patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,263,802 comments by 15,100 users - AmericanKulak, brazil66, mell online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 15 - 54 of 74 Next » Last » Search these comments
Hmmm isn't the latest theory a sort of M and String theory combined? So perhaps we are on a large membrane (large to us at least, not sure on the infinite level) with strings within it. This might represent the global economy on the membrane and local markets on the string part. That explains everything.
As HARM always says, “not physics advice.†:)
Has anyone read that new book about the move of wealth to Asia and commentary on what the US government should be doing to preserve the economy? Heard about it today on NPR but don’t recall the name.
Haven't heard of it, but frankly I don't know if there's anything the government can or should do about it. Didn't government manipulation of/intervention in financial markets get us into this mess in the first place? Globalization seems to be a macroecomic shift that's too big even for this country to stop. About the only thing we can do is try to stimulate and grow new industries in areas where we still maintain a competitive advantage.
Removing incentives for speculation, and increasing them for people who save and for businesses that invest in domestic R&D might help, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Peter P
2005 Jul 21, 3:17pm
..and of course a cameo by MarinaBubbleicious
With juicy tomato and fresh basil from his owned garden?
That his gardener grew and his personal chef prepared just that night? Yes that's the one;)
Alright, I'm game. Here's the criticism:
All you housing bears say that there is going to be a massive correction, and that all the people who bought in the last year or two are going to be underwater when their mortgages adjust. But the Fed will be right there to bail them out. They will hold rates very low, by any means necessary. They have successfully talked China into revaluing, which will spark inflation, which will eat down the debt owed on housing. The only people who lose are people who are asset poor: namely, renters.
Have at it.
Cheers,
prat
This is off thread but.. There was an article in the Sac Bee today about how rents are going up. One of the main culprits, the article claimed, was that many apartments were being converted into condos reducing the inventory of apts availiable. Don't they say condo's are the last thing to take off in a hot market and the first to fall?
I can be Fake S. I can start by telling everyone that I don't like them. ;)
Peter P
2005 Jul 21, 3:44pm
SactoQt, apartment conversions do not reduce housing supply because it gives one owned unit for each rental unit taken away. It takes a lot of time to proceed with a conversion and many of such projects are poorly timed - they tend to hit the market when there is already a glut of homes.
I suspect that those converted "condos" will be bought by smarter investors in the coming downturn and made into rentals again.
Peter P
2005 Jul 21, 3:51pm
Arguably Malaysia, Singapore were (and still are) only quasi-democratic countries and very paternalistic just like China.
China is not even quasi-democratic. It is actually ruled by a communist part (which plays the game of capitalism reasonably well by bending some rules).
I agree that that size matters here. It is not easy to mobilize hundreds of billions of dollar into a country with currency control.
SactoQt: Condo conversions are happening in many cities around the country. Investors are looking to arbitrage the difference between the value as a rental and the price that people will pay for the condo. Apartments are valued by capitalizing the rental income. Condos are valued by whatever the market will bear. Right now in most places the condo price to rent ratio is higher than the apartment price to rent ratio. In other words, individual buyers will pay significantly more than income investors will pay.
As apartments are converted it reduces the supply of rentals and increases the supply of condos (unless the new buyers rent them out). The net effect should be some upward pressure on rents and downward pressure on prices.
Back to SactoQt's original point:
Don’t they say condo’s are the last thing to take off in a hot market and the first to fall?
Zephyr, you've experienced a lot of market ups and downs. Does this ring true to you?
Generally, people prefer a house to a condo. Interest in buying condos goes up when houses become more expensive. Condos are to some degree a substitute good. They tend to catch the last froth of the market as first-time buyers struggle to buy something (anything?). When the music ends these buyers are the first to falter and condos decline more than homes.
Of course this pattern is not appropriately applied to markets where condos or co-ops are the norm, such as Manhattan.
On the supply side: Condos can be built in massive quantities and at the end of the cycle a glut can develop from overbuilding. Even in a market with strong and healthy real demand.
That's what I figured, too, but it's even better hearing it from a seasoned pro.
_nod_ to Zephyr.
Well, they've come up with negative-amortizing loan products. How about negative-aging health products?
Ponce de Leon never found it. But many continue to try. Actually, relative to most of history we live in a great time as far as health and longevity are concerned.
Peter P
2005 Jul 21, 5:06pm
I think health is a lot more important than longevity. It is sad to be sick towards the later part of life.
In an odd way this discussion on health and well being ties into the RE bubble. (Ok, I'm stretching big time) But we've talked about how the housing market is responding to greed and the desire for more, bigger, better etc. We may have access to better health care and live longer. But look at the obesity rates in this country and the resultant heart disease and diabetes. Over consumption is doing us in on so many levels.
We may have access to better health care and live longer. But look at the obesity rates in this country and the resultant heart disease and diabetes. Over consumption is doing us in on so many levels.
