patrick.net

Hosuing projects will not go anywhere because that is where the low cost labor for the wealthy reside.

I am a supporter of the Guest Worker program. I oppose minimum wage.

Rent control is what communists do.

Donald,

It's interesting, for a few minutes you had some good ideas, yet you abondon them so easily. Why is that?

I oppose house debtor bailout
I oppose Section 8 / HUD
I oppose Social Security
I oppose unemployment compensation
I oppose minimum wage
I oppose guest worker program

I support the constitution.

Paul, why do you oppose the guest worker program? We should support free flow of labor and capital once the welfare state is dismantled.

RE: thread graphics

Is that man from Poseidon, the underwater, upside-down vessel? :)

Paul, the problem with not providing a minimum level of prosperity for the poor is that once they fall below their absolute needs, taking things from the better-off (not necessarily the wealthy) seems like an increasingly good idea. Refer to Different Sean's many tirades on the subject.

It appears that Patrick.net has become a Troll feeding frenzy. I'll be back around when the Trolls get bored and move on to trawling in some other forum, or when TOS posts more pix, whichever comes first. In the meantime I'll start some new housing market topics on my blog (which I've been neglecting for the past 6 months).

I would support increased legal immigration.

Debtors Prison for FB's. They get three meals a day, free education, free housing, free couseling, free health care, free gym membership and they don't even have to worry about what they will wear in the morning. The temptation to take out crazy loans would also be removed. Now that is compassion! Actually, now that I think about it, it would probably be cheaper just to bail them out.

Paul, the problem with not providing a minimum level of prosperity for the poor is that once they fall below their absolute needs, taking things from the better-off (not necessarily the wealthy) seems like an increasingly good idea. Refer to Different Sean’s many tirades on the subject.

The idea is that once minimum wage is removed, the poor will have a higher level of absolute prosperity. True, the rich will be even better-off, but we are not here to enforce justice. Equality is over-rated.

Brand,

entitlements = "...level of prosperity"?

Debtors Prison for FB’s.

Too costly. It is worse than a bailout.

I see Donald has gotten himself a good nights sleep and came back with his game face on, ready to tackle the housing bears. Too bad his sad attempts at debate and trolling merely come off as half-witted and ignorant. I suggest naming Donald our very own local village idiot.

It was fun poking at him at first, but now this is just getting fucking BORING.

What I would like to talk about is this:

http://blog.inman.com/LeamerHousingandBusinessCycle.pdf

Ed Leamer's paper on housing and the economy that he presented last week in Jackson Hole. It was linked over at CR, I read through (most of) it, and it's got some very good stuff. I disagree with some of the conclusions, but one thing that I have argued previously is supported by data in this paper, that in "typical" recessions, housing leads the downturn, followed by consumer spending (read for the Bay Area economy - personal electronics), followed by corporate capital consumable expenditures (for the BA, IT and computer hardware/software upgrades), followed by corporate long-term capital expenditures, like office space and manufacturing equipment.

It seems the Bay Area economy will not be immune to the effects of a likely national recession.

Although my debtors prison idea was in jest, I do think the consequences for not paying back borrowed money should be more severe. I know too many people who have simply declared bankruptcy with minimal consequences. I even know one moron who has declared bankruptcy twice and is in trouble again right now. I know they changed the bankruptcy laws a few years ago. I have not looked into what changed.

Although my debtors prison idea was in jest, I do think the consequences for not paying back borrowed money should be more severe.

It is none of the government's business. The lender should have been more careful.

Peter and Paul …… AMEN.

Where is Mary? :)

It was fun poking at him at first, but now this is just getting fucking BORING.

Sir Donald seems to have a lot of zeal ! All this when at this point even the bullsh1test of the RE bull has a tough time arguing the bullsh1t case.

Since Donald and TOS know very well that we were right in being a bear, they have already resorted to the other scare tactics. Drumming up the bail-out plan, taunting about how inflation is eating away the renter's savings etc.

Here is a news flash for them. We have been discussing both these topics for a while now. I mean really for a while.

So Mr. Troll no need to waste your time. Maybe we should start talking about how the prices are going to go up in the next spring when the bail-out happen and the Fed reduces the interest rates to 1% or less ?

Yeah, I hate the idea of bankruptcy. A college pal of ours who liked to live better than her teacher's salary *intentionally* bought a whole bunch of new expensive stuff on a whole bunch of new expensive cards even as she was making appointments and plans with her bankruptcy lawyer. She ran up an additional $10K in debt so that she would have everything she needed to start fresh. And this was $10K around 1995--to put it in perspective, $10K was close to half of her first year teacher's salary in the town where she lived.

Um, that's stealing.

I like compassion, truly I do, but if you give people a system they can work, they will work it.

Donald expressed:
'Hosuing projects will not go anywhere because that is where the low cost labor for the wealthy reside."

All the housing projects and Sec 8 I know about are welfare recips. They perform no labor for anyone. Is that different elsewhere?

Peter and Paul …… AMEN.

Where is Mary?

Maybe she's leaving on a jet plane... Or blowing in the wind.

Sorry.

haha there is no federal rent control, only local and only NY and CA(only some areas).

Thus the AARP could NOT have lobbyists in washington supporting it.

This guy donald really is just makin shit up outta nowhere to troll.

No more reaching out to trolls who make shit up.

Can't we just feed trolls until they go burst?

I had a guy working for me that went bankrupt. He ran up his cards big time during the process. He bragged about it. His lawyer told him to do it. His lawyer told him he just had to make sure it was all expendables, like dinners, bartabs, etc. The guy went nuts with it.

I fired his unethical stealing parasitic loser ass at the first opportunity.

I fired his unethical stealing parasitic loser ass at the first opportunity.

Yeah. He should have taken you to French Laundry.

Stolen food leaves a bitter aftertaste.

Stolen food leaves a bitter aftertaste.

It is not stolen. More like appropriated. :)

If you ask me, that portion of debt should not be discharged. That behavior is borderline fraud.

I wonder what the seniors will think about having their savings devalued just to bail out no-good youngsters.

Actually, I believe that if you are unlucky and get someone thorough, the bankruptcy court will review all of your expenditures. If they see that you ran up a massive joyride right before declaring bankruptcy, I believe they can do very nasty things to you.

As you can see, there are specific provisions about luxury goods. The judge also considers unusual buying patterns just prior to a bankruptcy.

http://bankruptcy.lawyers.com/Credit-Card-Debt-In-Chapter-7-Bankruptcy.html

As you can see, there are specific provisions about luxury goods. The judge also considers unusual buying patterns just prior to a bankruptcy.

Post ended up in moderation, can someone please release the link?

Donald,
section 8 !=rent control
housing projects != rent control

Man why cant you just admit in a simple sentence "oh yeah I was wrong about rent control its not federal, my bad" instead of mentioning unrelated programs?

Because you are simply trolling here which is NOT the same as true discourse.

I would sure hate to be an FB with a HUGE depreciating asset and be hopeful of any kind of federal aid. It will probably turn out the loan caps are too low for most of them, or you have to live in certain minority dominated zip codes or be a single mother or they wont help you. sux to be an FB federal aid or not - no one is gonna pay down their principal.

I would sure hate to be an FB with a HUGE depreciating asset and be hopeful of any kind of federal aid.

Er... it is fine if the house is at least an asset. I thought we have already decided that a very-leveraged house with negative cash-flow nothing but an ass-hat. :)

Did anyone see Closing Escrow?

I thought housing never goes down.

I thought this board just consisted of JBRs who will be priced out forever.

I thought that through capitalism you can create wealth from nothing indefinitely.

I thought wages were supposed to spring up to a level to support the new housing values.

I thought we were in a new purely service based economy in which value was added purely by people moving titles, and loan papers back and forth.

I thought realtors were the new professionals on the same par as doctors and lawyers.

I thought there was no way the subprime meltdown wouldn't spread to other sectors.

I thought gold was going to be at $1000 per ounce as the dollar devalued and people preserved wealth in houses.

I thought the worst case scenario was for a soft landing.

Now they are looking for a shoulder to cry on? Well OK then, but I think some serious apologies are in order.

wouldn't = would

Malcom says: I thought gold was going to be at $1000 per ounce as the dollar devalued and people preserved wealth in houses.

Well, we might see gold go up here if the Fed starts aggressively cutting rates. $1000/ounce might be a bit high.

But the rest of the irony I tend to agree with. :)

Rent control is strictly government placing a limit on the amount of rent a landlord can charge. Section 8 is based on average rents for an area and is a voluntary program, and housing projects are not private units, therefore neither one falls under the definition.

Some rent controls are useful as they eliminate bait and switching. These types of rent controls don't interfere with the market price of rent, but freeze or regulate rent increases. These rules benefit both sides as they prevent lowballing which hurts the landlords who want to act ethically, and they prevent sudden drastic rent increases to renters who would be forced to waste money moving when a landlord wants to play games with pricing instead of just being upfront about what the rent is.

StuckInBA Says

Since ... TOS know very well that we were right in being a bear, they have already resorted to the other scare tactics.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

1- ha ha ha ... being right in being bear ??? says who ??? under what criteria ?? where are the earned / saved $$ ???

how about wishful thinking ??

2- Are you better off than people who bought a long time ago ??

Hint: no...

3- You have not even fully implemented your plan so how do you know that you are better off ??

hint: how about waiting 3-5 years after buying your dream house for pennies on the dollar with a wonderful jumbo 30 year loan @ 8%-9% before bragging....

Bottom Line:

4- I posted the % returns realized by RE in CA over the past 5 years (2002-2007) and the losses realized last year (2007)...

So tell me, how many -2% do you need to erase 20 % of +80%.....

Conclusion:

5- In a few weeks, Goldman will report

== > we will see the extend o the red ink due to subprime....it is all about psychology of fear... what if the number are not that scary....

6- In a few weeks, Helico ben will lower rates and in a few months, the 200 or so bailouts plans in congress and in the various state capitols will also be reality

== > we will see the impact on your illusory "ARM-reset-ARMEGADON" and foreclosure numbers

7- And even if you are right and we have a big drop in prices, then I am willing to bet 3-1 that you will not buy then out of fear of dropping prices…ha ha ha .. it so funny

== > you are simply risk averse, not a contrarian and that makes a whole difference...

Ps:

You are betting on a recession in which you will no lose your job (security) to be in a stronger position to buy…I know that you strongly believe that you are that special, but keep dreaming :-)

TOS said:
4- I posted the % returns realized by RE in CA over the past 5 years (2002-2007) and the losses realized last year (2007)…

So tell me, how many -2% do you need to erase 20 % of +80%…..

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TOS, you are leaving out inflation (which seems to be running somewhat higher than the federal numbers might indicate at the moment). You have to add inflation to the drop in housing prices if you want to make any meaningful statement.

And if you are getting your -2% from the median--well, we've all been over this. The median is easily skewed. If the jumbo loans are gone, the median may actually drop quite a bit--to something a bit closer to 417K.