Not so fast, Zillow; Redfin says Bay Area real estate is hotter than ever
Not so fast, Zillow — a recent report from the real estate data company showing that the Bay Area is experiencing a cooling housing market is off the mark, rival home data cruncher Redfin said.
San Francisco and the surrounding Bay Area remains one of the nation’s hottest markets, according to a report this week from Redfin. “There’s just 1.5 months of supply in the Bay Area, a sign that there’s not nearly enough inventory to meet demand,” said Rachel Musiker, a Redfin spokesperson. “The results are bidding wars and escalating prices."
Redfin data, which tracks MLS home sales, inventory and prices, showed that in July, 77.3 percent of homes sold in the Bay Area sold for above list price. The average sale-to-list price ratio was 108.7 percent. That's in direct contrast to Zillow (NASDAQ: Z)’s report earlier this week pointing to a Bay Area-wide cooling trend....
...In San Francisco, Redfin agent Mark Colwell said he isn't seeing any type of slowdown. In fact, competition is just as fierce as it has been in the past few years, which has forced many buyers to give up on the city and “try the East Bay instead.”
“San Francisco remains very hot, but I do think we’re starting to and will see a cap on prices,” said Colwell. “It’s going to vary by property type and neighborhood. You can buy a one-bedroom condo for $1.4 million. That price may continue to creep up a bit, but I don’t think we’ll be paying more than $2 million for one in the near future.”
Redfin agent Tom Hendershot in Oakland said that although competition is a bit less intense than it was a few months ago, homes there are regularly selling above their asking price. That trend can be a double-edged sword. Redfin agents in San Francisco report that it’s also turning some buyers off.
“Even those who can afford to pay escalating prices don’t want to overpay for a home and they don’t want to buy at the top of the market,” said Musiker. “Redfin agents are reporting that buyers are getting choosier about how high they are willing to go, and about which homes they’re willing to buy at those prices.
Wow. It's surprising. You are actually blaming women for causing wars and on top of that blaming them for not ending wars. Amazing logic, I have to say. I don't want to believe this site ihas become contaminated with such levels of hatred and fear, but it's true. And sad.
"Women are genetically self-centered. Their biology demands it and short of genetic engineering, (and an impossible societal realization) they will always be like this:
Where men fit into the picture is that they are really good at providing stuff and survival. Men are coveted because a woman, who again is focused on herself and nothing else, can incorporate him into her ego and will be enhanced by him.
Now in Western society we give women the illusion of self-sufficiency, which in turn gives women the illusion that they don't need men, which results in completely broken relationships. Absent the need for food, shelter, and protection, women will ONLY care about their one remaining need which is reproduction by the best possible sperm donor.
The best possible sperm donor is almost always a sociopath who is very proficient at getting women pregnant but nothing else. LITERALLY nothing else since the selection criteria at this stage is so focused on a reproductive numbers game that other activities, such as obtaining food or money or shelter is a waste of resources.
Young pretty women are sold a gigantic lie that they can be competent capitalists who can conquer the world.
In reality they are often promoted so the boss can get a better look at her tits and thrown off the corporate ladder when they aren't fun to play with anymore. I know it sounds incredible, however modern technological America makes most office jobs idiot proof to the point where anyone can do them, and rich men like having pretty employees. This is while America's colleges are saturated with 40-something single women. This is why the recession hit men the hardest while young women were still able to find jobs.
I think the goal should be to treat men and woman equally under the law. Then many problems will sort themselves out.
1. No child support orders without marriage under any circumstances.
2. Financial support is voluntary and a decision to be made by men at birth, just like women enjoy today.
3. Eliminate no-fault divorce in every state.
4. Rape convictions in the absence of corroborating evidence should be made illegal. It is not possible for a he said/she said trial to result in "beyond a reasonable doubt" no matter how credible the woman's testimony.
5. Women making false rape accusations should face the same penalty the man would have faced had she been successful.
6. Rape shield laws protecting a woman's identity should be abolished. The right to face one's accuser is a right as old as civilization.
7. Rape between a man and his wife should be outlawed. Rape is a special class of battery that involves lack of sexual consent. There has been an implied consent in marriage for thousands of years. Forcible rape within marriage can still be tried as battery.
8. All forms of "consent" rape should be abolished. This includes a woman willfully getting drunk or drugged and consenting to sex.
9. Denial of sex within a marriage is not only grounds for divorce, but grounds for a finding of fault and penalties.
10. Presumption of women being the custodial parent should be abolished for children over 6.
11. The age of consent in all states should be lowered to 16 and the age of consent to marry with parental endorsement should be lowered to 14.
