Patrick.net

‘I Am Optimistic that House Prices Could Fall for 20 Years’

By HousingBoom   Follow   Sat, 17 Mar 2012, 12:57pm   11,797 views   126 comments
Watch (1)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

http://wallstreetpit.com/76795-robert-shiller-i-am-optimistic-that-home-prices-could-fall-for-20-years

I do not see why people are even debating when home prices are going to bottom. For those who think we have already bottomed nationally, why the heck would one of the top housing forecasters in the US believe it will bottom in two decades!!!! That is 20 YEARS of declining home prices!!!

Unless you are an expert like Robert Shiller and co-founded an indicator to track home prices (Case Shiller Index), you might stand a chance against his predictions.

There is no way home prices have bottomed on a national level when foreclosures are still skyrocketing and the debt crisis is upon us. My point is, if Robert Shiller believes prices will bottom in 20 years, I would think calling the bottom in 10 years would be optimistic!!!! It is common sense!!

« First     « Previous     Viewing Comments 47-86 of 126     Next »     Last »     See most liked comments

1. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

   47   1:35pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   SubOink says Insurance? My homeowners insurance = what my renters insurance used to be. Same shit. ($1000/year) If you been around during the Northright earthquake in the early 90s. You would know, that isnt going to even cover a $250K home. Now how is that going to cover a home with market value of $500K or more. You the home owner will have to put up the difference... What happened to the Ins. companies back in the 90s.. they went belly up !

2. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

   48   1:45pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Helloeeze says I put some stock in his charts though. He has been right the last few years. Still, around the Bay Area most homes sell quickly at asking prices (which are lower than the peak, sure) But in good areas house will sell at 2005 prices easily. Whether those buyers later on will regret buying in 2012, we will have to wait and see. DQNEWS.com Santa Clara and San Mateo County declines vs last year Sept-11 SCC down -6.0% SMC down -3.6% Oct-11 SCC down -10.4% SMC down -6.5% Nov-11 SCC down -1.5% SMC down -9.6% Dec-12 SCC down -4.3% SMC down -10.7% Jan-12 SCC down -4.8% SMC down -7.8% Feb-12 SCC down .7 % SMC down -4.6% Another 25% drop, back to 1997 prices where the bubble started, + inflation and we will be at the bottom. But that is too much for some to accept..

3. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

   49   1:50pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Just like the dot.com aftermath, the RE agents here are still believing .. IT WILL COME BACK... 10-20% annual appreciation ! thats what their thinking.. I bet they will prematurely age 10 years worring about it...

4. RentingForHalfTheCost Follow Befriend (8) 38 threads 2,014 comments Pleasanton, CA Premium

   50   2:12pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   fewy says RentingForHalfTheCost, A dual income family with only one person employed in the tech sector should be able to afford a 500k to 600k home. Even with 5 years of experience this family should be making 150k a year, if they have ten years of experience I would say that would be around 200k. With those incomes and maybe some sort of down payment this house falls into the historic 3x annual salary range. I would absolutely agree with you and also be a potential buyer in this market. If we didn't have this one little thing to work out. The little shadow being cast over us called distressed homes (on or off the market). I won't even attempt to put a number on it, because truth is so distorted here that the proof will be in the next few years. I don't think the Bay area is in the clear here. It was part of the problem and will suffer for it in my view. There are a lot of people that have the opportunity to buy here, absolutely. Not nearly enough to offset the failures in home finance that exist though. I could be wrong, this place might be so special, blessed with holy water, sun shining even in the worst of times, but I don't think so. Hence, I'll keep renting and saving. Worse case for me if I am wrong, is I just move away (many options) and buy something with value. I'll leave this place for the blessed. ;)

5. RentingForHalfTheCost Follow Befriend (8) 38 threads 2,014 comments Pleasanton, CA Premium

   51   2:20pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   thomas.wong1986 says Helloeeze says I put some stock in his charts though. He has been right the last few years. Still, around the Bay Area most homes sell quickly at asking prices (which are lower than the peak, sure) But in good areas house will sell at 2005 prices easily. Whether those buyers later on will regret buying in 2012, we will have to wait and see. DQNEWS.com Santa Clara and San Mateo County declines vs last year Sept-11 SCC down -6.0% SMC down -3.6% Oct-11 SCC down -10.4% SMC down -6.5% Nov-11 SCC down -1.5% SMC down -9.6% Dec-12 SCC down -4.3% SMC down -10.7% Jan-12 SCC down -4.8% SMC down -7.8% Feb-12 SCC down .7 % SMC down -4.6% Another 25% drop, back to 1997 prices where the bubble started, + inflation and we will be at the bottom. But that is too much for some to accept.. But Apple just release that they are paying a dividend? I don't get it. Apple should just buy all the distressed homes in Santa Clara and put the skip back into the Realtors stride. Their leases on the ML500's have to be coming due soon. It will be like the option squeeze in the market. You thought they were dirty before, wait until they are in jeopardy of losing their sweet ride. Yikes.

6. 1sfrenter Follow Befriend (1) 11 threads 224 comments San Francisco, CA

   52   2:36pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   RentingForHalfTheCost says Hence, I'll keep renting and saving For many of us, "renting and saving" is not really an option. Right now our rent is equivalent to PITI on a similar house. This is only now true, as I have been waiting and renting for more than a decade. 13 years renting the same SFH and 250K to the landlord, who is not a nice person by any stretch of the imagination.

7. rootvg Follow Befriend (8) 1 threads 792 comments Danville, CA Premium

   53   2:48pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   1sfrenter says RentingForHalfTheCost says Hence, I'll keep renting and saving For many of us, "renting and saving" is not really an option. Right now our rent is equivalent to PITI on a similar house. This is only now true, as I have been waiting and renting for more than a decade. 13 years renting the same SFH and 250K to the landlord, who is not a nice person by any stretch of the imagination. My landlord is a great guy, self made millionaire who hates to see us leave but understands we have to do what we have to do. I might even succeed at turning his son into ham radio operator. There was a thirty foot radio tower at the property we rented that I didn't even know about.

8. David9 Follow Befriend (3) 28 threads 747 comments Tarzana, CA

   54   2:59pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   1sfrenter says For many of us, "renting and saving" is not really an option. Right now our rent is equivalent to PITI on a similar house. This is only now true, as I have been waiting and renting for more than a decade. Similiar circumstance here. First, I feel that I am being punished for making a good real estate decision by selling at a good time before and now with the little inventory available at the highest price possible, basically, the banks balance sheet wish list price. My point is is that it would be in my best financial interest to buy something where my monthly payment is LESS than rent. I had this in Dallas for awhile. Would you believe a stranger actually called me while I was there and said 'oh no, you can't do this, everyone has a mortgage, it's tax deductable' True story. More whining because I am blocked, sorry.

9. SubOink Follow Befriend (3) 9 threads 704 comments Los Angeles, CA

   55   3:14pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   thomas.wong1986 says SubOink says Insurance? My homeowners insurance = what my renters insurance used to be. Same shit. ($1000/year) If you been around during the Northright earthquake in the early 90s. You would know, that isnt going to even cover a $250K home. Now how is that going to cover a home with market value of $500K or more. You the home owner will have to put up the difference... What happened to the Ins. companies back in the 90s.. they went belly up ! So, basically your advice is - don't buy a home because if an earthquake happens that wipes out your house 100%, you may be screwed? Good advice....Not.

10. RentingForHalfTheCost Follow Befriend (8) 38 threads 2,014 comments Pleasanton, CA Premium

    56   7:02pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   SubOink says thomas.wong1986 says SubOink says Insurance? My homeowners insurance = what my renters insurance used to be. Same shit. ($1000/year) If you been around during the Northright earthquake in the early 90s. You would know, that isnt going to even cover a $250K home. Now how is that going to cover a home with market value of $500K or more. You the home owner will have to put up the difference... What happened to the Ins. companies back in the 90s.. they went belly up ! So, basically your advice is - don't buy a home because if an earthquake happens that wipes out your house 100%, you may be screwed? Good advice....Not. Don't understand why that is not "good advice". What is money management if it is not about managing the risk. Earthquake is a risk and it needs your attention if you own a place in the BA. I wouldn't be hoping for the best here if I owned. I would pay to make sure my home is protected. Are you saying I shouldn't?

11. SubOink Follow Befriend (3) 9 threads 704 comments Los Angeles, CA

    57   7:14pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   RentingForHalfTheCost says Don't understand why that is not "good advice" Advising not to buy because an airplane could crash into your home, is not good advice inmho.

12. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

    58   7:24pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   SubOink says So, basically your advice is - don't buy a home because if an earthquake happens that wipes out your house 100%, you may be screwed? Good advice....Not. Nope! my advice is for buyers to sober up and offer much much less than the stupid bubble prices. SubOink says - don't buy a home because You really are a FU realtor arent you ? Pathetic...

13. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,556 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    59   7:32pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   RentingForHalfTheCost says Don't understand why that is not "good advice". What is money management if it is not about managing the risk. Earthquake is a risk and it needs your attention if you own a place in the BA. I wouldn't be hoping for the best here if I owned. I would pay to make sure my home is protected. Are you saying I shouldn't? There are still homes standing in San Francisco that were built before the 1906 earthquake, and most of the ones that disappeared were taken out by fire. The number of homes at risk of collapse or serious damage in a large Bay Area earthquake is tiny, and mostly limited to liquefaction problems on the waterfront. Even the Cypress structure that collapsed and killed lots of people in 1989 was literally a block away from neighborhoods that suffered little or no damage. The risk of unsustainable earthquake damage in a large 1906 magnitude earthquake is as close to zero as you can get for most Bay Area cities and suburbs. Typical wood frame homes that are bolted to the foundation are almost completely immune unless right on the fault line. While a home on the Louisiana coast WILL have its roof ripped off by a hurricane someday, while a mobile home in tornado ally WILL be wrecked into rubble someday, while there are millions of people who WILL lose their homes to flooding along the Mississippi valley someday, almost all Northern and Southern California homes will look exactly the same in 2050 as they do today regardless of any earthquakes.

14. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

    60   7:47pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says The risk of unsustainable earthquake damage in a large 1906 magnitude earthquake is as close to zero as you can get for most Bay Area cities and suburbs. Typical wood frame homes that are bolted to the foundation are almost completely immune unless right on the fault line. Yes that that was under 1989 prices. Now factor in the same homes/property with market values 6-8x more.. We were very lucky we didnt have the big ones happen in 2006-2008. And what would the total damage cost $$$ come to and who would pay for it ?

15. mdovell Follow Befriend (4) 28 threads 776 comments

    61   7:49pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   To add every part of the country has something. Earthquakes, snow, hurricanes, mudslides, dust storms etc. It could be debated about the "big one" but then again they'd do the same debate in Japan. Some things can be predicted but I doubt that quakes really can that accurately. I used to think that inches of snow would be the most I would see but last year and the seasons before it was in feet. Roofs started collapsing in some areas.

16. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,556 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    62   9:33pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   thomas.wong1986 says Yes that that was under 1989 prices. Now factor in the same homes/property with market values 6-8x more.. We were very lucky we didnt have the big ones happen in 2006-2008. And what would the total damage cost $$$ come to and who would pay for it ? That's not the point. Telling me I should get earthquake insurance for my wood frame, foundation bolted, Lafayette home is the same as telling me I should insure against a rogue satellite crashing into my living room. While the odds are not technically zero, the risk can be ignored. You're the one who brought up big bad earthquakes in a reply to SubOink's $1000 a year insurance bill. What do you think the odds are that he's not in a landfill liquefaction zone and he faces no earthquake risk at all? Pretty good eh?

17. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

    63   9:50pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says You're the one who brought up big bad earthquakes in a reply to SubOink's $1000 a year insurance bill. What do you think the odds are that he's not in a landfill liquefaction zone and he faces no earthquake risk at all? Pretty good eh? To somehow infer, your rental insurance is the same as a CA SFH earthquake insurance is dishonest .. serious REA misinformation. plus factor in higher inflated market values, is calling for a state wide financial disaster on top of the earthquake damage.. But you have REA in Pnet who like to promote prices going up.. good for them.. but in the end.. bad for everyone.

18. SubOink Follow Befriend (3) 9 threads 704 comments Los Angeles, CA

    64   10:18pm Mon 19 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   thomas.wong1986 says SubOink says - don't buy a home because You really are a FU realtor arent you ? Pathetic... What is a FU realtor?

