Thread for orphaned comments

43623

Tenpoundbass 2014 Mar 5, 2:34am

Bingo - there IS the key word ... BELIEVE. Proof? Well, there is this and we think it is causing that. There is that and we think it's causing this - which leads us to BELIEVE. Sorry, to me there is too much evidence (and that is all we have to go on) that the climate has changed to one extreme and then the other, for me to put as much blame on humans as y'all do - sorry, doesn't pass the smell test to me.

I wish I had a nickle for every Scientific anecdote I've heard over the years, that were later refuted, embellished our just out right scraped as being wrong, and a new undisputed fact to describe it from henceforth was issued.

I'd be a man rich enough to buy a right wing media conglomerate and be a pariah to the MSNBC viewership.

Even the drought non sense from just last month that fortold there would be no turning point for it, that this is it, and we're in fullbore global warming. Brace your selves! Here it come's... Oh it burns! It burns! Aiyeeeeeee... wft... what's this? Raindrops!!!!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

43624

rooemoore 2014 Mar 5, 2:35am

freak80 says

Facts don't matter. People believe what they *want* to believe.

Very true. Although if their life or the life of a loved one was on the line, I'm sure they'd side with the 97% of experts.

43625

Tenpoundbass 2014 Mar 5, 2:46am

rooemoore says

Although if their life or the life of a loved one was on the line, I'm sure they'd side with the 97% of experts.

Are you fucking nuts! Have you seen the current lot calling them selves experts?

Isn't Ben Bernanke suppose to be an expert at something?

43626

zzyzzx 2014 Mar 5, 2:51am

Blurtman says

Has Russia killed 100,000 women and children in the invasion of Crimea? No.

They have killed way more in previous invasions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_crimes#Soviet_Union_perpetrated_crimes

43627 corntrollio 2014 Mar 5, 3:20am

Indiana Jones says

But home building is not happening in most of the inner SF Bay Area.

It's happening somewhat. Every available space that can be approved by a planning commission is being filled with single family houses, townhomes, or condos, from what I see. We still have too many restrictions, however, and these artificial distortions are at least a large portion of why housing is expensive.

Also, local governments tend to snag massive fees, so even new housing is more expensive than it should be. I believe the estimate for one of the massive condo buildings in SF was $140K/unit. That's a hell of a lot of money.

tr6 says

I would guess one of the biggest factors that's supporting bay area prices right now is the rise of bay area momentum stocks (FB, Twitter, SPLK). It feels a lot like 1999 or maybe early 2000.

Don't forget P.

Even so, the tech bubble this time around doesn't seem as democratic as last time. Rank and file employees had far more stock last time around, and the shares are far more concentrated in founders, VCs, and limited key personnel this time around. It's not everyone and their cousin this time; it's more like everyone's cousin who happens to be a key SVP. Even for something like Facebook, a lot of the rank and file people got decent down payments, but they aren't driving these all-cash transactions.

43628

rooemoore 2014 Mar 5, 3:38am

CaptainShuddup says

rooemoore says

Although if their life or the life of a loved one was on the line, I'm sure they'd side with the 97% of experts.

Are you fucking nuts! Have you seen the current lot calling them selves experts?

Isn't Ben Bernanke suppose to be an expert at something?

So you go to your doctor and he says you have colon cancer, but the good news is that if you have surgery soon you will have a 90% chance of survival.

He's "fucking nuts" you think, so off you go to another doctor. Same diagnosis.

He's "fucking nuts" you think, so off you go to another doctor. Maybe you'll be just fine.

You've found your doctor!

43629 bob2356 2014 Mar 5, 3:41am

CaptainShuddup says

I'd be a man rich enough to buy a right wing media conglomerate and be a pariah to the MSNBC viewership.

I doubt you could get a large starbucks coffee.

43630 cloud15 2014 Mar 5, 4:08am

Crazy , I pay $60 per month to propertyradar and should know better than zillow's crappy data. The inventory is not coming up around here.

43631

hanera 2014 Mar 5, 4:12am

corntrollio says

Even so, the tech bubble this time around doesn't seem as democratic as last time. Rank and file employees had far more stock last time around, and the shares are far more concentrated in founders, VCs, and limited key personnel this time around. It's not everyone and their cousin this time; it's more like everyone's cousin who happens to be a key SVP. Even for something like Facebook, a lot of the rank and file people got decent down payments, but they aren't driving these all-cash transactions

Where did you get this type of information? Reliable?