12. Prostitution should be legalized as it is in most of the world.
13. Pretend cyber-sex with a 40-year old man pretending to be a 15-year old horny girl should be decriminalized and Chris Hansen should be castrated.
14. Any form of presumption that a man might be a pervert in the presence of children will be abolished. Men will no longer be denied access to Legoland, removed from sitting next to children on airplanes, or locked up for taking cute nude pictures of their daughters. They will enjoy the same protected class status as women. I think the epidemic of female pedophile teaches has proven that this discrimination is pointless and stupid.
This nightmare to the modern feminist would only take is back to around 1960. I would suggest that further societal changes would be necessary however at least men would then be considered equal under the law instead of scapegoats for all the destructive behavior women are responsible for.
and finally, the women are not useless statement:
Yeah I'm not on board with the whole "women are useless" nonsense. I'm not a misogynist"
Do any of you Modern Male Victims of Feminism wonder why there are no posters on this site who claim they are women except Elliemae and TurtleDove? (who barely post anymore) They are GONE DADDY GONE! The woman bashing is pretty bad. Shockingly so. Really.
Please provide links illustrating the performance of homeopathic medicines in randomized clinical studies.
Since you apparently are google-challenged and unable to search for "homeopathy, randomized clinical studies", I will give you one link. You can check the references for titles of the actual studies, which you can find yourself.
From the article:
Overall summary of trial findings, 1950–2014
During this period, there were 104 eligible RCT papers published in homeopathy. Only 32 RCTs (31%) of the 104 papers have studied individualised homeopathy; each of the other 72 papers (69%) has studied non-individualised homeopathy (i.e. selected a single homeopathic medicine for investigation).
Of the 104 papers in total, 43 (41%) reported positive findings; 5 (5%) were negative; 56 (54%) were non-conclusive.
The 104 papers represent placebo-controlled research in a total of 61 different medical conditions. In 22 of those conditions, there has been replicated research (i.e. there have been two or more trials); for each of the other 39 conditions there are singleton RCTs. Though some account is taken here of the intrinsic quality of the research, this important matter of quality is reflected prominently in the BHA’s ongoing programme of systematic reviews.
This is where you are mistaken, Indiana. When you replace real medicine to treat a serious illness with something that does not work, you are risking your life
You got to be kidding me. If something doesn't work, then you try something else. Are you saying after trying one medicine which may not work for them, people give up all hope and let themselves sink into death?
Also, no one is saying if there is a serious illness not to consider ALL options, including allopathic medicine.
The sooner we get something like that here in the US the sooner we can start realizing $15,000 for a regiment of St Johns Wart.
Better $15k for St. Johns Wort vs. $25K for SSRI's and the risk of suicide
Treating depression with antidepressants may improve the condition, but may increase the risk of suicide. Physicians recommend treatment when the clinical need outweighs the risk.
Prescribing antidepressants has become common practice, with 164 million prescriptions written for antidepressants in 2008. Sales of SSRIs, specifically, increased by 32 percent from 2000 to 2004, to a combined total of $10.9 billion.
Unfortunately, SSRIs, a relatively new class of antidepressants, have been associated with an increased risk of suicide. In tests of Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, Celexa, Lexapro and Luvox on children with major depressive disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder and other psychiatric disorders, about 4 percent of patients experienced suicidal thinking, behavior or attempts. In the placebo group, 2 percent of the participants experienced similar problems.
Antidepressants have also been linked to akathisia, which is extreme restlessness and an inability to sit still. The discomfort can be so great that suicide becomes a welcome alternative to feeling this type of agitation. Sometimes akathisia is misdiagnosed as worsening depression, so medication dosage is increased, causing the restlessness to persist.
At least one antidepressant can have a stimulant effect similar to amphetamines, which can lead to suicide. A Food and Drug Administration (FDA) official responsible for evaluating adverse drug effects during the approval process of Prozac repeatedly warned that the drug could have this effect.
Tovichpeter - Question: Why do you have such a negative opinion of homeopathy? You've posted multiple articles attacking homeopathy. Homeopathic treatment does no harm nor have any detrimental effect on anyone. It CAN help people, and in the worst case scenario, it just doesn't work for them.
Brief History of Homeopathy
Homeopathy has been practiced in the United States for over 175 years.
Homeopathy is the preferred medicine by members of the Royal Family in England
and homeopathy is widely prescribed by physicians in Europe and Asia.
Homeopathy has had an opportunity to prove its effectiveness in times of epidemics and contagious diseases.
For example, during the cholera epidemics in Europe during the 1830's, homeopathic doctors had a recovery of 80%
of their patients. This compared to conventional doctors' 50% recovery rate.
