patrick.net

this asshole also claims he's a guru but he is one of the most ignored people on this website along with tatupupu, his alt account, and every comment he post has a dislike

talk about being a liar

yeah a well liked guru! hahahaha

kashif313 says

Time will tell which way housing goes- yes it will and either way I will be here making my rent payments on time living debt free.

It sounds like you're doing nicely, and happiness is the key.

Owning a home IMO is more of an emotional investment for people (outside of flipping and renting homes for a living). You pay a premium to have the control to rip out a wall or change the floors, etc. Renting for the most part is always going to be cheaper in desirable areas.

As for inheritances, I couldn't quantify it of course. I definitely see it in my circle though. A lot of people from all walks of life get major help from their parents, either living or deceased.

egads101 says

Gurus and geniuses are always treated well when they share their knowledge. Copernicus and Galileo come quickly to mind, they too were loved for their ideas! The oracle accepts the downsides that come with the gift of knowledge.

look at this asshole he's still going

dont you have any shame Roberto? you know embarrassing you are as a person? i literally cringe when i see you posting as 'the oracle'

you literally had to change your entire pat net identity because of badly you got destroyed for being a liar

We only get spending under control by having taxes close to what we spend.

The people who have the most influence on how the government spends money are the same ones who would pay much more if we actually pay for what we spend.

They would be more cautious about spending, especially on frivolous wars and corporate welfare, if we actually paid for close to what we spend.

The biggest myth is that spending beyond our means is the fault of liberals. Actually it's the fault of right wingers who are anything but conservative. They insist on not paying for what we spend. IF they (the elite) had to pay for what the government spends, they would figure out a way to spend less. That's the only way they ever will, because the deficit spending benefits them.

But, in the case of actual investments in things like infrastructure, education and productive jobs, deficit spending makes sense. Unfortunately, so much of our deficit spending goes towards the military industrial complex and wars and post war spending such as veteran death and disabilty benefits. (this is only the financial cost - we can't measure the actual value of lost lives).

How do we get a good return on investment for military spending ? It used be by "deterrence." Things have changed though. Justifying a military that large changed somewhere along the line. Eisenhower, a real conservative who believed in paying (and taxing) for what you spend, warned us about this.

Tim Aurora says

One thing bears do not understand is that in the long term the price of the house will never go below the cost of building a similar house.

And one thing that bulls do not understand is that the "cost of building a similar house" can also decrease.

Bigsby says

And I own a home in Monterey, not Monterrey.

mentioning a fake home multiple times, a sure sign that a liar is trying too hard to defend his lie

egads101 says

which is an utter lie, from a bitter little loser. the oracle cannot help you, but it seems karma is already paying you quite well for your deeds!

are you trying to lie again roberto that you switched your pat net name to this new 'oracle' character youre trying to lie to everyone with?

how do you explain callitcrazy exposing you for having the same ip? liar

Tim Aurora says

One thing bears do not understand is that in the long term the price of the house will never go below the cost of building a similar house.

Other assets have sold for under the cost of replacement for decades. Think of silver: 25 years.

Helium is another example.

Why don't the bulls and bears just "put their money where their mouths are" instead of personally attacking each other? Place your bets. Only time will tell who is right.

Iwag says

Bigsby says

And I own a home in Monterey, not Monterrey.

mentioning a fake home multiple times, a sure sign that a liar is trying too hard to defend his lie

Coming from the man who invented his Victorian SF purchase...

egads101 says

I think it is fairly obvious on here, that the bulls did put the money where their mouhs are, 2 to 3 years ago, and they've kicked the hell out of the bears's butts to date. Thus, the animosity (and tons of wishful thinking for the crash to restart) on the bear side.

lets see

roberto lives with room mates to pay his mortgage, minus 20 points
roberto has to keep a day job to pay for the debt on all of his shacks, minus 50 points
roberto has a shitty haircut, minus 5 points

yup, looks like roberto is down 75 points against the bears

Quigley says

What is causing our debt crisis?

There is no "debt crises".

It’s not even a picture of a crisis. The new CBO long-term budget projections are out, and while they’re not good, they don’t show crisis levels of debt even looking out a quarter-century.

The point is not that we should completely ignore issues of fiscal responsibility. It is that we are nowhere near fiscal crisis; we aren’t even looking at anything like a fiscal crisis 15 or 20 years from now. So budget deficits, entitlement reform, and all that simply don’t deserve to be policy priorities, let alone dominate the national discussion the way they did for the past few years.