43632 Bm05211983 2014 Mar 5, 4:17am

Inventory is scary low and prices are sky rocketing again just like last year. If I was a buyer I would give up and rent a 1 bedroom apartment in San Jose for 1800 per month

43633 HEY YOU 2014 Mar 5, 4:24am

The beginning of a new ice age:

http://www.wikihow.com/Make-a-Glass-of-Ice-Water

43634

New Renter 2014 Mar 5, 4:27am

Or move someplace where inventory and prices are more reasonable.

43635 corntrollio 2014 Mar 5, 5:18am

hanera says

Where did you get this type of information? Reliable?

Read S-1s and other SEC filings and also read articles on this. You can see how tightly concentrated share ownership is in a select few. The difference between the shitty businesses that had IPOs in the 1999-2000 range is that the businesses were shitty, had no revenue/profit, and the founders gave up a lot more of their stock. Working for these shit businesses was way more risky than working for, say, Facebook in 2010.

The companies that have been IPOing lately have had a more identifiable revenue model, and the founders and key employees haven't had to give up nearly as much stock.

More important is the companies that haven't been undergoing IPOs because they sold privately. In those cases, the founders and key employees retain an even bigger share of the pot and the VCs retain most of the remainder. Rank and file get enough to get them not to leave their job, but it's not a whole lot unless you were really early.

43636

ttsmyf 2014 Mar 5, 5:43am

WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!

Say hey! This was in the Wall Street Journal on March 30, 1999. Note "... how much it will buy."

Holy cow/interesting/compelling ...!

And where is it up to date??? Right here ... see the first chart shown in this thread.
Recent Dow day is Wednesday, March 5, 2014 __ Level is 104.4

WOW! It is hideous that this is hidden! Is there any such "Homes, Inflation Adjusted"? Yes! This was in the New York Times on August 27, 2006:

And up to date (by me) is here:
http://patrick.net/?p=1219038&c=999083#comment-999083

WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!

And http://patrick.net/?p=1230886

43637

Dan8267 2014 Mar 5, 6:28am

dodgerfanjohn says

What's subject to debate is whether or not humans are inducing changes beyond what would normally occur.

No that's not actually being debated by the scientific community. That's a lie told by assholes who have a vested financial interest in polluting the world. They make a few bucks and the rest of us are impoverished as a result. They are thieves and murderers. Yes, murderers, because it turns out that pollution can and does kill millions of people a year. It causes cancer and a myriad of other diseases.

The bottom line is that pollution shortens life spans and inflicts a momentary cost on the entire world. Allowing polluters to make money at our expense is no different than condoning theft.

- There is no doubt that the Earth is warming as a whole.
- There is no doubt that the Earth's climate is becoming more extreme including extremes of summer and winter.
- There is no doubt that these changes are due entirely to man's influence.
- There is no doubt that these changes will have major negative impacts on economies and people's lives and lifespans.
- There is no doubt that the people denying any of the above facts are either liars with a criminal agenda or idiots who obey those liars because the idiots think their political and social agendas will be served by those liars.

At this point in history, any man-made climate change denier should be regarded in the same venue as holocaust deniers, Flat Earthers, and people who think they are Napoleon. They should be ridiculed as the village idiots they are, lest they gather a horde of idiots who vote mankind out of existence with bad environmental policies.

There are two major litmus tests that nature puts all sentient, technology producing lifeforms through. One is whether or not they annihilate themselves with nuclear weapons. The other is whether they annihilate themselves with global ecological collapse. The first requires fear or hate. The second only requires apathy, something we humans are damn good at.

Our galaxy is 13.2 billion years old and a mere 100,000 light years in diameter. It is composed of 300 to 400 billion stars. A space faring race from one end of the galaxy could easily populate the entire galaxy in 1 million years with transportation at a mere 10% of the speed of light and would do so because of economic pressures and the need for resources continually driving populations from more dense areas to less dense ones. So why wasn't Earth colonized by aliens long before the dinosaurs, long before multicellular life? Those litmus tests can be a real bitch.

43638

hrhjuliet 2014 Mar 5, 6:33am

Before the crash, we had a cousin here in Bay Area who was normally sweet and intellectual, then she became a Century 21 real estate agent. She got into an irrational argument with my husband about buying now ( this was right before the peak) or being priced out for all time. She even claimed we were harming our children's future. They didn't talk for awhile, which made me sad because I liked his cousin, and we used to go to the opera together. Years later, after the crash, she let her license go and started working for something called (I may be wrong about the exact name) the Housing Authority, which turned out to be slightly corrupt, but she joined up to help poor families own homes. She never apologized to my husband, never admitted the Patrick articles he sent her ALL ended up being true. Just years later she invited us to an art showing, and we said nothing about the argument again. She sold her home in Santa Clara last summer and moved out of the area. She spoke to us about real estate for the first time since leaving the fold during the sale of her home that had been in the family for two generations. She pointed out that Santa Clara had lost its charm. She pointed out the traffic along the Alameda, and the hooka lounge around the corner where a family owned cafe once was. She knew she was never going to be able to sell at these crazy inflated prices again, and got out of the Bay Area. She now lives in a lovely community with all the extra cash from our inflated market. She got out of the cult, and out of the Bay of Feudalism. I hope my cousin in Santa Clarita can at least shake the crazy cult like jargon of the real estate world, like my husband's cousin finally did.

