« previous   misc   next »

UCLA Predicts a Roaring Come Back for House Prices


By Anonymousone   Follow   Wed, 9 Nov 2011, 11:53pm PST   7,478 views   53 comments
Watch (1)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

SAN JOSE, Calif. (KGO) -- Here's the best news you've heard in years about Bay Area real estate. A new report offers not just a glimmer of hope in California's housing market, but predicts a roaring comeback over the next six years. We could be poised for a dramatic comeback.

Read more:
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/business&id=8422604

Perhaps we can revisit this article a year or two from now.

« First     « Previous     Comments 14-53 of 53     Last »

Katy Perry   Thu, 10 Nov 2011, 1:59am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 14

HA HAHAHAHAHA LOL! UCLA economists are owned by the Banksters. They work for their masters. They know what side their bread is buttered on ( speaking fees/grants) What have they been right about in the last decade anyway. They truely are part of the problem. and this peice of filth is a good example. Their Data is all BS!!!

bubblesitter   Thu, 10 Nov 2011, 5:10am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 15

zzyzzx says

If prices drop, isn't that also a roaring come back???

Yeah sure,it is comeback for buyers.

bubblesitter   Thu, 10 Nov 2011, 5:33am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 16

Anonymousone says

UCLA Predicts a Roaring Come Back for House Prices

Why do I care about predictions on either side? No thanks, I'll stick to my own analysis. So far it has turned out better then Larry Yun's analysis. LOL.

¥   Thu, 10 Nov 2011, 6:33am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 17

"why there are still people who are against Ron Paul."

LOL. Libertarianism is one of the stupider ideologies floating around.

I think the current situation is fucked but libertarian solutions would just entrench the imbalances further.

Anonymousone   Thu, 10 Nov 2011, 6:40am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 18

Bellingham Bill says

I think the current situation is fucked but libertarian solutions would just entrench the imbalances further.

So you admit the current situation is bad but you criticized another that's not even tried? Why not just say let's keep the current one.

corntrollio   Thu, 10 Nov 2011, 6:48am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 19

Anonymousone says

Bellingham Bill says

I think the current situation is fucked but libertarian solutions would just entrench the imbalances further.

So you admit the current situation is bad but you criticized another that's not even tried? Why not just say let's keep the current one.

Libertarianism has been tried. What do you think feudalism was?

Agree that libertarianism is a waste of time. It would make the current problems worse.

PockyClipsNow   Thu, 10 Nov 2011, 6:52am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 20

Here is the UCLA(Pravda) RE forecast from 2006 (peak bubble)

http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/x15140.xml

The California Forecast, by economist Ryan Ratcliff, takes note of the state’s slowing real estate markets. Ratcliff concludes that the real estate slowdown will lead to a flat housing market and a slower economy.

“We do not predict a recession, nor do we predict a substantial decline in average nominal home prices,” Ratcliff says. “This forecast it based on two arguments. There is not enough vulnerability in the usual sources of employment loss to create a recession, and the historical record suggests that average home prices do not usually fall without this kind of job loss.”

As in the national forecast, Ratcliff is acknowledging declines in real estate and associated job losses in real estate-sensitive sectors. But absent job losses in manufacturing or other sectors, there will be no recession, he says.

Ratcliff does note the possibility of some downside risk to the forecast, however, due to the potential impact of exotic real estate financing and uncertainties about the effects of home prices on consumption.

>>>UCLA=FAIL

How can they be respected when they are merely cheerleaders like Yun/Lereah???? Mish has more credibilty.

Do they really just look at the last couple years/data points and trend that line in same direction? Thats what we all do. Even animals do this. The cat knows when u wake up and when u come home - but he is 'upset' when u sleep in on saturday (you blew up the trend! how could he know?!?!) dummies.

StoutFiles   Thu, 10 Nov 2011, 8:42pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 21

The best way to have a report noticed is to go against the popular majority.

TMAC54   Thu, 10 Nov 2011, 11:07pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 22

from the article; "The same panel of economists who warned the California housing bubble was going to burst is now predicting homes prices are ready to rebound."

It appears the panel did not have enough credibility to save millions of families from becoming homeless.
Can we learn more about this panel and there findings ? Past and future ? If not, maybe this is just another ad for banks.

Daytona   Thu, 10 Nov 2011, 11:31pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 23

The analysis is more important than the prediction. Based on my understanding, there is one favorable case to demand in housing --- jobs, consumer confidence, economic growth, which is all tied together.

So what is the catalyst to turn this around? New home construction.

In 2001-2009, new homes were built at an annual rate of about 2M a year. New homes built new towns with new roads, infrastructure, which requires new starbucks, bestbuys, restaurants, and new professional services market. It fed a lot direct and indirect job growth even though the stock market struggled post dot-com.

Unfortunately, those homes build created excess supplies, construction stopped and worst yet, the restaurants that were opened to support the new towns are mostly struggling, Corporations which grew on an expanded customer base now have to expand by taking customers from their competitors. But first they must shrink their expense and headcount. 15 million jobs were lost between 2008-mid 2010.

New home construction is true GDP stimulus, so until new homes built normalizes, the jobs lost will not come back.

The caveat is the last three years, construction was at an annual rate of 500K, so eventually construction activity will pick up and meaningful job creation and cycle will resume. Rental rates have been going up and vacancy rates have gone down consistently for the last 18 months. Excess supplies are being absorbed quickly and another 18 months of vacancy rate decline will surely push more construction activity.

FortWayne   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 1:21am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 24

Media has been claiming a recovery every few month, upon donations arriving from NAR. Yet bubble is deflating, government is trying to prevent it kicking the can down the road. Real market correction is inevitable.

Smart money is long out and is elsewhere. Housing is just a nightmare of bad debt. I hear Japan had the same bubble problem at some point, but I don't know much about it.

corntrollio   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 2:47am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 25

theLandlord says

New home construction is true GDP stimulus, so until new homes built normalizes, the jobs lost will not come back.

Yes, residential investment is generally considered a leading indicator for the economy.

Buster   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 3:28am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 26

Anonymousone says

Watch Ron Paul talks about housing and student loans:

http://youtu.be/D2eq2nZ6J6g

It baffles me why there are still people who are against Ron Paul.

He's the anti-Civil-Rights-Act Republican. He's an anti-reproductive-rights Republican. He's a gay-demonizing Republican. He's an anti-public education Republican and an anti-Social Security Republican. He's the John Birch Society's favorite congressman. And he's a booster of the Constitution Party, which has a Christian Reconstructionist platform. So, if you're a member of the anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-black, anti-senior-citizen, anti-equality, anti-education, pro-communist-witch-hunt wing of the progressive movement, I can see how he'd be your guy.

Bap33   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 3:34am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 27

I voted for him once, and if he is the only way out from under Obama's rule by decreee, then I shall vote for him again.

lexa   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 3:56am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 28

Buster says

Anonymousone says

Watch Ron Paul talks about housing and student loans:

http://youtu.be/D2eq2nZ6J6g

It baffles me why there are still people who are against Ron Paul.

He's the anti-Civil-Rights-Act Republican. He's an anti-reproductive-rights Republican. He's a gay-demonizing Republican. He's an anti-public education Republican and an anti-Social Security Republican. He's the John Birch Society's favorite congressman. And he's a booster of the Constitution Party, which has a Christian Reconstructionist platform. So, if you're a member of the anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-black, anti-senior-citizen, anti-equality, anti-education, pro-communist-witch-hunt wing of the progressive movement, I can see how he'd be your guy.

while I am not anti- anything you listed, my economic liberties and my civil liberties mean more to me than anything on your list combined. Also, I don't beleive Ron Paul is anti-equality, he's a staunch Contitution defender, more so than any other candidates or acting Prez.

corntrollio   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 4:05am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 29

lexa says

he's a staunch Contitution defender, more so than any other candidates or acting Prez.