For people who use Homeopathy, it is only natural to ask what does Homeopathy offer
in our modern and uncertain times? Dr. Skye Weintraub, author of Natural Healing with Cell Salts
states that the first line of defense is to have a healthy, vibrant immune system.
Dr. Weintraub tells us that one way to enhance our immune system and be healthier
is through the use of homeopathic remedies. For information on using homeopathy
with our current threats of epidemics with Ebola, Hanta Virus, Whooping Cough,
Lyme Disease, flesh eating strep..., see Homeopathy Healing by Eileen Nauman.
In 1850, a homeopathic college was founded in Ohio due to homeopathic success rates during the
cholera epidemics in the United States. Educated doctors abandoned bloodletting and
administering large doses of poisons to purge the body. Doctors now began to use homeopathic
remedies as a safe and more effective treatment against yellow fever, typhoid, and scarlet fever.
By 1900, 100 homeopathic hospitals existed. Popularity of homeopathy in all classes of society encouraged
the development of 22 homeopathic medical schools, and the opening of over 1000 homeopathic pharmacies.
Over 20% of doctors during this period considered themselves homeopaths.
Lectures on Materia Medica contains James Kent lectures on homeopathic philosophy from this active period in homeopathy.
Dr. Kent spoke on how to effectively use homeopathic remedies.
The American Medical Association (AMA) was beginning its strong hold in medicine. Conventional
medicine never ceased its attack on homeopathy. Dr. McCormack in the early 1900's said,
"We must admit that we have never fought the homeopath on community and got the business."
The Carnegie Foundation in 1910 issued a report sanctioning allopathic (conventional) medical schools.
At the same time condemning homeopathic schools. This was based on the premise that homeopathic teachers
were also practicioners and that courses in pharmacology were taught.
With newer medicines and $350 million being poured into allopathic medicine and hospitals by John D. Rockefeller,
homeopathic schools began to close due to lack of support and money.
Homeopathy continues to struggle. This is due in part to state laws and the AMA.
The current laws for licensing force physicians to practice according to acceptable and prevailing standards.
Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843) is considered the Father of Homeopathy.
A physician, scholar, teacher and scientist in Germany.
Hahnemann coined the term "homeopathy" from Greek terms, meaning similar suffering,
to denote the basic law of similars.
This discovery of the law of similar came with his experiments with Cinchona bark.
The Cinchona experiments soon followed with experiments by himself and others using many other substances.
The experiments and symptoms produced by the substances were documented as "provings".
See Principles and Laws of Homeopathy for further discussion.
These principles and laws explain why homeopathy is so safe and natural,
while strengthening the immune system and allowing our bodies to balance and heal.
Homeopathy works equally well for both viruses and for bacterial infections.
Homeopathic medicine was first used for a wide-scale epidemic in 1801 when Samuel
Hahnemann MD, observed that a child who was being treated with a homeopathic preparation
of belladonna resisted scarlet fever even though all three siblings were affected. Wondering
whether the belladonna had acted prophylactically, Hahnemann began giving it to children in
other families when the first ones fell ill, and he found it to be protective despite a 90% attack rate
among the untreated. The method was accepted by the regular doctors and the Prussian government.
The father of Homeopathy, Samuel Hahnemann, was the first man to conceive that the
products of disease could be used in the cure of diseases. His preparation, Psorinum, was
the first vaccine to be made.:--T.T.M. Dishington (1928)
Dorothy Shepherd in the book, More Magic of the Minimum Dose, writes, "What do homoeopaths
want immunizing substances for? We have got much better agents which have been used clinically
and proved many years before immunization was even thought of. We call them nosodes."
"Legislation on homeopathic medicines is now harmonised across the EU. Homeopathic remedies are now officially a category of drug, and are controlled by the very same Directive as pharmacological drugs (licensed medicinal products)..."
UK Government response confirms place of homeopathy in the NHS
On 26 July 2010 the UK Government responded to the Science and Technology Committee report ‘Evidence Check2: Homeopathy’. The Government reaffirms homeopathy belongs in the NHS where patients can best benefit from doctors integrating it into healthcare.
The response clearly states that ‘local NHS and clinicians, rather than Whitehall, are best placed to make decisions on what treatment is appropriate for their patients – including complementary or alternative treatments such as homeopathy – and provide accordingly for those treatments.’
Dr Sara Eames, President of the UK Faculty of Homeopathy states: ‘As a doctor who practices homeopathy on the NHS, I know homeopathy is an important part of our health service helping tens of thousands of patients annually, a majority of whom have not been helped sufficiently with conventional treatments. I am pleased to see the government, contrary to the recommendations of the Science and Technology’s report, agrees that homeopathy has a place in the NHS and offers choice to both patients and local purchasers of healthcare.’
‘I am pleased to see that the government’s response embraces patients’ right to make informed choices about healthcare,’ notes British Homeopathic Association Chief Executive, Cristal Sumner. ‘This response makes it quite clear that this choice includes complementary medicine and homeopathy more particularly, which is a welcome affirmation to all current and potential patients across the UK.’
1900: Popularity of homeopathic medicine rises in the U.S. with the establishment of 22 homeopathic medical schools, more than 100 homeopathic hospitals, and over 1,000 homeopathic pharmacies.
And then...Penicillin changed the game. And those AMA quacks took over.
The issue is not the shorts, it's the shorts WITH the sandals. Also the bare arms don't help. Too much skin is showing to be considered "business appropriate". The male boss blew it by being unable to figure it out and focused on the shorts.
Unfortunately there is no way to help a man to understand or empathize with the constant underlying fear that a woman has ALWAYS in the back of her mind and psyche that if she somehow ends up in a vulnerable situation (alone with a man), there is the possibility (however minute) she may be raped. Why? Because the man (almost always) is physically stronger and can subdue her.
It's really actually very simple.
The only similarity to fathom I think is the idea of a very weak man sent to a federal prison.
Have you ever wondered why you don't see lots of women out alone late at night? Think about it...in the City there are many men walking around in the later hours. You'll see male-female couples or even a group of women walking. But you don't see a woman alone very often at night, walking around (besides prostitutes who are protected by their pimp). And the reason is FEAR. Women are afraid of being raped.
Most men have no idea of how this fear plays a part in every woman's consciousness.
And it's amazing how little understanding there is on patnet that having multiple temper tantrums about wrongful rape accusations trivializes the actual core problem which is rape itself.
Sorry chaps, women only get dressed up to impress each other
By Andrew Levy for the Daily Mail
Updated: 19:33 EST, 10 June 2011
Men left waiting for hours as their partners get ready for a big night out won’t be pleased.
Women apparently dress to impress other women.
A poll of 2,000 debunks the myth that they spend hours in front of a mirror on a Saturday night to impress men.
The truth is, two thirds are trying to encourage compliments from their peers.
Six out of ten women aged between 18 and 30 said they had their girlfriends in mind when they chose what to wear on a big night out.
And more than a quarter said the most genuine compliments they received came from women they don’t know – not men. Yesterday a spokesman for Simple skincare, which commissioned the report, said: ‘There is an assumption that women go all out to impress the opposite sex, but this research has revealed this isn’t always the case.
‘The fact that so many women care about what their peers think of their appearance is only natural.’
She added: ‘On the whole, women are much more in the know when it comes to clothes, make-up and style, so it’s not a surprise that girls go out to impress other women as opposed to men.’
Two thirds of women believe that men say they look good regardless of what they look like and just say it as standard, without thinking.
And 48 per cent of women polled actually prefer to get a compliment from a female stranger as opposed to a man.
More than half of women say they have never got themselves ‘dolled up’ purely to snare a man and 22 per cent claim a man’s opinion doesn’t matter to them at all.
I'm not saying anything bad about these areas -- they are beautiful places. I am just noting these people are buying property far from family and friends back in the BA and unless telecommuting, there is not a lot of local job opportunity.
And what do you classify as 'middle of nowhere'? Is that someplace that isn't in the heart of the city?
I mean away from population and job centers. Two recent examples of BA friends purchasing property -- Mariposa & Placerville, CA. Mariposa is about 45 minutes from Merced and on the way to Yosemite. Placerville is almost midway between Sacramento and Lake Tahoe. These are not "suburbs" or even "exo-burbs", but old gold-mining towns. This is what they could afford.
Also, these are people who are trying to stay in California and haven't thrown in the towel like all the Portland OR and Austin TX migrators, of which there are many.
My experience with many of my gen x friends are they are either stuck in their house with no plans to move up or struggling to keep the house they got. Or they moved to the middle of nowhere to afford a place to buy.
It doesn't make sense for them to sell since they don't know if they will even be able to snag another house, let alone a house that isn't much more expensive than the one they have. Some of them have had job changes or pay freezes/cuts a few years ago, which created hardship in paying their mortgage, and they are still struggling.
Some are doing well -- the ones I can think of the wives don't even have to work -- they are just one income and living in high end BA area - husbands of course are involved in tech, yet they are still basically stuck in their current homes. No plans to "move up". It seems like the "move up" market is dying.