19. Mobi Follow Befriend 1 threads 241 comments

    65   6:19am Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   SubOink says 2500/m over 30 years = 900k in rent spent. That is, if you don't have a rent increase EVER. Highly unlikely to go 30 years without rent increase. After 30 years you practically spend a million bucks. Remember, you still have to live somewhere when you retire...meaning...keep paying rent. From a cost point of view, renting may not really save you money. However, the reality is that job security is a major issue nowadays. If I can pay minimal down payment in a non-recourse state, I may have jumped the gun. But that is not the case.

20. SubOink Follow Befriend (3) 9 threads 704 comments Los Angeles, CA

    66   9:36am Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   thomas.wong1986 says To somehow infer, your rental insurance is the same as a CA SFH earthquake insurance is dishonest .. serious REA misinformation Completely wrong Thomas! And it goes to show you how you take something and just roll with it. Here is what I wrote: SubOink says Insurance? My homeowners insurance = what my renters insurance used to be. Same shit. ($1000/year) FYI, homeowners insurance is NOT earthquake insurance. Earthquake is a second optional policy.

21. bob2356 Follow Befriend 3 threads 2,498 comments

    67   10:16am Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   thomas.wong1986 says Yes that that was under 1989 prices. Now factor in the same homes/property with market values 6-8x more.. We were very lucky we didnt have the big ones happen in 2006-2008. And what would the total damage cost $$$ come to and who would pay for it ? Single family homes have almost no risk of earthquake damage unless they straddle the fault line or are sitting on fill no matter what they cost. What part of this don't you get?

22. RentingForHalfTheCost Follow Befriend (8) 38 threads 2,014 comments Pleasanton, CA Premium

    68   11:47am Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   SubOink says RentingForHalfTheCost says Don't understand why that is not "good advice" Advising not to buy because an airplane could crash into your home, is not good advice inmho. It absolutely is 'good advice' if your house was built at the end of a major runway. Risk is there in everything, we just need to give it the proper level and hedge against it if needed. I would not in a million years own a home here in the BA without answering how much risk there is in an earthquake causing me financial distress. The way most houses are built around here, that risk is real.

23. RentingForHalfTheCost Follow Befriend (8) 38 threads 2,014 comments Pleasanton, CA Premium

    69   11:55am Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   iwog says There are still homes standing in San Francisco that were built before the 1906 earthquake, and most of the ones that disappeared were taken out by fire. The number of homes at risk of collapse or serious damage in a large Bay Area earthquake is tiny, and mostly limited to liquefaction problems on the waterfront. Hmm. That is not what this study says. 25% of homes is not tiny by anyones imagination. Even a BA realtor. ;) "The CAPSS project estimated that after a magnitude 7.2 earthquake on the San Andreas Fault, approximately 25 percent of the city’s housing units would not be safe for residents to occupy.25 In other words, we currently expect 75 percent of residences to be available for sheltering in place after the expected earthquake. This means that residents of more than 85,000 units would need to seek alternate housing until their units are repaired or replaced, which would take years." http://www.spur.org/publications/library/report/safe-enough-stay As much as I would love to believe everyone all the time, I'd trust a report funded by the "US Geological Survey" over any BA realtor. These guys must be making this stuff up right Iwog?

24. RentingForHalfTheCost Follow Befriend (8) 38 threads 2,014 comments Pleasanton, CA Premium

    70   12:00pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   "Ahh, it is only a tiny amount of houses that will be damaged. Nothing to worry about. Sign here quickly, I don't like having my M-class parked in this neighborhood"

25. RentingForHalfTheCost Follow Befriend (8) 38 threads 2,014 comments Pleasanton, CA Premium

    71   12:01pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   bob2356 says thomas.wong1986 says Yes that that was under 1989 prices. Now factor in the same homes/property with market values 6-8x more.. We were very lucky we didnt have the big ones happen in 2006-2008. And what would the total damage cost $$$ come to and who would pay for it ? Single family homes have almost no risk of earthquake damage unless they straddle the fault line or are sitting on fill no matter what they cost. What part of this don't you get? The part where you are lying.