You don't even know what it means to defend the constitution. And you can't spell it either. Seriously, if I had a dollar for every person I know who talks about the constitution who has never studied constitutional law, I'd be very rich. If they had actually studied con law, they'd figure out how stupid and unprincipled it is.

Buster   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 4:55am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 30

corntrollio says

You don't even know what it means to defend the constitution. And you can't spell it either. Seriously, if I had a dollar for every person I know who talks about the constitution who has never studied constitutional law, I'd be very rich.

Amen.

Buster   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 5:00am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 31

lexa says

while I am not anti- anything you listed, my economic liberties and my civil liberties mean more to me than anything on your list combined. Also, I don't beleive Ron Paul is anti-equality

Ron Paul is most definitely anti gay and anti all of the above. If you are so into civil liberties and equality, this is one area where 'sort of kinda for some' doesn't fly. You are either FOR civil equality and liberty for all or you automatically fall into the anti column. This is one of those rare all or nothing issues. You either are or you are not. Both you and RP fall into the not column.

bayarearenter   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 5:31am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 32

I agree that this is more (coordinated?) hype from those who would benefit from a return to an inflating RE market. In all the cheerleading articles, you never see anything about the recovery of economic fundamentals. So what is the purported genesis of this impending RE comeback?

thomas.wong1986   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 10:34am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 33

UCLA experts don't buy recession

In a contrarian view, the Anderson Forecast focuses on strength in industry and spending.

March 11, 2008|Peter Y. Hong | Times Staff Writer

Brushing aside conventional wisdom, UCLA economists say California and the nation will survive the housing slump and job losses without plunging into recession -- although it will still be miserable for many Americans.

"We are holding firm: no recession this time," UCLA Anderson Forecast Director Edward Leamer said in a report being released today.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/11/business/fi-ucla11

thomas.wong1986   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 10:46am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 34

joshuatrio says

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (revisit that in a couple years)

Their model is busted...

http://bayarearealestatetrends.com/

September, 2009: UCLA: Home prices have hit bottom

“Now that prices have adjusted to levels which make existing homes more affordable, sales are increasing and conditions are becoming ripe for new residential construction,” wrote Jerry Nickelsburg, a senior economist with the Anderson Forecast and the author of the California economic outlook.

June, 2009: Housing recovery set to begin, forecast says

“Our employment forecast suggests that it will be late in 2009 before prices are tempting enough and supply is low enough for the market to stabilize. When it does, the contraction in residential construction will, finally, after more than three years, cease to be a drag on the California economy.”

June, 2009: UCLA: Hard times to last another year

After retreating to 2002 levels, home prices are about to start going back up, with buyers coming off the sidelines at the mid-point to latter part of 2009. The surplus of homes for sale has evaporated.

October, 2008: UCLA sees mild rebound for O.C. economy in 2009

“We are not forecasting a freeze up in the financial markets,” Nickelsburg said.

June, 2007: UCLA Anderson Forecast: U.S. Economy Not In A Recession, “But It Is Certainly Close.”

In his national report, UCLA Anderson Forecast Senior Economist David Shulman notes that if the current (and continuing) forecast is close to the mark, then the period from second quarter 2006 through first quarter 2008 will mark an historically anomalous long period of below trend growth. But he remains consistent with the story the Forecast has been telling for some time, that a recession is not imminent for the U.S. economy.

June, 2006: No Statewide or National Recession Seen

Leamer, who does not expect real estate prices to fall significantly, notes that sales volume is what typically drops, and drops more precipitously than prices, as the price cycle lags behind the volume cycle. The number of homes sold will drop as owners decline to sell in a weak housing market. Prices, however, should hold.

REpro   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 11:24am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 35

Now we know for sure who is “The Master”.

thomas.wong1986   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 1:13pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 36

So Cal is peppered with REI interest.
They sold their soul to the devil decades ago.

clambo   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 6:39pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 37

I don't believe it.