Bigsby says

Coming from the man who invented his Victorian SF purchase...

unlike you i don't care if you attack my purchase, i'm sitting in my house right now laughing at your fake Monterey house, liar

anyone who has to lie about living in that area is obviously a loser

freak80 says

Why don't the bulls and bears just "put their money where their mouths are" instead of personally attacking each other? Place your bets. Only time will tell who is right.

i put my money by not buying over priced shacks in the desert

i bought in a prime area like s.f which has appreciated over 7 times my initial purchase price since 1991

Iwag says

Bigsby says

Coming from the man who invented his Victorian SF purchase...

unlike you i don't care if you attack my purchase, i'm sitting in my house right now laughing at your fake Monterey house, liar

anyone who has to lie about living in that area is obviously a loser

Except I'm not lying. I leave that entirely to you.

Iwag says

i bought in a prime area like s.f which has appreciated over 7 times my initial purchase price since 1991

That's great. So why the bitter and angry tone? Why do you care about other peoples' investments?

Iwag says

i bought in a prime area like s.f which has appreciated over 7 times my initial purchase price since 1991

You bought when you were 21. How'd you pull that off? Help from your parents? Inheritance?

For someone who started out so promising, it is sad to see you reduced to this forum and this thread. Why not be more like the person you mock and give us the address of your wonderful home? We can easily find out if you are telling the truth. You are telling the truth, right?

Bigsby says

Why would you know or care about lawsuits filed against you? Errmm...

That is the question, why would I know or care?

I think what you are trying to say is that I should care, but you never offer any reasons for that.

The banking system is so screwed up that I don't ever expect to take on more debt.

I never had debt before, so I don't see using it in the future.

The good times for credit are gone.

egads101 says

Everybody, say hello

Nothing to say Bob? No deep insight into how screwed up the Real Estate market is?

Did you read today's report of how banks are confident people will hold onto mortgages, because the new crop of home buyers have to actually Promise to Pay the loans.

Yeah, that's the ticket. It has nothing to do with the value of the asset, it's all about that very important Promise to Pay.

David Losh says

Bigsby says

Why would you know or care about lawsuits filed against you? Errmm...

That is the question, why would I know or care?

I think what you are trying to say is that I should care, but you never offer any reasons for that.

The banking system is so screwed up that I don't ever expect to take on more debt.

I never had debt before, so I don't see using it in the future.

The good times for credit are gone.

So in the US they don't inform you of a lawsuit against you? That's an interesting approach.

freak80 says

That's great. So why the bitter and angry tone? Why do you care about other peoples' investments?

i dont give two shits about anyones investments haha what makes you think that?

rooemoore says

Why not be more like the person you mock and give us the address of your wonderful home?

are you an idiot? do you think i'm as stupid as roberto is? that guy had the FBI up his ass because he put out too much personal info about himself because he's an idiot

i'm simply here for the haters to be jealous of, and we both know they are, otherwise they wouldnt be here trying to tear at me through the internet with all their might

doesnt change the fact that no one can claim to be a better timer of the market than me

Bigsby says

So in the US they don't inform you of a lawsuit against you?

Evidently not, but that doesn't answer the question of why I should know, or care.

It's all the same thing. They ask for money, they get paid.

However the reason I don't care any more is that even if these blood suckers get paid you, the individual, have to ensure that you get a release.

So as far as I know those lawsuits are filings of satisfaction.

Agreed. R's are fiscally irresponsible in regards to the military, war and empire building.

D's are fiscally irresponsible in regards to social "do-gooder" spending, feel good spending, bridges to no where, free lunches, the food stamp army, Obama phones, section 8, and lavishing upon the entitlement class EVERYTHING ELSE.

Even worse, the costs of government with respect to the citizens growth to individual competence are unacceptably high by reason of governments constant seduction of the people into childlike dependency.

Dependency = guaranteed votes at election time...gee, what a surprise!!

David Losh says

Bigsby says

So in the US they don't inform you of a lawsuit against you?

Evidently not, but that doesn't answer the question of why I should know, or care.

It's all the same thing. They ask for money, they get paid.

However the reason I don't care any more is that even if these blood suckers get paid you, the individual, have to ensure that you get a release.

So as far as I know those lawsuits are filings of satisfaction.

