patrick.net

SubOink says

David Losh says

I think that the economy is shifting, and the 30 somethings will be living a more mobile lifestyle.

That would be me and friends...and I don't see that changing at all...

Do you and your friends expect to have your current jobs for a lifetime?

No? Then you might be moving

Are you willing/able to commute 1-2 hrs each way each day should your job change?

No? Then you might be moving.

Is your and your friends' local industry so entrenched they will never decide to move to lower cost of living areas?

No? Then you might be moving.

Might you or your friends one day have a lifestyle change (divorce, kids, disability, etc.) and decide your current house no longer satisfies your needs?

No? Then you might be moving.

David Losh says

Bellingham Bill says

baby boom echo is turning 30 soon . . .

Great rebuttal, and I agree that things aren't as bad as some people make out.

I think that the economy is shifting, and the 30 somethings will be living a more mobile lifestyle.

Most of us will try not to live a life on the move because most of us want kids. Im in this group and bought a house last year and don't plan on moving anytime soon b/c of kids.

No one talked about the foreign money being wired here in Bay Area ?
Indians , chineese please speak up ?

Bellingham Bill says

Based on labor participation rates we haven't recovered since 2008.

That's counting old people. Don't count old people, they're retiring now.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LNS12500000

is the picture of the recovery. Weak sauce, but just like the first half of the 1990s, really.

That doesn't make sense. The first year of the 70 million baby boomers turned 65 last year. There isn't any change in the participation rate based on baby boomers increasing the percentage of retired people yet. Not that the baby boomers are going to be able to retire ever. A lot of baby boomers will be working till the day they die. The boomers should eventually end up skewing the participation rate up not down.

The labor participation rate is the lowest it's been since 1978 when large numbers of women were entering the work force. Your chart only looks at numbers not adjusted for population gain rather than percentages of the population. Chart your "recovery" the last 6 years against population gain, which is almost all from immigration who would be looking for jobs and it looks like this. http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet That's not a very pretty picture at all.

You seem like someone who should be able to tell the significance of the difference between raw numbers and percentages. Was I wrong about that?

drudometkin says

Most of us will try not to live a life on the move because most of us want kids. Im in this group and bought a house last year and don't plan on moving anytime soon b/c of kids.

They operative word there is try. The average family in America moves every 7 years so I wish you the best of luck beating that.

Call it Crazy says

HEY YOU says

Let's do everything possible to stop the coming real estate implosion of overpriced houses.

How do you propose to do that??

Step 1) Spend more than asking with no contingencies.

Step 2) Immmedienty HELOC

Step 3) Use HELOC money to repeat step 1

Repeat ad infinitum.

Bellingham Bill says

This is not capitalism, it is parasitical rentierism.

Bellingham Bill says

Capitalism involves the creation of new goods and services. Rentierism is the toll-collecting of economic rents on pre-existing wealth.

These are great phrases, and something I've struggled with for many years.

Providing housing is a business. It is a very good business if managed well, but many people don't approach rental property from a business perspective.

Rental property is providing a service, so it's been hard the past couple of decades with this massive amount of appreciation, and listening to yahoos who only see the funny money of equity.

I think the business of rental property is changing to be much more professionally managed catering to market conditions.

It's because I think large rental property owners are taking over that I would rather be doing something else until things shake out.

drudometkin says

Most of us will try not to live a life on the move because most of us want kids.

We own our house, and have stayed because of the kids. Before I was married I moved a lot, more times than I care to recount.

The fact of the matter is that many of the people who work in our market place of Seattle Washington are contract workers with Microsoft, Amazon, or even Boeing.

The good paying jobs are changing.

B.A.C.A.H. says

I dunno about "better" odds. I've known several of those women who were loyal partners right up till the time they got their green cards. Some of them locked it in with a child for the cash flow, some not.

divorce rate among mail order brides is 20%.

or you can choose to believe what you have been told by American women.

American women are known to be greedy, power hungry bitches who pretend to marry you for "love" then and file for divorce 2-3 years later for bullshit reasons so they can live off on your hard earn paychecks.
of course i don't mean to offend all American women, just those who do the above.