43639

bubblesitter 2014 Mar 5, 6:37am

hrhjuliet says

She knew she was never going to be able to sell at these crazy inflated prices again, and got out of the Bay Area.

Hmmm...with sales volume this low, how are Realtors making their living?

43640

RWSGFY 2014 Mar 5, 6:38am

jojo says

Yes, the increased variability (volatility) of weather systems is a strong indication of Climate Change.

Who said it did increase?

43641

RWSGFY 2014 Mar 5, 6:55am

jojo says

Straw Man says

jojo says

Yes, the increased [b]variability (volatility) of weather systems[/b] is a strong indication of Climate Change.

Who said it did increase?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_glaciers_since_1850

This is "weather"? Steady change in one direction is "volatility"? A-ok.

43642

Shaman 2014 Mar 5, 7:01am

Even an earth with barely breathable atmosphere and a completely destroyed ecology would be far easier to live on than any other place in our solar system. Mankind would go underground and live in silos, mining the earth below for minerals and fuels to sustain life inside. Think bioDome underground.
We won't die out because of global warming, but it's VERY likely to cause a population crash. Those of you who believe Earth has too many people would approve, I guess.

43643

REpro 2014 Mar 5, 7:03am

corntrollio says

Also, local governments tend to snag massive fees, so even new housing is more expensive than it should be. I believe the estimate for one of the massive condo buildings in SF was $140K/unit. That's a hell of a lot of money.

This is correct. It calls â€œimpact feeâ€. It is a single most important addition to local high cost of housing. Where this money goes is another question. Teachers salary schedule are unchanged from last 5-6 years.

43644 myob 2014 Mar 5, 7:34am

Every time I think that housing can't get more expensive here in silicon valley, I turn out to be wrong. I bought a small house in Mountain View last summer, and similar houses, in worse shape, are going for ~15% more right now. A small 1000sqft 3/2 on a 6000 sq ft lot just sold for $1.2M in my neighborhood.

Inventory is low on the peninsula, almost non-existent if the school district is average or better. Open houses are flooded with interested buyers. The 3/2 I mentioned above was packed, and at one point, a tour bus showed up with a bunch of asian investors and a translator tour guide.

What is driving this? Is this all due to local wealth? The bus of investors would seem to imply that foreigners are buying here too. How much does loose Fed policy contribute in an area of such high demand and tight supply?

These kinds of prices require dual high income families to afford. Where do all the average income earners live? Is everyone commuting in from Gilroy and Tracy? It's hard to imagine how this could be sustained.

43645

Heraclitusstudent 2014 Mar 5, 7:46am

myob says

These kinds of prices require dual high income families to afford. Where do all the average income earners live?

1% of the population earn more than $400K and is loaded with cash.
$1.2M is like nothing to them.

That's not 300,000 people, that's 3,000,000 people.

If even 50% decide to live here, it can obviously be sustained.

If you're just an engineer or poor entrepreneur, you shouldn't even try to live here.

Go live in Tracy or Modesto.

43646

New Renter 2014 Mar 5, 8:00am

Heraclitusstudent says

Go live in Tracy or Modesto.

I hear Ben Lomond is nice...

43647 EBGuy 2014 Mar 5, 8:00am

Bump. Down jojo, down. Sit. Good boy.

43648

FuckTheMainstreamMedia 2014 Mar 5, 8:33am

Lol@ "I posted more words than you and I said so" as an argument

43649 corntrollio 2014 Mar 5, 8:33am

REpro says

This is correct. It calls â€œimpact feeâ€.

It's not just direct fees either, although those are more typical in San Francisco. The whole planning process here in the Bay Area tends to be very expensive overall and the cost per square foot for construction/addition is very high as a result. To some extent, the extremely high cost of construction sets a bit of a floor on housing prices, even though the technical value of a house is in the land.

REpro says

Where this money goes is another question.

In SF, a lot of it goes to the non-profit-industrial complex. Those guys are good at pulling in other people's money for misguided programs that don't achieve what they think they achieve.