26. thunderlips11 Follow Befriend (13) 52 threads 2,638 comments Premium

    72   12:04pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   thomas.wong1986 says All Kruman came to be was the left wing media's darling boy in economics but didnt make any analysis or conclusion as Shiller did that prices would fall. Krugman called a bubble in Housing in 2005: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html At the time, the usual Krugman bashers explained that Krugman just wanted to make shit up so Bush would look bad: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2005/08/011131.php

27. rootvg Follow Befriend (8) 1 threads 792 comments Danville, CA Premium

    73   12:12pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   RentingForHalfTheCost says "Ahh, it is only a tiny amount of houses that will be damaged. Nothing to worry about. Sign here quickly, I don't like having my M-class parked in this neighborhood" If I were buying a Mercedes, the E-class is what I would want. They're primarily used as taxis in Germany with an ample supply of OEM parts both here and overseas. It's a German Crown Victoria. I'm starting to sour on BMW. Their quality is slipping.

28. bmwman91 Follow Befriend (7) 37 threads 1,539 comments Mountain View, CA bmwman91's website Premium

    74   1:22pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   rootvg says I'm starting to sour on BMW. Their quality is slipping. Dude, tell me about it. The new ones are fat pigs that have lost most of their sporty character. The new 1 series is sort of a step in the right direction. Sadly, since the biggest market is soccer moms & status-seeking douchebags, their products have steadily been transforming to cater to that segment since ~2000. I love my 21 year old 3 series. It is light, slightly underpowered, well built and fun to drive. There is a reason why I have been driving one for the last 11 years! The new ones are nice, but after a few years they have nothing but problems (electronic mostly, and the interiors don't hold up all that well). BMW still makes some of the finest engines out there, in my opinion, but I wish that the cars that they were attached to were 1500lbs lighter, with less silly features, no silly LCD displays in the center console, and none of this electronic throttle crap. Give me a good old mechanical/cable-operated throttle so I can FEEL the engine! Electronic throttles feel like nasty wet sponges, and they offer no tactile feedback. I also wish that they would make some light, high-revving 4 cylinder models (or at least import them to the US) like the E30...a real enthusiast's car. No bells & whistles, just a solid engine, a sensitive steering system and a small & light chassis. Manual transmissions are mandatory.

29. Mobi Follow Befriend 1 threads 241 comments

    75   1:26pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   thunderlips11 says thomas.wong1986 says All Kruman came to be was the left wing media's darling boy in economics but didnt make any analysis or conclusion as Shiller did that prices would fall. Krugman called a bubble in Housing in 2005: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html At the time, the usual Krugman bashers explained that Krugman just wanted to make shit up so Bush would look bad: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2005/08/011131.php Homo Economicus. A Legendary Creature, like Bigfoot, claimed to exist by Pseudoscientists. Krugman is actually keen in terms of pointing out the problems. His issue is that he has ONLY ONE solution, which is runing more government deficit.

30. rootvg Follow Befriend (8) 1 threads 792 comments Danville, CA Premium

    76   1:32pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   What I want is a German diesel SUV and I'm leaning toward the Mercedes over the BMW. Then again, if I suddenly became wealthy I might opt for an American SUV simply because I know they're comfortable and trading or selling them every three years wouldn't hurt my bank account. The Americans DO make a solid truck but the long term expectation for build quality isn't the same. Now, if MB brought the diesel GWagen stateside...THAT is a vehicle.

31. rootvg Follow Befriend (8) 1 threads 792 comments Danville, CA Premium

    77   1:35pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   BMW has plans to bring a twin turbo four cylinder 5-series with manual transmission to the United States. They're being forced to by the EPA. Depending on the price, I might be interested in one for my commute.

32. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,556 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    78   6:12pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   RentingForHalfTheCost says "Ahh, it is only a tiny amount of houses that will be damaged. Nothing to worry about. Sign here quickly, I don't like having my M-class parked in this neighborhood" You DO understand that Loma Prieta in 1989 was a 7.1 earthquake on the San Andreas fault right? Uh right? I'm not sure where you got your map, but obviously either you or the person who created it are missing a few facts. How come 25% of the homes in San Francisco didn't fall down in 1989? How come 1% of the homes in San Francisco didn't fall down? Furthermore most people who live in the Bay Area don't live in San Francisco.

33. B.A.C.A.H. Follow Befriend (6) 5 threads 2,359 comments

    79   6:52pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Renting, Are you a local kid? Doesn't sound like it. Your nightmare scenario will create a shortage of housing and make the rents go up even more. All the reconstruction will cause delays and bottlenecks for the homeowners but will also be an opportunity for all sorts of upgrades and deferred maintenance, which is what happened from the quake and also after the Oakland Hills fire. You can pay for earthquake insurance to mitigate your financial disaster. The premium is not cheap and it is a sh*tty policy but it will prevent your property damage from wiping you out. Think of it as just another aspect of the high cost of housing in the region.

34. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

    80   8:56pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   thunderlips11 says Krugman called a bubble in Housing in 2005: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html no, he quoted both steven roch and shiller.. and wrote an opinion in a news paper... but did not do any analysis or the leg work to make that conclusion.

35. thomas.wong1986 Follow Befriend 16 threads 4,426 comments

    81   8:59pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   rootvg says I'm starting to sour on BMW. Their quality is slipping. actually the early model 300s like BMWman shows is fairly cheap.. and the engine is pretty solid. A good solid car to have and fun to drive... yes fun!

36. Clara Follow Befriend (10) 11 threads 169 comments San Bruno, CA

    82   9:01pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Nuff said, buying is cheaper than renting tO me in my neighborhood. Shut the hell up, you have no clue. To me, buying cheap and nice house is the most thing ever. Fuck renting. Those rental SFR are usually shitty.

37. rootvg Follow Befriend (8) 1 threads 792 comments Danville, CA Premium

    83   9:27pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   thomas.wong1986 says rootvg says I'm starting to sour on BMW. Their quality is slipping. actually the early model 300s like BMWman shows is fairly cheap.. and the engine is pretty solid. A good solid car to have and fun to drive... yes fun! My wife had an '87 325 with manual transmission right after college. I swear it was bulletproof. I loved that car.

38. jvolstad Follow Befriend (4) 992 threads 1,125 comments San Antonio, TX jvolstad's website

    84   9:45pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   RentingForHalfTheCost says Their leases on the ML500's have to be coming due soon. It will be like the option squeeze in the market. You thought they were dirty before, wait until they are in jeopardy of losing their sweet ride. Yikes. http://www.makemiamihome.com/ This Realtard makes me want to puke.

39. RentingForHalfTheCost Follow Befriend (8) 38 threads 2,014 comments Pleasanton, CA Premium

    85   10:28pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Clara says Nuff said, buying is cheaper than renting tO me in my neighborhood. Shut the hell up, you have no clue. To me, buying cheap and nice house is the most thing ever. Fuck renting. Those rental SFR are usually shitty. Yah, renting money has no strings attached. If you are really lucky you can squat for years and just wait for them to tear gas you out of your shack.

40. RentingForHalfTheCost Follow Befriend (8) 38 threads 2,014 comments Pleasanton, CA Premium

    86   10:30pm Tue 20 Mar 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   iwog says RentingForHalfTheCost says "Ahh, it is only a tiny amount of houses that will be damaged. Nothing to worry about. Sign here quickly, I don't like having my M-class parked in this neighborhood" You DO understand that Loma Prieta in 1989 was a 7.1 earthquake on the San Andreas fault right? Uh right? I'm not sure where you got your map, but obviously either you or the person who created it are missing a few facts. How come 25% of the homes in San Francisco didn't fall down in 1989? How come 1% of the homes in San Francisco didn't fall down? Furthermore most people who live in the Bay Area don't live in San Francisco. So it is your complex analysis verses the study performed by these people. Guess what, you lose. Shelter-in-Place Task Force: Christopher Barkley, URS Corporation Jack Boatwright, U.S. Geological Survey David Bonowitz, Structural Engineer** Mary Comerio, Professor of Architecture, University of California, Berkeley Bryce Dickinson, Rutherford and Chekene Laura Dwelley-Samant, Consultant** Lucas Eckroad, Department of Emergency Management, City and County of San Francisco David Friedman, Forell/Elsesser Engineers Inc. Laurie Johnson, Laurie Johnson Consulting | Research Keith Knudsen, U.S. Geological Survey Laurence Kornfield, Earthquake Safety Implementation Program, City and County of San Francisco** Joe Maffei, Rutherford and Chekene Mike Mieler, Doctoral Candidate, University of California, Berkeley Steven Murphy, Seifel Consulting John Paxton, Real Estate Consultant Chris Poland, Degenkolb Engineers* David Schwartz, U.S. Geological Survey Heidi Sieck, Kennedy School of Government Debra Walker, Building Inspection Commission, City and County of San Francisco

« First     « Previous comments     Next comments »     Last »