earn in our life).

a crack house was burned to the ground a few months back in my town. Wonder how the property values are doing on that street?!

Maybe it was a marketing strategy to kick start price increases in your town.

Hmmmm maybe you’r right …. after all supply was reduced by 1 unit thank to the fire

So if 90% of a neighborhood is burnt down by a riot the remaining 10% will see prices skyrocket, right? ;)

Ain't that sweet....Husband is a mortgage banker, wife is a realtor. I wonder what their next occupations will be. :lol:

Ain’t that sweet….Husband is a mortgage banker, wife is a realtor. I wonder what their next occupations will be.

I personally know two such couples. :)

"...humiliation and poverty Germany suffered at the hands of the Allies following their defeat in WWI"

Not to mention that possibly a few key German manufacturers were interested in profiting by another romp through Europe.

Sounds like perfect Real Estate Bull logic if you ask me!

Yes, they will contend that after an earthquake housing prices should go up.

I wonder what happened in SF after 1989?

@SQT,

I don't want to belabor the drug issue (it looks like the other bloggers want to get back on topic), so I'll keep this short:

--I don't think children should be allowed to buy or use drugs --period.
--There are some drugs that probably should never be legalized because there is no such thing as a safe dose (heroin, PCP, etc.).
--If we stopped spending $ billions on criminalizing and incarcerating adults and taxed drugs instead, we would have TONS of money for public health education, rehab and other programs.
--I'd rather spend money here on curing heroin addicts than spraying poppy fields in Afghanistan.
--Legalizing the "soft" drugs would no doubt make the price of them plummet dramatically, and reduce street crime as well as the influence of organized crime. I still think these would be net positives for society.

I too, have a brother who is a long-time recovering cocaine addict, who has had many run-ins with the law. Somehow, the fact that drugs here are illegal has not stopped him from obtaining drugs ;-) . The fact is, there will always be a small segment of society that will gravitate towards reckless, self-destructive behavior. Criminalizing everything under the sun won't ever change this. The best we can do is offer these people a helping hand and opportunities to make better choices.

Sorry for the digression. Now, back on topic :-)

The Loma Prieta quake of 1989 did not help San Francisco, nor did the LA riots of 1992 - if anything these 2 events only added fuel to each city’s early to mid 90s real estate stagnations.

Also, the 1995 Kobe earthquake did not help Japan's RE market.

HARM--

The drug discussion was off-topic, so I'll stop.

Too bad, because I was hoping to hear Bull$hiter's perspectives on that one :-) Where is he/she lately?

I say anyone buying real estate right now has to be on drugs!

Sorry if I highjacked the thread.

I thought I did. :)

I propose we produce a film about the evils of overborrowing during a housing bubble. We could call it "Refi Madness". lol

Friends don't let friends flip condos!

I propose we produce a film about the evils of overborrowing during a housing bubble. We could call it “Refi Madness”. lol

How about a new XBox role-playing game "Flip that condo". Players can assume roles such as builder, mortgage broker, realtor, flipper, and renter. Internet game-play will be supported.

Peter P, that sounds good enough to be true. Might want to patent it.

New article Real estate investors bailing out?

[snip]
A researcher at Arizona State University told the paper that in the hot market of Phoenix, as many as 30 percent of the properties for sale on the market right now are owned by investors, while Sandra Geary, a real estate broker in Sonoma County in California said that her sales to investors have dipped by over 75 percent.

"Now that the market is slowing down, it's scaring investors away," Geary told the Journal.

Tsk, tsk, SQT...

That will never happen here, because we have limited land, a high population density and millions of rich, well educated asians buying our properties.

I just read the article on Patrick’s links about the slowly re-emerging Japanese housing market. It mentioned that a 750sqft apartment goes for about $350K, which is a lot of money. But not too long ago, the same apt sold for $1.5 mil. Ouch.

Japan does look like it is recovering. However, I did see a new construction single family house in Kyoto selling for less than $500K. It does not look too small. I can post a picture tonight. New 900sqft apartments are going for less than $400K.

Japan has much tighter zoning regulations than California and people feel more strongly about keeping their homes. Yet their market crashed badly. What does this say about the California RE market?

From the August "Housing Bubble Glossary" thread:

“MIRAGE” (Moneyed Immigrants, Rich Ancestors, Generous Expatriates): Acronym coined by yours truly to lampoon the bulls’ argument that housing demand is being supported by cash-rich immigrants, wealthy parents and transplants from other states.

I was also in Hong Kong. It appears that the media that are openly saying that the housing market is cooling there and that rate hikes will harm the market more.

Despite common perception, no one is immune.

Not even the Marina district?

Interesting, many people who have contended that there is no housing bubble are now saying that there is a housing bubble but they are immune because...

A small newsflash: our Marin Bubble Blog was mentioned in a local paper.

http://tinyurl.com/e22s7

Rather amusing...it's really helped the blog's visibility
Overall, the response has been positive.

You’re blaming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for the price of homes?

I blame zoning regulations and supply-side restrictions.

However, GSEs do attempt to affect "affordability" by facilitating liquidity on the financing side. This leads to imbalances in pricing IMO.

Nevertheless, imbalances do get corrected eventually.

You’re blaming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for the price of homes? That reflects a severe misunderstanding of the market. Fannie and Freddie place repossessed homes on the market at FAIR MARKET VALUE, which is the going rate for comparable homes. It is hardly their fault the price of homes has risen dramatically.

The fact that the GSE's put AG's monopoly money into the system is what drives up the prices. They buy mortgages from banks, thus taking the risk away from banks. When the banks are relieved from their risks, they loosen their standards to allow anyone to get a loan (as long as they don't have more than 9 bankruptcies). When you allow people from all walks of life to buy houses by putting huge amounts of money in their hands, the laws of supply and demand will drive the prices up. It's very simple and very obvious....I don't know why you would even deny this!

Any attempt to make things more "affordable" without increasing supply will create imbalances and is counter-productive.

I do not blame anyone for this bubble because it will correct itself. Market prevails eventually.

I do not blame anyone for this bubble because it will correct itself. Market prevails eventually

...and many of those who created the bubble will suffer from the aftermath.

…and many of those who created the bubble will suffer from the aftermath.

Free entertainment. :twisted:

ScottC,

Again, fixing up repossessed homes is a great thing, but this is not the business the GSEs are in (perhaps you have them confused with HUD and Habitat for Humanity?).

As Allah & Peter P noted, their core business and reason for being is purchasing mortgages from the banks/originators, repackaging them as MBSs and selling them to institutional investors at a profit (thus, providing mortgage market “liquidity”).

We seem to be arguing apples and oranges here.

I expect that the magnitude of the housing bubble bust will exceed my expectations.

Did I just create a paradox?

Talk about entertainment.
http://sacramento.craigslist.org/rfs/116568833.html

With all the chatter about free food, they forgot to mention this is mere minutes away from Folsom State Prison!

Did I just create a paradox?

Which one is greater: Peter P's immovable pessimism, or the bubble's irresistable implosion? :-P