patrick.net

"Forget about the price, let's talk about what payments you can afford"?

Sooner or later, the fabled flower of real estate will wilt.

Just like it's progenitors, the wilted flower children Boomers of the '60s & '70s, as they scrape the last bit of resin from their Gerry Garcia 50th Anniversary bongs for one last hoorah!

Everything must die, my friends!

"its" rather.

Here is the key. US stock market must NOT crash, and I think it won't.

All other RE crashes happen *as* the stock market crashes, causing more collapse of confidence or margin call on specuvestors as they spread their money across different assets.

That's why I think the big guys here will do everything possible to make sure that our stock market *looks* fine. You will continue to see up and down 10 points each day for many years to come, until inflation catches up.

OO,

What can the big guys do to keep the stock market afloat? More corporate subsidies? More cheap credit? More cheap consumer goods?

It seems to me that the big boys are already doing everything they can to keep up experience and they've been doing it since the dot.com bust. I don't think they have the leverage to keep the stock market looking fine for the next 5 or 10 years.

-experience
+ appearance

:oops:

SP,

You can call it anything you like, as long as Peter P is fine with it. :)

Oh my bad, I took the Church of Multiple Ophrasm for the Church of Multiple Or...sm, my fault.

astrid,

all I am saying is, if you have a printing press and you want to support the stock market nominally, you can certainly do so.

Has anyone realized that DOW has long been a down curve for the last 5 years since the dotcom bust if you adjust the index for inflation? You never see that reported, the mindless reporters only talk about breaking new "high". If we hover up and down between the 11,000-12,000 band for the next 10 years, plus you can even kick out a few failures and bring in only the winners to the index, how indicative do you think this "index" is?

What if we were wrong? When was the last time economic fundamentals ceased to be fundamentals? Has there been a fundamental that has been kicked out of the fundamental list? If so, which one was it?

The question is: fundamental for what people?

OO,

I am giving the Wall Street guys a bit more (maybe unwarranted, I've never met anyone who works for a mutual fund or hedge fund) credit. If they see a consistent policy of dollar devaluation, they will go abroad and chase higher real yields, in which case, the stock market may still tank in the short term.

Illusions and manipulations can last years. Of course the truth will come out, the question is, will it come out fast enough for our limited lifetime? Taking 10-20 years off from history is nothing, but this 10-20 years may coincide with the best and most productive time of our life.

athena,

while there's no free lunch, I can assure you that there's free ice cream. I forgot whether it is Ben&Jerry's or Baskin Robbins that does it every 5 years on a particular day.

Is it really free? Well, you need to line up for half an hour to get in.

OO,

That's a scary thought. And very true. My parents' generation lost the best years of their lives amidst Mao's craziness.

SP,

Actually, it's a 50/50 deal btwn me and Peter P. We're going to co-develop a cult based on our cult leader aptitude. It's also Peter P's thread, so what he deems appropriate is what stays. I'll take your in-SIN-nuendos under consideration, but I think I will probably take my cult (if I actually develop this hypothetical cult) in a slightly different and child friendly direction.

When Virgin Atlantic first got into the DC market, they were giving away flights for the first 200 people who showed up.

Opportunity cost is a real killer on free lunches.

The closest I can think of is the internet and TV. I still have to pay for access fee, DVR, and firewalls, but the amount of entertainment and education one gets in return is really amazing.

Also, air is still free. Breath deeply before it's all gone.

Free lunch? Where? I’m hungry! I want a free lunch! I also want a free ride!

How about some free debt?

@Lefantome, you Sir have been upgraded to a patron margarita at my pathetic rental any time you are in $anta barbara, turn right by the homeless village, go past 34 migrant construction workers (try yelling "hey pendeho out the window, it means "hello" in mexican) turn left by the open sewer and we're on the left by the pig trough.

athena,

I'm a fundamental-ist also. But, the problem is that sometimes the utility value of waiting out fundamental correction is less than the utility value of exploiting near-term technicals.

Just because fundamentals are way out of whack, like with housing, doesn't mean an eminent sharp correction will follow. There is a reasonable chance of a slow reversion--a soft landing. In such a scenario both those "in" and "out" may come out about the same on paper, in purely quantitative financial terms. In fact, the outs may be a bit better off. But, weighing in the utility value of pretending debt=wealth for years may put the ins ahead.

This is kind of a classic collision between macroeconomic and microeconomic realities.

Put it like this: I don't clean my plate and eat only what I'm hungry for. I do this because I have no want for food, because I don't want to get fat, and because I don't want to teach my son that he has to eat when he doesn't want to. My grandparents, who lived through the Depression, always thought us grandchildren wasteful, and begging for disaster. My grandmother gained economic utility with extra body weight, I do not. Someday, maybe the music will stop on the modern economy, and those with big round bellies will be happier than those without. That doesn't change my micro utility from eating for pleasure and exercising for pleasure. Macro forces sometimes reveal the fundamentals that cause people to necessarily eat and exercise to survive. Even if one believes this will be true again someday, it's probably not advisable to start eating like the Depression is on today, even if failing to do so is wasteful and irresponsible.

I'm a fundamental-ist also.

I hear you... market fundamentalist. :)

But, the problem is that sometimes the utility value of waiting out fundamental correction is less than the utility value of exploiting near-term technicals.

Very true. Randy, I am actually quite surpised that you sold your primary residence last year. It was a good financial move. But would you do that again?

Randy,

However, your grandparents' behavior is backwards looking and gives a suboptimal result. Similarly, people who bought RE in 2003-6 are backwards looking and still seeking bubble era results.

Ultimately, everyone here is primarily concerned about their microeconomic outcomes, though individual utility functions may not be equivalent to purchasing power.

I thought you weren't a market fundamentalist though. At least not a full blown market fundamentalist.

newsfreak,

BTW, I ran into this explanation for the origin of Amerika. I had no idea that it ran back to 1927.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_political_spelling#.22K.22_replacing_.22C.22

SP,

The same thesis - tightening by BOJ - was mentioned by Jubak in his latest article on MSN investor. It was kind of chilling, but it made sense.

That's my argument against soft landing as well. On purely economic fundamentals, like price to rent ratio etc - one can argue about a plateau. But there are these externalities which no one talks about on this blog. When and how much liquidity crunch will happen depends on whims of foreign investors. And the butterfly effect can be devastating.

I don't believe in gloom and doom theories. But this bubble simply cannot end well. Economic fundamentals do not support it. But that's not all. Too many vested interests will try too much of their "tweaking" with completely unintended consequences. No one, NO ONE, knows what would be the effect of ARM resets.

In the end it will all seem like a drunkard's random walk. You cannot predict the next step, but the direction is pretty much obvious.

Peter P,

Very true. Randy, I am actually quite surpised that you sold your primary residence last year. It was a good financial move. But would you do that again?

I would. But my decision was not financial or economic in nature; it was a lifestyle/life situation choice. My wife took an executive job in the North Bay which would have required she stay up there in an apartment 3-4 days a week or suffer 3+ hours per day of commuting. My situation is uber flexible, and I want her to be able to maximize time with our son, so we moved close to her work.

The decision to rent and not roll right into another home was the financial part. But it was really just an opportunistic decision, not a strategic one.

The decision to rent and not roll right into another home was the financial part. But it was really just an opportunistic decision, not a strategic one.

I see. And it might not be prudent to get a second home (condo?) in North Valley.

astrid,

I thought you weren’t a market fundamentalist though. At least not a full blown market fundamentalist

I was playing on words: I'm a fundamental-ist, as in I believe in economic fundamentals. I think all free market fundamentalists are pure ideologues, and worth about as much. Actually, I think that of all definitional fundamentalists of any ilk.

In truth, I'm not sure I've ever met a true free market fundamentalist. A lot of people use the rhetoric when it serves their purpose, but when pressed they quickly reveal just how ready they are to intervene against things they don't like.

I see. And it might not be prudent to get a second home (condo?) in North Valley.

Not at these prices, no. I'd rather have a second home/condo somewhere like Carmel or Incline Village.

"I was playing on words: I’m a fundamental-ist, as in I believe in economic fundamentals."

LOL! In that case, I wish everybody is a fundamental-ist.

I'm almost scared to bring this up, since it involves prop 13, but here goes. Assuming the likely scenario that the federal government succeeds in inflating itself out of trouble, I assume Californian municipalities will run into the tax raising ceiling and be starved for revenues. Anybody care to comment?

They had the usual, suicide loans, etc. but the tip to pool resources with friends was a new one.

Not a totally new concept. Around 1997, a surveyor that I worked with explained to me how he bought his first house in Concord (suburban hell on par with Aurora, CO). He partnered with a contractor friend and eventually was able to buy his share at a pre-agreed price. His friend even helped improve the place. This all came about after the '89 RE crash. The contractor was just looking for a predictable return, while housing prices were stagnant and dropping.

Your income typically does increase over time (if you avoid divorce, anyway). My household income increased 462% since 1994. And there are still opportunities for advancement. My boss is planning to retire in 8 years, and right now I'm the only one who could replace him.