SactoQt, I completely agree, but don't get me started on what could be a huge digression. The abysmal ROI for our sick-care spending is one of my top pet peeves.
Peter P
2005 Jul 21, 5:34pm
We may have access to better health care and live longer. But look at the obesity rates in this country and the resultant heart disease and diabetes. Over consumption is doing us in on so many levels.
We may be having more stuff on paper but I doubt that life is better. Stress in modern life is going to be another cause of illness. (People did not have to worry about RE bubbles, right? ;) )
Peter P
2005 Jul 22, 12:20am
will there be daily interviews with the Chinese finance minister?
will the media hang on to every utterance of the BOC spokespeople?
Chinese Greenspeak? Or should I say "Redspeak"?
If only there were some way to look at rent trends in the bay area...
Cheers,
prat
If only there were some way to look at rent trends in the bay area…
http://patrick.net/
Looks like BA rents are trending lower after months of basically holding steady --and this during prime renting/moving season. If landlords are having trouble raising rents now, can't wait to see it in fall-winter.
Check out the following thread on Ben Jones' site:
tinyurl.com/ccrpg
Relisted Homes Makes Market Less Clear
This Boston site reports on relistings in that city. "To remove the stigma attached to a house that won't sell and make a fresh appeal to home buyers, some real estate agents reset the clock on the number of days a property has been listed, a practice critics liken to resetting the odometer on a used car."
"The number of canceled listings in Massachusetts has nearly tripled since 2001, a sign that one of the hottest real estate markets in the country is beginning to cool down, said real estate specialists. It 'tells you is the market is softening. Demand is declining,' said Karl Case, professor of economics at Wellesley College."
"The practice of canceling and relisting a property makes it difficult for analysts and economist to gauge the strength of the real estate market. 'I rely on that data,' Case said. 'I'd prefer they not do it.'"
"Michelle Ferranti is 'shocked' that neighbor Christopher Daleo's house on Arbor Lane in Woburn has not sold. It has been on the market since March 8. Yet, on July 9, it appeared as a new property on MLS, said Daleo's agent, Pam Dooley. She had canceled it July 8 and renewed it the next day, erasing in several keystrokes information that might cause house hunters to wonder why the house wasn't selling."
"Class action lawsuit against Pulte seeks more than $10 million in damages"
Las Vegas flippers seek te recoup losses from builder:
tinyurl.com/9k66j
*Sob* Those poor flippers! While they're at it, maybe they can sue their parents for their own stupidity.
Peter P
2005 Jul 22, 3:58am
Perhaps we should all buy houses, wait for the drop, and then sue the seller for damages.
Perhaps we should all buy houses, wait for the drop, and then sue the seller for damages.
Is that "PeterPrime" talking or the "real" Peter P? ;-)
Peter P
2005 Jul 22, 4:40am
FYI–Some Realators and sellers in the BA are now requiring prospective buyers to sign a waiver prohibiting them from suing if (when) the value of the property goes down. Too bad for the lawyers
I read about that earlier. ;)
(And the disclaimer about school district, right?)
It is unprecedented. If a restaurant have me sign a waiver before serving me food, I would probably walk out.
« First « Previous Comments 15 - 54 of 74 Next » Last » Search these comments
So China's decided to let their currency (RMB) appreciate 2% against the dollar. And they've decided to re-peg it to a "basket" of international currency (Euro, Yen, Peso, etc.), instead of strictly against the U.S. dollar. Hmmm... what to make of these developments?
Given that China's central banks hold approx. $500 billion in U.S. Treasuries and MBS (Mortgage-Backed Securities), and --along with other asian neighbors who have large trade surpluses with us-- one would expect some impact on the U.S. mortgage market. Conventional wisdom holds that currency "diversification" basically translates as "fewer Yankee dollars". This would tend to throw cold water on demand for both the MBSs themselves (which directly reduces mortgage lending liquidity), and the 10-year Treasuries that fixed mortgage interest rates are tied to. This in turn means less credit for the mortgage market directly, and higher 10-year rates (which would be the Treasury market's logical response to a drop in demand).
On the other hand, you have the Renminbi's slight appreciation against the dollar, with the very possibility of more "adjustments" to come. This would seem to counteract the impact of the RMB's "basket" diversification on Treasury/MBS demand. After all, what is China likely to buy with that extra 2% (with more to come), but more Treasuries and MBSs? After all, they still have to find some way of spending/investing all those dollars they're getting from their most generous trading partner --Uncle Sam. Of course, if China allows its currency to appreciate more rapidly, this could put a damper on demand for Chinese goods by U.S. consumers, which in turn reduces the inflow of dollars (and China's appetite for dollar-denominated assets).
Does every action by the BoC have an equal and opposite reaction? Discuss...
HARM
#housing