Hysteresis   Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 9:22pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 38

thomas.wong1986 says

Their model is busted...

http://bayarearealestatetrends.com/
WRONG: September, 2009: UCLA: Home prices have hit bottom
WRONG: June, 2009: Housing recovery set to begin, forecast says
WRONG: June, 2009: UCLA: Hard times to last another year
WRONG: October, 2008: UCLA sees mild rebound for O.C. economy in 2009
WRONG: June, 2007: UCLA Anderson Forecast: U.S. Economy Not In A Recession, “But It Is Certainly Close.”
WRONG: June, 2006: No Statewide or National Recession Seen

at least they're consistent(ly wrong).

how the fuck can someone be wrong every single fucking year from 2006 and still be in the business of making forecasts.

that people are throwing these retarded predictions around, when they have been wrong ----every single fucking time---- just shows how stupid people are.

clambo   Sat, 12 Nov 2011, 12:56am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 39

Maybe things are looking up in San Jose, but elsewhere forget it. California is so broke it is now laying off those highly paid government workers. Drive around and see those people from south of the border pushing baby strollers. They ride in a 98 toyota. So, WHO is gonna lend them $500,000 to buy a place? Who is gonna lend them $350,000?
The "no documentation loans" is oddly funny, since they were made to people whom the liberals would also call "undocumented"=illegal.
Liberal politics have bankrupted this state and the highly paid high tech people can afford to buy here and there. The overall situation is dire however.
My friends are angry with themselves for not selling at the peak and leaving town. One guy has a dump in a bad neighborhood near the beach that was once "worth" $650K at the peak. It's small, crummy, surrounded by apartments and Mexicans. It's going back down to about $170K. They shot two guys about 100 yards up the street (dead).
My other friend has an awesome property that is like a shangri-la, once it was "worth" about $1.5 million. Today, shave off about $1 million. He wishes he had sold and moved, but his wife was adamantly against it because the slacker kids may have had some trauma of making new friends, etc.
One guy I know bought a tiny place with his down of $100K, his entire net worth, it was about 650 square feet and cost over $450K. He LOST it and his dough when they foreclosed.
I've seen this movie before, the only thing missing are zombies walking through the wreckage.

TMAC54   Sat, 12 Nov 2011, 1:52am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 40

clambo says

I've seen this movie before, the only thing missing are zombies walking through the wreckage.

Spend some time with the OCCUPY Groups.

How long before Gubmint can no longer afford to kick the can down the road ? or

Will that cat Greenspan figure out the rubix cube ?

Patrick   Sat, 12 Nov 2011, 3:52am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 41

Hysteresis says

how the fuck can someone be wrong every single fucking year from 2006 and still be in the business of making forecasts.

Anderson center was founded by and is funded by realtors.

http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/x30968.xml

So it's not that they're wrong, it's that they're lying, trying to get your money.

elliemae   Sat, 12 Nov 2011, 4:57am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 42

I KNEW IT!!!

NOW is the time to buy!

bubblesitter   Sat, 12 Nov 2011, 6:06am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 43

PockyClipsNow says

>>>UCLA=FAIL

I agree,especially UCLA Anderson!

Vicente   Sat, 12 Nov 2011, 7:51am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 44

TMAC54 says

Took me a while to find your improbable picture, that is a Photoshop picture, an entry in this contest:

http://www.worth1000.com/contests/2748/contest

My favorite:

elliemae   Sat, 12 Nov 2011, 9:48am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 45

Vicente:
what, no unicorns?

Anonymousone   Sat, 12 Nov 2011, 4:06pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 46

Patrick says

Hysteresis says

how the fuck can someone be wrong every single fucking year from 2006 and still be in the business of making forecasts.

Anderson center was founded by and is funded by realtors.

http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/x30968.xml

So it's not that they're wrong, it's that they're lying, trying to get your money.

Wow! Thanks, Patrick.