Rin says

One important point which is sometimes missed in American male/Foreign woman marriages is that the divorce rate hovers near ~20% vs the 50-60% standard for American male/American female. So while there's no perfect situation, I'd at least feel better knowing that that's an 80% chance of success than less than half.

yep most of these "horror" stories about foreign wives leaving after getting their greencard is completely bullshit, fabricated by angry and jealous American wives who feel threatened by younger, thinner and more attractive foreign brides.

Carolyn C says

Speaking of Asian woman

that is complete bullshit and you know it. women like you are the reason why many American men marry foreign wives.

does the C. in your name stand for CUNT by any chance?

Mark D says

1. does the C. in your name stand for CUNT by any chance?

   Truly a shining example of American masculinity that I feel very sorry for......
   Another short dick man on display for all to see by any chance?

coriacci1 says

Mark D says

1. does the C. in your name stand for CUNT by any chance?

   Truly a shining example of American masculinity that I feel very sorry for......

   Another short dick man on display for all to see by any chance?

who are you by the way? some mangina?

you are ok with this woman degrading Asian women? let me guess you are one of those white washed, self-hating idiots? rejected by Asian women and are now hating them? are you one of those? speaking of short-dick, have you looked in the mirror lately?

No Mark d it is not bull. It is absolutely the TRUTH. You get all upset because I state THE TRUTH! I have been married for over 15yrs to the same man. What about yourself. I suspect not. Keep your Psycho aggression to your self.
And reserve the c word for your cheap girlfriends or boyfriends.

Too many feminists, not enough real men left around.

Let me give you a totally different argument and say.

Gold almost reached 2000 an ounce a few months ago. And everybody was saying:

-> Gold will go up from here!!
-> Hyperinflation is coming!!!

Good school district bay area houses have reached prices 20-30% above those of the previous bubble, and now everybody is saying:

-> I'm wiring my bangalore money to buy silicon valley investments!
-> My mom, father, grandparents and those of my wife are bringing all the yuans from beijing to buy properties to the bay area!!
-> My friend is getting rich on real estate!. I am too maxing my preapproval to buy a house in the bay area smaller than my dick!.
-> I am getting together with five friends to buy, all together, an house in palo alto that we would not be able to afford alone. Hey, schools are important for when we have kids!
-> I bought a house in menlo park in 1974, and I have made 50 times my investment!!. Hell, I will buy another one and I will probably make 50 times my investment again!

Folks. It's impossible to predict when will a bubble pop. For those bears of you, hey, It's also impossible to predict if they will EVER pop (sometimes, bad for those of you bears, they never pop).

But for you bullish people, remember, the definition of a bubble is plain and simple:

"An asset class whose price appreciation is based on the expectation of further price appreciation in the future, and not from the underlying fundamentals of the assets".

I think bay area people forget that too easily due to the heavy constipation out of eating way too many curry chow mein burritos. That's what make them sooo full of shit :-).

So, folks. Yes, it's a bubble.

Sorry folks, we do not know when will it pop. We do not know if it will pop.

Oh, for those of you talking about good debt, and bad debt:

"If the only way you can afford an asset is by leveraging 4 times your cash, let me remind you, YOU CANNOT AFFORD THE PLACE". If 80% of people needs to leverage 4 times their cash to buy a property: 80% of the people cannot afford the place. If you still go ahead and leverage, together with everybody else. PRAY, if a crash comes, your ass will hurt way more than a skinny weak guy in a san francisco prison."

Finally, for those of you hoarding cash. Be careful. The world of economics is cruel. All you need is a steep increase in money velocity to see your life time savings be wiped away.

So, in conclussion:

Diversify

The bond dumping this week is huge. Possibly a turning point. I thought everyone loved our debt no matter how little it returned. Apparently not.
Notice that it also accompanied dumping of Fannie and Freddie. Loss of faith in the dollar? Plus a short squeeze on paper gold causing physical disconnect?

Yikes. Keynesianism is helpless if this continues.

I'd like to weigh in on this......
199 for 3 days straight, holding water....

Carolyn C says

I have been married for over 15yrs to the same man.

dear Carolyn CUNT,

this thread isn't about you or your anecdotal stories. if you could read, "women like you" refers to exactly that, "women like you". it doesn't necessarily refer to you. but even if your online claim was true, how do we know the reason he's staying is not because he doesn't want to lose 50%?

you are probably some fat & hedious woman feeling insecure because your husband has been eyeing the Asian neighbor too much so you fabricate crap online to reassure yourself that your husband won't one day leave you for a younger, hotter ass oversea. i wouldn't blame him since being stuck with someone like you for 15 years is quite a torture, he gotta get some "fresh air" occasionally from SOME WHERE, even for just a moment.

without looking at her pics i can guarantee right now that Carolyn Cunt is AT LEAST 30 lbs overweight. who can prove me wrong?

deepcgi says

The bond dumping this week is huge. Possibly a turning point

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=lyS

"huge!"

Keynesianism is helpless if this continues

funny how the right wing has latched onto that word as if it's a bad thing.

well, it's only bad if it's done when a D is in the White House.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=lyT

is real government spending since 1970.

Note how it rose 40% under Ronnie Raygun and 33% under Bush II.

The 12.5% increase under Obama is Kenyan Socialism or something.

Do conservatives have some sort of special retard pill they take every morning?

What makes them so dense???

robertoaribas says

it is better to rent, than buy, but whoever you rent from is a parasite that is raping you.

I've never ever said it's categorically better to rent.

My analysis is simply numbers based, looking at PITI-less-the-P vs. rents.

As for parasitism, that you resort to strawman and adhom to refute it tells me I hit a nerve. Georgists get that abuse a lot, actually.

Don't worry, you're not alone in your vitriolic opposition to this thesis.

To move to Georgism would take a lot of changes around here, and I don't expect any of it to ever happen in my lifetime.

Too bad, since the land market is one of the primary drivers of inequality and economic despair.

It's fucking obvious really, but nobody gets it.

We're like fish in water, so immersed in the land market that we cannot really see it for what it is.

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/15868-we-don-t-know-who-discovered-water-but-we-know-it

Landlords bullshit everyone that they're creating new services, and are real entrepreneurs etc.

It's all a lie.

robertoaribas says

China and Russia both got rid of the land market, and thus became your paradise. Sadly they both gave up on it.

Russia is actually doing OK, because they gave everyone title to their dwellings free and clear. They'd be doing a helluva lot better if they hadn't let crooks sell themselves most of their natural wealth titles.

China of course is learning the hard way that capitalism's dark side is rent-seeking in land. As is Vietnam, ironically enough. We lost the war but won the peace!

http://michael-hudson.com/2013/07/china-avoid-the-wests-debt-overhead-a-land-tax-is-needed-to-hold-down-housing-prices/

I suppose you could alway move to Cuba?

Even more ironically, the eurosocialist paradises of Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands have also let their housing sector impoverish them.

Housing will always be bid up to the point of pain, because land is fixed in supply and the housing good itself is difficult to build and by definition is immobile once built.

Whether landlords collect the economic rents or we just sell overpriced real estate to ourselves, the only solution to this is to increase the supply of quality housing options such that the monopoly rents vanish, just like most other sectors of the economy operate in a state of over-supply, purging profits through competition of vendors dealing with more supply on their shelves than customer demand.

One does not need to be a "twit" to see and understand this.

But, the world is a lot less ugly place if one doesn't, I'll give you that.

(The stupid thing is that Henry George was no Socialist, of course. He was just pointing out the obvious imbalances in the anything-goes 1800s, of people impoverishing themselves via land economics. He saw it first-hand in the SF area, how skyrocketing wages just resulted in higher rents, putting the economy in a treadmill mode where a lucky/smart few profited from the masses inability to find an affordable place to live).

Albert J. Nock:

The only reformer abroad in the world in my time who interested me in the least was Henry George, because his project did not contemplate prescription, but, on the contrary, would reduce it to almost zero. He was the only one of the lot who believed in freedom, or (as far as I could see) had any approximation to an intelligent idea of what freedom is, and of the economic prerequisites to attaining it....One is immensely tickled to see how things are coming out nowadays with reference to his doctrine, for George was in fact the best friend the capitalist ever had. He built up the most complete and most impregnable defense of the rights of capital that was ever constructed, and if the capitalists of his day had had sense enough to dig in behind it, their successors would not now be squirming under the merciless exactions which collectivism is laying on them, and which George would have no scruples whatever about describing as sheer highwaymanry.

Bill:

The republicans are as Keynesian as the democrats. Ron Paul was the only candidate from either party who subscribed to Austrian economics. This fact is why nothing has changed the fundamental danger to the markets. Screw the republicans screaming for smaller government and lower spending. They only want to spend the printed money in different places. Ron Paul was right. He's still right. According to the Keynesians of either party last Thursday was never supposed to happen.

On a separate issue, Bill. "Housing" is certainly not fixed in supply and it's arguable that "land" is. There is plenty of room for new anthills. The percentage of the yard covered in anthills is actually pretty small. It's the current hotspot that is so highly prized. And of course we build new homes incessantly.

As the US produces less and less tangible and shippable products and more and more ones-and-zeros, the less critical proximity will be. I for one have grown quite fond of my low cost HD teleconferencing with clients thousands of miles away. I've never needed to live in California to take their money.

Bellingham Bill says

Housing will always be bid up to the point of pain, because land is fixed in supply and the housing good itself is difficult to build and by definition is immobile once built.

Yet the dumb Georgists believe all land should be effectively owned by a monopoly run by bureaucrats (via their confiscation of all use value of the land). Let me have all the use value of your car(s) and your wife; you can keep the title to them.

Since you acknowledge that building "by definition is immobile once built," how in the world can you be so dumb as to be sucked into believing Georgism that would put the building owner on the torture rack by forcing him bid on the land underneath the building every year against all comers, including giant retailers who may eye the plot of land! Talk about eminent domain on steroids! Georgists are little more than shills for big corporations that buy governments.

Then again, it should be expected, as Georgists are just the typical socialists/closet-communists who are too dumb to realize that individual liberty can not be safe-guarded by a god-like monopoly called "government" but only by the freedom to choose among multiple competing service-providers (including government service) like the 18th century Western Europe, where modern conception of liberty arose to begin with. Thousands of small landlords competing to provide housing service is far more likely to result in cost-effective housing tuned to ever changing local demand than a government monopoly run by bureaucrats can possibly deliver.

We'll soon be winding down the pusher (Fed) phase of the housing "recovery" to get the debt addicts hooked again and will soon enter the lying, stealing and cheating phase to maintain that housing "high" for the economy.. all the while, the math continues working against as my real estate short positions reflect..

It is the law. Like the say,"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Our current system was to protect women in the old system. But instead, today a woman who emotionally abuses you, cheats on you and has children with multiple fathers will still get half your money in a divorce. Then she can shack up with some kid in your house and expect you to maintain her and her lovers in the lifestyle she was used to-all the while crying how abusive you are.

Even today, witness the Jody Arias trial. She slit his throat and brutally slashed him and claimed abuse and many claim a woman could not do something like that if she were not abused-no proof needed. Thankfully it was AZ and she was convicted-she would walked in feminist states.

When you are in a marraige-both parties contribute and so even Steven. Now when you move on-both need to move on and forge their own paths-that is what equality is about. Today whoredom has become accepted by law by western women and has become part of the culture. Now this is not about sleeping with multiple sex partners-I have done that too. But this is about expecting money for doing so and unfortunately govt has become the armed pimp for these women. Might as well amke the men wear burqas.

mell says

New Renter says

Dan8267 says

Luckily, we men get better looking with age. I'm appreciating that fact to its fullest.

The only thing better looking about the average older man is a potentially fatter wallet.

I don't think that's the only thing. Up to a certain age you do get sexier if you keep in shape, e.g. salt and pepper hair ;)

Funny, I don't see 20-35 yeasr old males dying their hair silver.

I DO see 40-50 year old men dying their hair back to its color of youth, not just because they think it makes them more attractive to women but to try to postpone the inevitable age discrimination at work.

Anyone else here suspect Disney and their catalog of princesses has something to do with the topic at hand?

