1
0

U.S. Housing Prices are Never Going to Down, But Humor Me...


 invite response                
2016 Jun 20, 11:25am   12,482 views  45 comments

by exfatguy   ➕follow (0)   💰tip   ignore  

...theoretically, what could happen to make them go down and not be attractive to the worldwide investment community?

« First        Comments 20 - 45 of 45        Search these comments

20   anonymous   2016 Jun 20, 7:26pm  

theoretically, what could happen to make them go down and not be attractive to the worldwide investment community?

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

A housing bubble, instead of a Mortgage Bubble. Because the result would be oversupply, by the very definition of a bubble.

I live in an area where new building has no restraints, and they simply build more supply, as needed. And prices just pretty much move sideways, save for the occasional sucker that couldnt horsetrade to save their life that demands they get took.

Supply aint gonna outstrip demand in lala land cities like SF, but thats what it takes

21   curious2   2016 Jun 20, 8:13pm  

P N Dr Lo R says

They are not my friend's data, he recommended the book to me,

Fair enough, and I am glad you read Gabriel Rotello's book, which was published in [1997 - see below 1987]. Life expectancy for persons with HIV/AIDS increased dramatically around 1996, due to the advent of new combination drugs that should have gone generic and OTC by now. I do acknowledge that the incidence of HIV continues to be mostly in the MSM categories (men who have sex with men, including prisoners and closet cases who swear they're not gay). I note similarly that most HIV diagnoses have tended to be among Afro Americans, despite their being only around 10% of the population, due possibly to higher rates of incarceration and IV drug use (two closely related risk factors). Regarding some of the specific behaviors that you mentioned, the overall prevalence results mostly from the heterosexual population, including specific subsets e.g. the NBA and the subset of boomers who became "swingers" in the 1970s and 80s. Promiscuity is definitely a risk factor for STDs, and promiscuity correlates with being male, as nearly half the overall population are. The gay male and lesbian populations are both sinful according to your preferred charlatan, yet they have obviously different rates of HIV. More than 90% of gay men do not have HIV, and more than 99% of lesbians do not have it, so your supposedly omnipotent ego extension must either be imaginary or have terrible aim. Even among gay men, current nationwide data result from powerful local community effects and not primarily HIV/AIDS. So, if the fear of HIV is what's holding you back from getting gay married, you needn't worry overmuch about that; the much larger problem is your neighbors and especially your preferred charlatan.

P N Dr Lo R says

at one with many Muslims

The only example I can think of is the Londonistan ban on ads with bikinis, where a subset of feminists aligned with the newly elected Muslim mayor. Long ago, the left aligned with Arab Marxists, who called religion the opiate of the masses, but that isn't the sort of thing that Muslims would say (lest they get their heads cut off). Many Arabs are not Muslims, and most Muslims are not Arab (a fact evidently unknown to some on the left who call criticism of Islam "racist"). You do have a point though that people trying to "smash the state" tend to make common cause wherever they can, and without always thinking through the consequences of their actions.

22   NDrLoR   2016 Jun 21, 9:03am  

curious2 says

I am glad you read Gabriel Rotello's book

First printing was in 1997.

curious2 says

your preferred charlatan

That's more original than the often seen "skydaddy", one of Dan's favorites.

23   curious2   2016 Jun 21, 10:45am  

P N Dr Lo R says

curious2 says

I am glad you read Gabriel Rotello's book

First printing was in 1997.

Thanks: you are right about that, and I have corrected my prior comment. I should also acknowledge I haven't read his book; I have read his work from the 1980s, and assumed (wrongly) the book compiled that in some way. In any event, he describes the experience of a subset of boomers, and that experience has unfortunately echoed in a subset of millenials.

I have often remarked that if Martians viewed the evening news and nothing else, they would have a completely opposite view of life on earth: they would believe that airplanes only ever crash, buildings only ever burn down, and that they should ask their doctors about every overpriced pill that sponsors the broadcast. They would have no idea why people fly in airplanes, and live in buildings. Likewise, if you base your opinions on the memoirs of an NBA player, or a rock star, or an inveterate 70s swinger, you would get a picture significantly at variance with ordinary experience.

I linked to actual nationwide data, showing that disparities in life expectancy depend heavily on local communities, not HIV (which is practically the only really lethal STD these days). Your friend in southwest Texas might well observe data consistent with Gabriel Rotello's book, but it's a subset, just as the NBA and rock stars and swingers are. I have already acknowledged that the incidence and prevalence of HIV continue to be highest in the MSM categories, but considering that more than 90% of gay men don't have HIV, it doesn't currently have a huge effect on overall life expectancy, and it certainly hasn't reduced housing prices, which are the topic of the thread.

At most, if you want to assert a link to housing prices, you could say that the combination of profiteering and mandatory subsidized insurance have increased the sticker price of mandatory medical insurance in some areas, and that should in theory slightly reduce housing prices, but in practice it hasn't happened because the Byzantine cost-shifting subsidy mechanisms have deliberately obscured the costs so thoroughly. Also, HIV tends to be concentrated among the poor and addicted, especially IVDU, and housing prices in those areas are already close to scrap value.

I read endlessly, which is my personal addiction, and in my opinion both major parties have exploited this issue to capture and frighten constituencies. Republicans thwart medical research to keep people scared of STDs, which serves the religious narrative. Democrats agree to cut medical research in order to protect entrenched revenue models including daily pills, the prices of which are artificially inflated and subsidized by Obamneycare. The combined result exploits STDs to trap constituencies: (R) religious people frightened of catching an incurable and lethal STD, and the charlatans who exploit them, and (D) people whose lives depend on daily pills the retail prices of which are unaffordable without cost-shifting insurance subsidies, and the corporate profiteers determined to maximize the revenue from those STDs, even if it means encouraging more people to get them. Now THOSE ads are a real scandal, IMO, subordinating people's lives to lucre, but it's SOP among religious institutions worldwide.

Anyway, thank you for correcting my error about the publication date of Gabriel Rotello's book.

24   Blurtman   2016 Jun 21, 10:56am  

7. The rise of matriarchal societies where lesbianism is the norm, and men a dying breed.

8. Out of control global warming and an inadequate power grid driving people to live outdoors.

9. GM foods are engineered to be impossibly tasty, driving an out of control worldwide obesity epidemic.

10. God just says "Enough!" and removes all trace of human life from the planet.

25   Shaman   2016 Jun 21, 3:47pm  

Buying a house, condo, or apartment is a SOCIALIST endeavor that relies on the civility, cooperation, and goodwill of neighbors to be financially viable.
For instance, I share air space, noise space, parking space for guests, a pool and spa, green belts with flowers, and a clubhouse with my neighbors. We also pool money in a SOCIALIST manner we call HOA dues which pays for all the upkeep.

26   MMR   2016 Jun 21, 8:30pm  

curious2 says

Fortwhine/Forthood might be reducing the value of your neighbors' property - especially if you've continued pouring toxic waste illegally on your neighbors' boundary line.

Doesn't this guy live in Reseda? It's probably the most "reasonably priced" real estate in the valley. Being that it is chock full of Mexicans, It's hard to fathom how he can live there.

27   curious2   2016 Jun 22, 12:06am  

MMR says

Doesn't this guy live in Reseda?

Fortwhine/Forthood does live in Reseda, but every time he turns on the TV all he sees are "black actors and black celebrities." Waco has 10x more black people than Reseda, so I wondered if there might be a connection...

28   deepcgi   2016 Jun 22, 8:03am  

If you say that house prices will never go down, you also have to say that they will not remain stagnant. The system is not stable unless it is continuously increasing.

29   NuttBoxer   2016 Jun 24, 1:15pm  

exfatguy says

U.S. Housing Prices are Never Going to Down, But Humor Me...

A sure sign of a bubble.

"There will be no interruption of our permanent prosperity."
- Myron E. Forbes, President, Pierce Arrow Motor Car Co., January 12, 1928

30   Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses   2016 Jun 24, 1:19pm  

NuttBoxer says

A sure sign of a bubble.

"There will be no interruption of our permanent prosperity."

- Myron E. Forbes, President, Pierce Arrow Motor Car Co., January 12, 1928

says the fucktard who didn't buy in San Diego 3 years ago and bragged about it on here??

you think your opinion matters, after a monumental fuckup like that??

31   NuttBoxer   2016 Jun 27, 7:59am  

Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses says

says the fucktard who didn't buy in San Diego 3 years ago and bragged about it on here??

you think your opinion matters, after a monumental fuckup like that??

What's your property valued in again if decide to sell? Ohh yeah, that paper that presently collapsing around the world. How's your portfolio looking this morning?

32   exfatguy   2016 Jun 27, 10:25am  

I keep hearing about world debt. Who's in debt? Everybody is paying all cash for everything. If they are borrowing to get that cash, then from whom? Why isn't that lender investing in housing if it offers better returns than loaning money?

33   Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses   2016 Jun 27, 10:33am  

NuttBoxer says

Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses says

says the fucktard who didn't buy in San Diego 3 years ago and bragged about it on here??

you think your opinion matters, after a monumental fuckup like that??