If they don't inform you and you know nothing about them, how come you are paying them?

coriacci1 says

no one would sell if they bought back in ’91. california’s prop 13 makes not selling THE NO BRAINER!

this guy is actually intelligent unlike roberto

Bigsby says

If they don't inform you and you know nothing about them, how come you are paying them?

All of the creditors? have the same offer. amount owed, no interest, no fees.

egads101 says

sure thing.... you get served for a lawsuit....

Really Bob?

It's always interesting to me how threads become about me rather than the bad decisions people make when they purchase properties.

I think it's because you guys have nothing to contribute, nothing to say, no real insight into the housing market.

To answer your question Bob, people listen to me because I make money.

Evidently something is working because the traffic to my websites keeps growing.

You just don't want people to have information.

If you didn't see 2008 as an opportunity to clear debt, then you missed an opportunity.

kashif313 says

Think about what is happening in reality - cheap money means those with first access are purchasing homes and putting them on the market to rent - homes for sale supply is drying up. If more homes are coming on the market for rent than demand - what happens to rents? They remain static or go lower.

Demand for rentals would increase since those out-bidded need to rent. A household would need to buy or rent. So those out-bidded would need to rent.

sbh says

Republican administrations...complain more loudly about it being solely a Democratic failing, and then refuse to pay their bills just as any deadbeat would, and then claim that the Democrats represent all the deadbeats.

This is quotable...deadbeats complaining about giving help to other deadbeats.

Wait this describes all Republican voters who have ever benefited from a welfare program or a government job. Eh, that's pretty much everyone, directly or indirectly...

I'm still curious. How is it intelligent to hold on to a property if someone believes that it is overpriced and prices will crater? If a house would go from $1m to $500k (or $250k according to Mr. Wong) then that $750k loss avoidance swamps any prop 13 benefit. Anyhow, if someone rebuys after the cratering, they will lock in a new low prop 13 assessment.

And, if "no one would sell" due to prop 13, how will prices crater if there is such a limited supply?

Of course if prices won't crater, then hanging onto the property makes sense.

hanera says

Demand for rentals would increase since those out-bidded need to rent. A household would need to buy or rent. So those out-bidded would need to rent.

So is this happening in reality? Your cotention is that household would need to either buy or rent, there is no other option? How about moving back into the parents home or vis a versa (parents living with kids). How about sharing a home, etc. This is actually happening in larger numbers than in the past. Student debt limits purchasing power (esp. for homes) along with unemployment/underemployment, etc.

Also if what you say is true, why are institutional buyers exiting the purchase to rent model? Answer; the returns are not there, meaning people are not paying asking price for rents and choosing a 3rd option listed above. What is actually happening in my area and the surrounding areas (So Cal) is that rents are generally not increasing. I've been at my location for 4 years and have a 0% increase year over year. BTW, Im not the only renter in this situation.

Kashif313,

Once you bring in other variables, anything is possible. I was following your implied conditions of your statement.

hanera says

Kashif313,

Once you bring in other variables, anything is possible. I was following your implied conditions of your statement.

Ok, fair enough.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/adding-to-the-deficit-bush-vs-obama/2012/01/31/gIQAQ0kFgQ_graphic.html

Regardless of the spin, our country cannot regain prosperity by overspending, borrowing even more, and then discouraging thrift.

Even a 5th grader knows better.

egads101 says

which is an utter lie

Now, Bob, we all know you are liar.

You got caught, spanked, and ran off.

What's the deal with this other persona? You sound even more nutty.

kashif313 says

Also if what you say is true, why are institutional buyers existing the purchase to rent model? Answer, because the returns are not there, meaning people are not paying asking price for rents and choosing a 3rd option listed above

You could be right but the reason I think is what is known long ago. Residential rentals are too complex for institutions to manage profitably, and has been the domain of mom and pop till this financial crisis. It means that even with the low purchase prices, the business model till can't work because return is till not good enough to compensate for the high overhead of an institution.

Some "bull" just please tell me how median house prices and median incomes in the SF Bay Area make sense? How do they live in the same world? I don't get it. Here are some possibilities:
People who buy houses are saving for retirement at all.
People who buy houses plan to try and keep their current income or a higher income well past age 65.
People who buy houses eat poorly.
All people who buy houses are from families with substantial net worth.

FunTime says

People who buy houses are saving for retirement at all.

"AREN'T" saving for retirement.