New Renter says

mell says

New Renter says

Dan8267 says

Luckily, we men get better looking with age. I'm appreciating that fact to its fullest.

The only thing better looking about the average older man is a potentially fatter wallet.

I don't think that's the only thing. Up to a certain age you do get sexier if you keep in shape, e.g. salt and pepper hair ;)

Funny, I don't see 20-35 yeasr old males dying their hair silver.

I DO see 40-50 year old men dying their hair back to its color of youth, not just because they think it makes them more attractive to women but to try to postpone the inevitable age discrimination at work.

Well, ultimately gray hair is a sign of aging, but for a couple of years the mix exudes "still young enough" and "experienced" where experienced is of course strongly correlated to "has more money". You are aware though of the "touch of gray" products which don't aim anymore of hiding gray hair entirely ;)

Bellingham Bill says

It's fucking obvious really, but nobody gets it.

After 150 years no one has implemented Georgism. Where are all the economic paradises based on it? Where are the success stories? Maybe everyone actually does get it. Perhaps everyone else understands that ivory tower theories based on the common good, like georgism and communism (yes I know they are different things, so don't get your panties in a wad) don't work in real life with real people.

bob2356 says

After 150 years no one has implemented Georgism. Where are all the economic paradises based on it? Where are the success stories? Maybe everyone actually does get it. Perhaps everyone else understands that ivory tower theories based on the common good, like georgism and communism (yes I know they are different things, so don't get your panties in a wad) don't work in real life with real people.

Not a very compelling argument. Just because it hasn't been tried, does not make it bad.

tatupu70 says

Not a very compelling argument. Just because it hasn't been tried, does not make it bad.

It doesn't make it good either.

besides, marrying foreign wives makes the most financial sense.

engineers in the states are considered millionaires in South America, Eastern Europe and Asia. if a guy can attract the 6's and 7's here he would be able to attract the 9's and 10's over there.

marrying non-US wives gets the most "bang" for your bucks. why would anyone want to buy for a used Buick with like 200K in the odometer in the states for $20K when he could buy a BMW or a Benz for $5K in another country?

foreign wives are appreciative of what their husbands provide. they treat you like a King. U.S wives cut their hair, get fat, refuse to do house chores, withhold sex, complain all day long and put all the blames on you. who needs that?

Mark D says

engineers in the states are considered millionaires in South America, Eastern Europe and Asia.

It's not as black & white as that. It's that American engineers (or tech workers) are seen as dependable husbands by women in those countries as I know of many fellas, who're married to Brazilians, Chinese, Koreans, etc, and the common denominator is not the house in the Hamptons, Bel Air or trips to Bora Bora but a stable home and a good family. Note, these were once ideals, valued by American/Canadian women back in the 60s.

Patrick,

Did you create this site as a forum for discussions of real estate, or to assemble a pathetic bunch of misogynistic losers?

You're allowing 50% of your potential participants to be driven away with people posting garbage like this:

"does the C. in your name stand for CUNT by any chance?"

when they're not bragging about who has the most money. What a waste of time.

denise says

Did you create this site as a forum for discussions of real estate, or to assemble a pathetic bunch of misogynistic losers?

You're really gonna love mershedperturders posts.

Moderate Infidel says

denise says

Did you create this site as a forum for discussions of real estate, or to assemble a pathetic bunch of misogynistic losers?

You're really gonna love mershedperturders posts.

Feisty ;) The first personalized attack on this thread was misandristic though.

denise says

You're allowing 50% of your potential participants to be driven away with people posting garbage like this:

"does the C. in your name stand for CUNT by any chance?"

when they're not bragging about who has the most money. What a waste of time.

names are thrown around here all the time by not only men but also women, in even in this thread. a fact you conveniently ignored. i didn't see you come in here earlier and give Patrick the "helpful" feedback you are trying to give him now? what's the difference this time? because this time the victim is a woman?

don't you find that is sexist of you? your action has shown what a men-hater you really are. and don't act like you are concerned about Patrick's readership. you are here to defend your fellow men haters. talk about pathetic, you should look the mirror as well.