What's your property valued in again if decide to sell? Ohh yeah, that paper that presently collapsing around the world. How's your portfolio looking this morning?

3.2 million, with 1.4 million in 4%ish debt, cash in come of $22000 a month, mortgages of $10,300 a month. I'm really worrying about things!

34   Strategist   2016 Jun 27, 10:59am  

Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses says

3.2 million, with 1.4 million in 4%ish debt,

You should refinance. Get a 15 year fixed.

35   mmmarvel   2016 Jun 27, 11:43am  

Home prices are never going down

36   Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses   2016 Jun 27, 12:14pm  

Ironman says

Gee, why does such a wealthy asshole like you need to teach 13th grade math in community college???... Hmmmm, maybe because you're LYING!!!!

I'm not that guy, but I spoke with him recently. He is doing even better than me investment wise, and is retiring in december with a pension of $70K a year... so yeah, working a few hours a day in a job he likes, with 3 months off in summer to get that pension.... how sad!

37   NuttBoxer   2016 Jun 27, 1:54pm  

Sharingmyintelligencewiththedumbasses says

3.2 million, with 1.4 million in 4%ish debt, cash in come of $22000 a month, mortgages of $10,300 a month. I'm really worrying about things!

That wasn't my question. How much did you lose today? Don't answer that. Instead just calculate if current trend continues, and you remain in assets that are just paper, and have no real value, since even you land is rented until you pay in full, how long before you go belly up?

It won't happen this week, but it will happen. And all that time and hard work to put into building that pile of paper will have been completely wasted. Meanwhile I'll be buying land somewhere more tropical, somewhere away from governments who don't respect property rights. But hey, at least you have right now.

38   Ironworker   2016 Jun 27, 1:57pm  

Those who already own their own house plus other properties will say it will never go down.

Those who are trying to buy are waiting for it to go down and think it must go down.

I believe it will go down, not much, for very brief period of time before it goes up again. Maybe 10-15% in SF Bay Area.

The difference is that it will be a buyers market and buyers will have little, little, little more to chose from and little less competition.

The fact is we all who didn't buy in 2011-2014 are regretting it. I'm one of them.

It was oportunity of a lifetime we probably won't see anymore.

39   tatupu70   2016 Jun 27, 2:03pm  

NuttBoxer says

and you remain in assets that are just paper, and have no real value, since even you land is rented until you pay in full, how long before you go belly up?

You're even dumber than I though if you believe that real estate is a paper asset.

40   Strategist   2016 Jun 27, 2:48pm  

NuttBoxer says

That wasn't my question. How much did you lose today? Don't answer that. Instead just calculate if current trend continues, and you remain in assets that are just paper, and have no real value, since even you land is rented until you pay in full, how long before you go belly up?

Since when is real estate just a paper asset? And how the hell do you calculate real estate fluctuations on a daily basis?
If current trends continue, he will be worth millions more, because the trend is up.
Your post has got to be the worst post on Patnet so far.

41   Strategist   2016 Jun 27, 2:49pm  

tatupu70 says

You're even dumber than I though if you believe that real estate is a paper asset.

The way he talks, it's just toilet paper.

42   mmmarvel   2016 Jun 27, 6:30pm  

What do you mean real estate is over priced???

43   mmmarvel   2016 Jun 27, 7:13pm  

Ironworker says

I believe it will go down, not much, for very brief period of time before it goes up again. Maybe 10-15% in SF Bay Area.

The difference is that it will be a buyers market and buyers will have little, little, little more to chose from and little less competition.

Then here is an idea - move away from the SF area.

Ironworker says

The fact is we all who didn't buy in 2011-2014 are regretting it. I'm one of them.

It was oportunity of a lifetime we probably won't see anymore.

Agreed, we bought in 2011 (in Houston) and the house has more than doubled what we paid for it. By the same token, if we sell the stuff that is out there now is too expensive for us. Guess I'll wait till it triples in value.

44   RWSGFY   2022 May 26, 7:51am  

DooDahMan says

mmmarvel says
Guess I'll wait till it triples in value.


Has it done so now ?


My shack is almost there if we are to believe Zillow. All in less than 10 years. It can't last - not with my fucking luck.
45   Blue   2022 May 26, 7:57am  

Corporations pay way less taxes than individuals. RE game is unfair and corrupt when corporation competing with individuals. Take for example 1978 prop 13, corporations keep original entities to continue tax basis when acquiring and pay almost zero property taxes.

« First        Comments 20 - 45 of 45        Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions