patrick.net

bruceb Says:
I have been to Arkansas and you would use those 2 ponds to raise catfish as that is what everybody does , eats it , thinks about, talks about

I recall a website whose general theme was devoted to pictures of arkansas girls wading into ponds to catch catfish with their bare hands. I wouldn't call it a pr0n site, since it didn't do much for me, :-) but maybe some guys are into that.

SP

I recall a website whose general theme was devoted to pictures of arkansas girls wading into ponds to catch catfish with their bare hands. I wouldn’t call it a pr0n site, since it didn’t do much for me, :-) but maybe some guys are into that.

Huh?

ahem, I do believe I quoted G

Try "instant equity" in Craig's List and see how many hits you get. It is such a retarded (mentally challenged) term. If anyone can get instant equity why wouldn't anybody just buy it and flip it right away. Oh maybe only the ones with good credit now can enjoy instant equity :)

Way, way off topic, but by jove, this could end very, very badly.

The BBC just reported that there are ads in Pakistani newspapers asking the public to notify the authorities in case they have any information on "lost" radioactive material.

I don't have a link for this yet, just heard it on the radio.

SP

Peter P Says:
[re: catfish ponds]
Huh?

What?
SP

I read somewhere that 40% of the mortgage workouts end up in foreclosure later anyways. But there is a problem with that estimate:

We have never had nationwide depreciating real estate before. So, if you have negative equity in a house, what motivation would you have to play along with the bank and keep struggling to make the payments, even if the bank reduces your interest rate somewhat and makes it fixed? Aside from a credit hit (and many were subprime before) and tax on the loan forgiveness, what would keep you in the game if prices keep sliding? What would you really lose by saying F this? So I would predict that past performance will be a poor predictor...l

Further, how far would the bank take this? a cut in rate from 6 to 5% is equivalent to a 10.5% loan forgiveness up front. I can see how having some loans workout this way is better than sucking in and choking on too many foreclosures all at once, but still the way homeloans are sold how many can take a 10+% hit early on and not turn out to be a losing proposition for the banks?

azrob,

If the SHTF in a big way, a bank may well consider a 10% or so hit to be way better than the alternative.

They might also be thinking that if this happened the Fed would cut short term rates right down again, in which case they would get their principal back in full (plus some prepayment penalties?) if the borrower refi-ed into an ARM again.

In fact, I am surprised none of the big lenders has yet offered workout loans with low fixed interest rates denominated in yen. It seems to me that except for the borrowers currency risk this could actually be a win-win at, say, 4% or so.

astrid Says:
I guess I would feel differently if I was optimistic enough to have children…

that's the triumph of hope over experience...

Randy H Says:
[Hyper inflation] has never occurred within a modern nation state that wields credible military power. Many examples of building-to-hyper inflation scenarios have been averted by this same mechanism, as in Russia in the 90s.

hmm, what about Germany in the Weimar Republic... or Brazil and other S. American states now?

DS,

Yes, I would like to read about Weimar Germany's stupendous military might :)

"hmm, what about Germany in the Weimar Republic"

That makes Randy's point for him. When Germany stopped making WWI reparation payments in the early 20s, the French and Belgians took over Germany's industrial Ruhr region. Germany did not have the military power at that time to stop them. Germany, after losing its prime manufactiring and mining area, resorted to making reparation payments through the printing press. In 1914, the Mark was worth about a quarter. In 1923, it took 1 million to buy a buck.

"He got so worked up with his theory (and some alcohol)"

Is this the time when everyone gives one another that "Well don't look at ME, "I" didn't invite this @ssclown" look? Ahh, "that" look!

Vince Vaughn and Luke Wilson star in:

Realtwhore Party Crashers!

How depressing. At least real party crashers 1) don't take themselves seriously 2) have nothing to sell/promote and 3) are just trying to pick up chicks you could tell how their evening was going to end ANYWAY!

Headset, astrid,

Thanks, "victors" usually don't need a wheel barrow of currency to buy a loaf of bread. Let's not let that ruin an otherwise fabulous Friday!

After reading some news articles, I am wondering if the gov may step in to play bailing bucket.

For example, someone already mentioned that MA requires banks to renegotiate loans.

In the FHA steps in, they may take over loans that banks cannot handle, forgive the underwater part, and use a zero rate for the balance. This would be restricted to owner occupied homes. Nobody would be able to buy a home this way, it would just be for those presently underwater. In the past the FHA only guaranteed loans, but the FHA has experience taking over defaults and its purpose is to support owner occupiers by allowing a lower downpayment and reduced monthly payments.

I hope nothing like that occurs, but it looks politically feasable.

While you all may be munching and mulling over the impending housing crash, a global crash on all assets (stocks, bonds, gold, and others) isn't very far away. Start planning for the rainy days. But, how?

I thought everyone was just kidding about this whole "Mod-Squad" thing?

http://therealestatebloggers.com/2007/04/16/mod-squad-proactively-helps-emc-mortgage-customers-facing-foreclosure/

What a farce! By definition "pro-active" would have meant not writing these loans in the first place! This is how we spin things here at the REIC.

April job report out... and it does NOT look good. Signs of slowing into a depression?

SF,

Where do you get "depression" out of that? That link just shows a slowdown in job growth.

April job report out… and it does NOT look good. Signs of slowing into a depression?

4.5% unemployment is not a big change now. We've already at this rate in previous year. The trend now I see it the rate fluctuates between 4.7 and 4.5. Will it go up? Probaby yes, mostly becuase of the slowing growth. There is already hiring freeze in some companies.

@DS

RE: Weimar & die Inflationszeit

This is *exactly* my point. Weimar had no credible military power. They hyperinflated as a result of crippling foreign debt obligations.

This all stopped, quite abruptly I might add, just as soon as they were able to credibly halt payments and convince foreign debt holders they had enough guns to do so without recourse. Notice I didn't even say that such a power needed to actually have a military. Just have a credible military threat. In fact, Germany didn't even really have a military when they halted hyperinflation. They just convinced their debtholders they did through PR tactics well publicized by the H Channel's daily black and white documentaries.

In fact, the recovery in Germany was so stupendously successful that Americans were scrambling over top of one another to invest in das Reich. Not so dissimilar from Putin's Russia (but that's just my own opinion).

Brazil and other S. American states

Do they have credible military threats capable of intimidating the IMF powers to which they are indebted?

Headset,

I didn't say it was a depression. I asked if it was a sign of the economy slowing, perhaps headed into recession. Except that I wrote depression instead of recession because I'm occasionally less apt that a retarded monkey at working this here keyboard. :)

I believe the article said there would need to be several consecutive months of 50k or less new jobs created to steal the Fed's attention at this point. Question though?

Does that count realtwhores? REIC Shills? Illegals hanging drywall?

Just in case someone in an urban property is approached about refinancing, and assured that rising gas prices will surely inflate their valuation, I ran some numbers.

Take a car with 15 mpg actual performance in your average daily travel. Today's gas price is $2.90/gal. Assume under the most biased optimistic scenario, that the day after you refinance, gas prices jump to $4.90/gal.

Imagine while living at your close-in property you only have to drive 10 miles per day, and the option of living out in the suburbs is 60 miles per day. Over a period of 30 years, the savings from moving closer in amount to $87,600. Thus the premium for moving closer in by about an hour's worth of commute time is roughly $2,920 per year. Refinancing fees alone will eat up most of that first year. Actual savings are much lower and will take longer to manifest because gas will not jump $2/gal overnight (much as my energy-related positions would like that state of affairs).

apostacy:

wow you really don't value your life at all! you calculate the gas to the penny, but don't discount the fact that your wasting 2 hours a day commuting? assuming a 40 hour normal work week, you just gave yourself a 25% paycut in terms of hours spent working and commuting when compared to money earned.

Screw driving from the suburbs, I live 10 miles from my office and ride my bike everyday! Factor my sexy lean body that young girls love into that equation next time.

azrob,

Uh I don't know how to break this to you but after a certain age males become totally invisible to "young girls". They can see through, above and around you. Balding or not. "Lean and sexy" or not. Do it for yourself.

Uh I don’t know how to break this to you but after a certain age males become totally invisible to “young girls”.

Or worse, they become downright disgusting to "young girls." A guy in his late 30s+, even if he is lean, good-looking and rich, is a turnoff (read "lech") to most self-respecting women under 27 or so... As for those who don't respect themselves, well, if he buys her nice things, anything goes!

I'm 35 years old, and I feel like I'm ontop of the world. I've never felt more attractive, although not to girls 25 and under. The good thing is that I actually think women right at the 28-35 mark are the most attractive to me, and the most interesting. I'm 6'1 and thank God I've still got all my hair. I just renewed my passport and putting the two pictures next to each other I actually like the new picture better.

I also recently heard an interesting stat, that out of the guys under 30, 1/3rd of them are not getting laid. I was surprised, but most of the guys I encounter in that age group seem to be single and suffering from blue balls. I was surprised at the number of single people in my MBA program both men and women. I think it's part of our new culture of putting relationships off because everyone is hoping to find absolute perfection.

that's on top :)

Here is some good reading, real live stories of realtors that lie.

Glen,

Huh? Maybe you're just not lean, good looking, and rich enough.

This dating scene of which you all speak sounds like one heck of a cross objectification clusterf&ck.

I would imagine trophy wife worthy material in the 20-27 age group would rather be burnishing their credential or looking for the perfect husband. IF that's what you're looking for, early 30s is probably the age group to hunt in. Anyone fitting that discription in their late 30s probably has too many issues to be worth dealing with.

"because everyone is hoping to find absolute perfection"

And... the longer one waits, the narrower... that definition becomes!

If someone wants to ride their bicycle to work, HEY more power to them! But like I say, live your life the way YOU want to! Don't do it b/c you think it will score points w/ "the chicks". Every thing that's worthy of your time should be it's own reward.

When I was young I learned to play the electric guitar b/c "I" thought it was cool. 30 years later I have never 1) been paid OR 2) "got chicks". What most folks in this category really seek, is the approval of other musicians, not some stoned out chick. (Not that there's anything wrong with that!) :)

"And… the longer one waits, the narrower… that definition becomes!"

Classic! Like closing time at the bar, or the San Miguel glasses.

Serously though, many women are doing a "career" before settling down. I know several women ex-pilots that once they "been there, done that" have gotten out of the AF, got married and are now housewives. I think you will find many housewives who married late 20s early 30s who had careers first.

Plus, what's the hurry? A man can party until he is 35, that leaves plenty of time to marry and raise a family. Works out well, since the desire to party ebbs a bit at that age.

Glen,

Huh? Maybe you’re just not lean, good looking, and rich enough.

That's for sure. But I wasn't really basing my observation on my own personal experience.

This dating scene of which you all speak sounds like one heck of a cross objectification clusterf&ck.

I've been married for 6+ years, so I am just talking out of my &ss. Please ignore my ignorant rantings. :)

I used to live in Berkeley, then SF, then moved to LA. I think some of the stereotypes of BA vs. LA are based in reality--at least in my experience. When I lived in the BA, I was broke but my dating life was still pretty good. When I moved to LA, everything changed. Seemed like you had to have lots of money to get a foot in the door of the dating scene. Luckily I got out of the dating scene entirely and got married--also, lucky for me, my wife is not a typical LA woman.

@azrob
Go ahead, factor that in (I did with my own internal analysis). I'm just saying that there is a specific valuation to the proximity of real estate to where you work. And it might or might not jibe with what REIC folks are representing. I've heard off-the-cuff estimates ranging from $10K per year to $50K per year. I would just like to see some actual calculations that have some semblance of reality.

In my post, I was using round-trip times, but your point was taken. So on a $100K gross annual income, a one hour round trip commute is $12,500 per year gross value. Over 30 years, $375,000. So adding in our relatively implausible scenario I previously introduced, a $462,600 difference over 30 years.

As long as you are factoring in opportunity costs however, you probably need to factor in the probability you have to move for another job (whether out of town or another part of town). And increased wear and tear on the vehicle (compute the TCO per mile, kind of like the automobile equivalent of PITI). And figure the discount of that opportunity cost if you are on salary; it is not as if you freed up those hours you would automatically be paid for them.

I wanted to get a discussion going on what the real value is of living close-in to where you work. Because I can easily see a lot of people with a vested interest in real estate wildly inflating those figures.

For my own situation, I'm relatively fortunate in that I can actually commit discretionary time to wealth-producing activities, and realize income from that decision, so a $200,000 differential over 30 years is not hard for me to justify. But other people's mileage would vary quite a bit from mine, so I tried to pick one aspect that would likely be a common denominator.

apostasy Says:

> Just in case someone in an urban property is
> approached about refinancing, and assured that
> rising gas prices will surely inflate their valuation..
> Imagine while living at your close-in property you
> only have to drive 10 miles per day, and the option
> of living out in the suburbs is 60 miles per day.
> Over a period of 30 years, the savings from moving
> closer in amount to $87,600….

Then azrob Says:

> apostacy: wow you really don’t value your life at all!
> you calculate the gas to the penny, but don’t discount
> the fact that your wasting 2 hours a day commuting?
> assuming a 40 hour normal work week, you just gave
> yourself a 25% paycut in terms of hours spent working
> and commuting when compared to money earned.

Let’s take an average guy with a $60K/$30/Hr job. If he has a Honda he will be lucky to get his cost per mile down to $0.50 (Edmunds.com has a great “True Cost to Own”/TCO feature that gives fairly accurate cost per mile for every car).

60 one way mile commute = $30/day + 3 hrs at $30/hr = $120/day, $600/week, $31,200 a year…

Time is valuable. This is why fractional jet ownership is growing ever more popular.

Apostacy,

Living close in will have some value, and it may be quantifiable as you suggest.

Some trends that may ameliorate that value could be changing from 8 hour/5day to 10 hour/4 day, increased telecommuting or work at home, or changing work hours to avoid rush hour time.

But then, and increase in gas proces and the trend toward toll roads could move the equation the other way.