¥   Sat, 12 Nov 2011, 5:00pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 47

Patrick says

Anderson center was founded by and is funded by realtors.

UCLA Anderson got taken over by the realtors when they lost somebody big -- I forget who now, but this guy resigned ca. 2007 IIRC.

I was reading _All the Devils are Here_ again today but I just got beaten down by it.

The amount of fraud that was allowed to go on ~2002 - 2007 was just staggering.

The amount of BS in this country may be up there with 1970s USSR, but we're too immersed in the BS to even see it for what it is.

The clown show that is the Republican side is just a symptom. The 99% movement is a reaction, they don't have the full picture pieced together yet but they're on the right track at least.

thomas.wong1986   Sun, 13 Nov 2011, 1:23am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 48

Bellingham Bill says

The amount of fraud that was allowed to go on ~2002 - 2007 was just staggering.

The clown show that is the Republican side is just a symptom. The 99% movement is a reaction, they don't have the full picture pieced together yet but they're on the right track at least.

Fraud ?

WASHINGTON - Mortgage giant Fannie Mae is asking the federal government for $7.8 billion in aid to covers its losses in the July-September quarter.

The government-controlled company said Tuesday that it lost $7.6 billion in the third quarter. Low mortgage rates reduced profits and declining home prices caused more defaults on loans it had guaranteed.

Fannie has received $112.6 billion so far from the Treasury Department, the most expensive bailout of a single company.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs&feature=related

your 99% movement isnt going anywhere...

¥   Sun, 13 Nov 2011, 2:18am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 49

thomas.wong1986 says

Fannie Mae is asking the federal government for $7.8 billion in aid to covers its losses in the July-September quarter

FNM made the idiotic mistake of taking subprime tranches on its books, and also facilitating the 80 piece of 80/20 lending.

The started doing this late in the game -- 2005 IIRC -- which multiplied their exposure.

FNM joined in the bubble madness but they did not create it.

As for the 99%ers, if they don't stay on the streets they will perish from a thousand cuts that are coming this decade and next.

I wish them well, the system is gearing up to go Soylent Green on us, and without Solidarity the 99% is fucked.

thomas.wong1986   Sun, 13 Nov 2011, 7:19am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 50

Bellingham Bill says

FNM made the idiotic mistake of taking subprime tranches on its books, and also facilitating the 80 piece of 80/20 lending.
The started doing this late in the game -- 2005 IIRC -- which multiplied their exposure.
FNM joined in the bubble madness but they did not create it.

How about all accounting fraud by both GSEs committed in prior years before being exposed in 2003 ? So what caused the losses that Frank Raines hid from the auditors and BOD. By 2005 they were already busted.

thomas.wong1986   Sun, 13 Nov 2011, 7:26am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 51

Bellingham Bill says

and without Solidarity the 99% is fucked.

There is no 99%.. there is the 54% who work pay their taxes and have a far different view. The so called OWS, is nothing more than a small number of far left nut heads.

They are nothing but noise and dont speak for the majority.

Patrick   Sun, 13 Nov 2011, 7:33am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 52

thomas.wong1986 says

there is the 54% who work pay their taxes

No, you're not being honest. There is no 54%. Everyone pays sales tax and payroll taxes, and for the poor, those are as high a percent of income as the rich pay in taxes, because:

1. the poor must spend all their income to survive, while the rich can put off sales taxes indefinitely, compounding that money in the meantime

2. the rich pay 0% Social Security or Medicare tax on incomes above $106,800. They are just completely exempt above that income limit, which also lets them accumulate money faster than the poor

Anonymousone   Thu, 24 Nov 2011, 2:46am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 53

@ Bap33

"I voted for him once, and if he is the only way out from under Obama's rule by decreee, then I shall vote for him again."

Fanned.

« First     « Previous comments    

Anonymousone is moderator of this thread.

Email

Username

Watch comments by email

home   top   questions or suggestions? write p@patrick.net