Californian municipalities will run into the tax raising ceiling and be starved for revenues

If super inflation happens, the Cities will see just the opposite. Due to Prop 13, they get less than 12 cents on the dollar from property tax. Schools and the state waste the rest. Their primary funding source now is sales tax. That is why they let the big box stores happen and shunned new housing.

Public schools are mostly funded by tax from merchants. That is why Los Altos and Los Altos Hills, although inundated with high-value properties and high assessed property values due to recent change of hands, have a trouble funding their high schools, because Los Altos has very little commercial activities. But it is also a collective choice made by the residents, most of whom choose to send their kids to private schools anyhow.

bikes2work and OO,

That's really interesting info indeed. Thanks!

most of whom choose to send their kids to private schools anyhow
However, on the elementary school level, Los Altos schools are better than Palo Alto's. They all scored highest (10 out of 10) in the state on recent standardized tests. Better overall consistency that Palo Alto's elementaries.

LA elementary district includes a small portion of Los Altos Hills, Mountain View and Palo Alto that encompasses the San Antonio Shopping Center. Sears and leaving next year and the report is that Home Depot is moving in. On the High School level, it is not revenue but the mixing with the rest of Mountain View that brings the quality down. Too many apartments in the rest of Mountain View. I'm a snob about that. Sorry.

I remember when the phrase, " sticking your neck out", used to mean, going into debt. As a symbolic meaning, this meant that; you could have your head cut off if you can not repay the loan. In todays society, this analogy has no meaning.

If we visualize the current flock of debtors, perhaps we can restore the meaning to this phrase. Imagine all the debtors with their necks sticking out. Now transpose that image onto a flock of millions of chickens on the way to the precessing plant. What happens next? We all know what happens next. This is why, going into debt was always a cautionary step.

I am from the old school of debt, and that is why I see a monetary bloodbath in our future.

bikes2work Says:

> On the High School level, it is not revenue
> but the mixing with the rest of Mountain
> View that brings the quality down. Too many
> apartments in the rest of Mountain View. I’m
> a snob about that. Sorry.

It is not snobbery, it's just a fact that most (but not all) people that are living in crappy apartments with High School age kids are not very smart. Most (but not all) kids raised by people who are not very smart are not good students. The Los Altos Hills kids will hang with the Mountain View apartment kids in High School since many single Dad's work two jobs and the empty apartment is a great place to party and many single Mom's date guys who will sell High School kids drugs. After High School the Los Altos Hills kids will only see their old friends if they grab a burger on El Camino and are asked "would you like fries with that"...

Brand new homes being sold to investors as welfare rentals MUST be outlawed.

Absolutely. If we take away NIMBYism, free market will create enough low income housing. Subsidizing housing will only make it more expensive over time.

NIMBYism won't end. The existing home owners don't want younger, more accomplished middle class families crowding them out and lower their property value. They want to be rich as possible and have the government subsidize them (via subsidized housing, food stamps, and Earned Income Tax Credit) for their gardeners, cooks, gas station attendants, etc.

They're not going to concede until the whole deck of cards comes crashing down and California becomes such a mess that no sane middle class family (without the means to segregate themselves via gated communities and private schools) will pay the Boomers for their houses.

Maybe it's too much pessimism, but right now Red Whine's fine screed actually makes a lot of sense.

So many good posts!

Lefantome, (aka) "The Man" puts things in true perspective! I suppose I've always been a "bottom feeder" as I have the falling knive scars to prove it. Lefantome dispells the notion of hoping for a reflex rally and short term profitablity. Can someone (Robert Cote') anyone? coin a phrase that best describes the Titanic's "up-grade" passengers?

astrid,

I have my own "gated community!" It's called "Your Break". There are 5 pool tables, a juke box and a bar that is a block deep. The checkerboard tiled "dance floor" has an unmistakable traffic pattern that leads from the gracious enty to the bar and has a similar foot traffic pattern to the men's room that exudes the scent of......... mint. There are two old farmers that play video poker and to my knowledge have never spoken. Frankly, I don't see how the place stays open! Until their lease runs out anyway, I have my own "gated community!"

SP,

Oh Elite One,

Sorry to hear of your dissapointing dinner! You can join me in my "gated community" where I hear the Friday $7.95 buffet is quite excellent!

SP,

Good news! Maybe I could even afford to pick one up in a couple years, for a 50+% discount. Maybe even more if these places boast of "dated" items like fake stucco, granite countertops, and fakey wall finish. And yeah, pricy bad restaurants. ;)

Actually, I probably wouldn't buy anything built in the last 6 years. I just wouldn't trust the construction quality. But what you mentioned is indeed a hopeful trend towards better planned communities.