43650

REpro 2014 Mar 5, 8:44am

myob says

These kinds of prices require dual high income families to afford. Where do all the average income earners live? Is everyone commuting in from Gilroy and Tracy? It's hard to imagine how this could be sustained

Came to the point that a lot of middle class earners are freak-out with situation and seriously considering moving to Oregon, Texas, Arizona, â€¦ kind similar action as in 2005-06. Bay area residents may face another household expense soon e.g. private schooling.

43651 corntrollio 2014 Mar 5, 9:32am

dodgerfanjohn says

Lol@ "I posted more words than you and I said so" as an argument

LOL @ "I can't think critically and therefore ignore data and analysis" as an argument.

43652

indigenous 2014 Mar 5, 11:42am

Bigsby says

The obvious question being when.

This year or by 2019 by what I read in that article

43653

AD 2014 Mar 5, 12:00pm

indigenous says

Beaulieu also sees a 15 to 34 percent correction coming in the stock market.

He says he sees a downturn in 2019. I suspect that means the 30 percent stock market drop will be in 2018. So we are around 1870 for the S&P 500 with a market cap to GDP ratio of 116%. If it goes down about 20% to a ratio of 90%, then the market is back in the fairly valued region.

It was 150% back in December 1999.

43654

indigenous 2014 Mar 5, 12:18pm

adarmiento says

He says he sees a downturn in 2019. I suspect that means the 30 percent stock market drop will be in 2018. So we are around 1870 for the S&P 500 with a market cap to GDP ratio of 116%. If it goes down about 20% to a ratio of 90%, then the market is back in the fairly valued region.

It was 150% back in December 1999.

It is unclear whether he is talking about this year or 2019.

The main thing to know is that due to FED activity the stock market is overvalued willy nilly and there will be a large correction, so stock investment is skating away on the thin ice of a new day, to think otherwise is folly.

43655

Tenpoundbass 2014 Mar 5, 12:24pm

It's the gift that keeps on taking.

43656

AD 2014 Mar 5, 12:35pm

How is the earnings and revenue going to be impacted by the Federal Reserve decreasing its quantitative easing to zero ?

Look at how the sales or revenue for major bluechips like Walmart have steadily gone up since 2004.

http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/financial-statements?symbol=wmt

43657

FuckTheMainstreamMedia 2014 Mar 5, 12:43pm

corntrollio says

dodgerfanjohn says

Lol@ "I posted more words than you and I said so" as an argument

LOL @ "I can't think critically and therefore ignore data and analysis" as an argument.

Point me to the data and analysis in this thread.

43658

indigenous 2014 Mar 5, 12:44pm

adarmiento says

How is the earnings and revenue going to be impacted by the Federal Reserve decreasing its quantitative easing to zero ?

I think they were saying that the impact is going to come from the impact of O care.

That and the normal business cycle.

It will be/is incumbent on Yellin to keep QE going.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

43659 HEY YOU 2014 Mar 5, 12:47pm

The buyer establishes the home's value.
Screw the seller,appraisers, commissioned sales people & banks. They don't care about the buyer. 10% of asking price unless idiocy is in one's DNA then all they can do is overpay.

43660

AD 2014 Mar 5, 1:11pm

indigenous says

It will be/is incumbent on Yellin to keep QE going.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

I agree as the Affordable Care Act (aka: "Obamacare") is going to have a bigger price tag than what it was sold at back in 2009. That is because the original forecasts were based on no exemptions and delays (i.e., for public sector unions with Cadillac healthcare plans, etc.). It will be interesting to see who the Democrats will blame for the larger prices. Will they only focus on the insurance companies ?

Perhaps there will be a bailout of the insurance industry because of this ?

As far as QE #5 from the Janet Yellin, I think the Fed may stop no further than $30 billion per month of the Federal Reserve buying mortgage back securities and U.S. Treasury notes. I do not think QE will go down to $0 for another two years.

43661

AD 2014 Mar 5, 1:14pm

And as a result I suspect that the 10 year Treasury Note will not go above 3% for at least another 2 years.

43662

AD 2014 Mar 5, 1:23pm

A home's value is based on what a buyer is willing to spend to buy it, and what the seller will agree to sell it at. And I think there are forces at work which determine this equilibrium point.

They are several rules which create these forces. Such rules are price to income ratio, Principal/Interest/Taxes/Insurance as a percentage of median household income, as well as Patrick's rule below:

annual rent / purchase price = 3% means do not buy, prices are too high
annual rent / purchase price = 6% means borderline
annual rent / purchase price = 9% means ok to buy, prices are reasonable

patrick.net

Thread for orphaned comments

Please register to comment: