patrick.net

The road trip was good. I wish I took a pair of Tevas along and hiked more slot canyons. Let me know if you want to see pictures.

Sure. I always like pictures of roadtrips.

I have a question for some of the other Patrick.net regulars. Am I wrong in being a little annoyed that Patrick now wants to charge for the housing article links?

I am not annoyed. However, I think a donation button (like the one on Ben's blog) may also be effective.

I will admit I have spent less and less time authoring threads as it’s a completely thankless task most of the time. But I have authored quite a bit more than Patrick and I guess I am feeling a little put out.

I personally thank you, SQT. If you have a subscription service, I will probably subscribe too. ;)

But then I’d have to pay you too, you do at least as much.

No, I probably have to pay you to read my silly threads.

My contribution is not much beyond huh, duh, and doh.

I just make silly comments to compensate.

Huh? Okay, you are going to author the next thread.

If I can think up a decent topic, sure.

Be creative. Think outside the housing bubble. ;)

How about best women in the world?

How about best wine you've had for under $100?

How about best wine you’ve had for under $100?

Pinot Noir, Robert Sinskey, 2001

I do not drink much. So please forgive my ignorance.

New Topic

Do people move more often when prices are rising? It seems to me that people can move to a larger house when their old one sells quickly.

When prices are falling, people must stay put for much longer. Even if they want to buy a bigger but cheaper foreclosure they cannot, because the sale of their old house won't even cover what they owe on the mortgage.

What are your thoughts Hobbson?

It seems to me that people can move to a larger house when their old one sells quickly.

It is easier to move up when

1. there is significant price compression
2. the move-up house is priced above the said compression, and
3. credit is easy and cheap

does anyone here own mexican real estate?

only if they live in california, texas or new mexico...

Anybody realize that their rent is actually paid with after tax dollars?

So, in essence, your real rent is about 1.4X what you’re paying now to get your gross rent wherease homeowners have their interest and their profits subsidized by the gov’t?

My rent 2K, 2K X 1.4 = 2800, house is "worth" ~850K, just the fucking mortgage payment is > 5K, not including insurance, property tax, maintainence etc. So tell me you small dick maggot fucking troll, why the fuck would I buy? Oh, yeah, I forgot so i can flip the house in 2 years because it only goes up. Hmmm, seems $anta Barbara is down 9.44% so far, and there are 44% more listings that this time last year. do me a favor you 5'3" piece of shit, go back to wishing your fucking big assed whore of a wife would put down the fucking ben & jerrys and turn american idol off so you take in her fat assed glory.

SX,

Wrong calculation. Only the interest & tax part of your house payment is sunk money. The principal payment should be treated as saving. Of course you should factor in the opportunity cost of the principal payment that you could've otherwise used in productive investments (i.e., CDs in Iceland just prior to the crash of Icelandic krona).

But, 850K x (6% mortgage interest + 1% real estate tax) = roughly 60K. Take away tax deduction. Your net payment is 42K. That's about 35K/year and 3K per month.

3K is still 50% more than 2K rent. Not worth it. Castrate that 5'3" guy's dick.

look, guys, we could actually start a joint effort site fairly cheaply that uses more sophisticated and still free blogging php software, i.e. one that includes a text editor toolbar, the ability to edit own posts, no posting problems, proper member profiles, a chatroom (god help us), etc. i've already had a discussion with patrick about that, and if he had more time he would look at it. there's no reason we can't put something together, and include patrick's links or similar.

e.g. http://www.phpbb.com/

i'd do it, except i'm trying to raise my own site in time for a state election, which i keep putting off...

oh shit… tammy bruce the lesbian republican is basically saying that WE ARE GOING INTO IRAN. Fuck that stupid bitch. I am sick of this stupid terrorist shit.

you should write to her and let her know... politicians are amazed when constituents actually write to them and engage in a democratic political process...

This Tammy chick looks quite masculine. I like her (as a person or a man).

It's funny. These days in Amerika, men look feminine and women look masculine.

Boy, ‘ol DS sure dont mind flapping his lips about America while swatting flies in rooville.

actually, aussies own about half of america right now... do a google search on 'what rupert murdoch owns' and look up frank lowy and westfield in wikipedia. that's right, the westfield shopping mall chain in NoCal and SoCal -- $42 bn in assets... owned by an aussie... and rupert murdoch own half your influential press and Fox, and makes and breaks govts on a whim...

and guess who leased out the WTC retail space 6 weeks before 9/11? westfield america...

all your base are belong to us....

it has nothing to do with the land, its the government’s fruits that they covet.

i bet if the mexicans realised what the gold and oil was worth in 1848 they would've put up more of a fight...

All your shopping mall and newspaper belong to us...

SQT Said:

I have a question for some of the other Patrick.net regulars. Am I wrong in being a little annoyed that Patrick now wants to charge for the housing article links?

But as one of the blog moderators, I spend easily as much time per day, checking in, clearing the spam from the moderation queue and watching threads when I have them. And now I’m thinking it’s not worth the effort if the guy who created the blog finds the task to onerous without pay.

I too had the exact same response. I can sort of understand Patrick charging readers or occasional posters, but thread moderators/authors? It's not as though we're getting compensated for our time (and drawing eyeballs with our brilliant topics & commentary :-) ). I don't mind donating considerable time because I thoroughly enjoy the debate and company here (and occasionally learn a useful thing or two), but now I've got to pay for links?? Hmmm...

FYI: Farm program pays people who don’t farm - Federal subsidies to owners of old, unused farmland top $1.3 billion

Your tax dollars at work... or non-work.

My favorite "money quotes":

"This was an unintended consequence of the farm bill," said former representative Charles W. Stenholm, the west Texas Democrat who was once the ranking member on the House Agriculture Committee. "Instead of maintaining a rice industry in Texas, we basically contributed to its demise."

"The original intent was to make a step in the direction of eliminating farm programs," said then-House Majority Leader Richard K. Armey (R-Tex.), who led an unsuccessful fight in the 1990s to trim the subsidies. "By 1998, there was no zeal left."

Instead of cutting, Congress ended up expanding the program, now known as direct and countercyclical payments. A program intended to cost $36 billion over seven years instead topped $54 billion.

I can sort of understand Patrick charging readers or occasional posters, but thread moderators/authors?

he will start MLM blogging next... woops, he already has :lol:

Shmend Rick Says:
http://rebubble.ning.com

that was quick, rick

build it and they will come...

HARM Says:
FYI: Farm program pays people who don’t farm - Federal subsidies to owners of old, unused farmland top $1.3 billion
Your tax dollars at work… or non-work.

the face of pure evil... CONSERVATIVE republican congressmen doling out upper class welfare and dispossessing tenant farmers... we need more CONSERVATIVES in power from top to bottom...

i didn't realise tammy bruce is just another ann coulter, except uglier... not even a politician, just another rupert murdoch stooge...

SQT Says:

"I have a question for some of the other Patrick.net regulars. Am I wrong in being a little annoyed that Patrick now wants to charge for the housing article links?"

Yes and no.

Yes, because he's built a great site and deserves as much $$$ as he can get.

No, because one of the things I liked about this site was checking out the daily articles with my coffee. I won't pay for them, though.

Just my two cents.

:o~~ The Mouse

surfer-x Says:

'My house is...“worth” ~850K...'
_____

Exactly!

Nice parenthesis around the word "worth."

Says so much with so little.

"Worth" my ass! Maybe in Monopoly money or bubble bucks.

I'd rather be a hedonist. If humanity is indeed doomed in its present incarnation, I might as well put off having kids and enjoy myself in the mean time.

Anyone here thought about the housing bubble as the outgrowth of the tech bust + outsourcing + threat of terrorism? I read Tulipmania a couple years back and I recall that book posits the tulip bubble and most other bubbles are accompanies by a sense of social upheaval and insecurity. Thus, the usual social norms and checks are suspended in favor of getting rich quick and the fear of being left behind.

At least the Dutch have a thriving flower bulb industry to show for their tulip bust. I wonder what positive contribution this housing bubble could have to American society.

SQT,

RE: The state of the blog here, a couple of observations and opinions I have...

* There are a huge number of new readers now that the housing bubble has gone mainstream. That has increased the normal: spam, trolls, newbie questions, etc.

* Arguing the existence of the housing bubble issue has become a bit of a non-issue, so now even the moderators/authors are find themselves at odds over the next level of detailed debate. Hard versus soft landing, liquidity versus inflation, urban planning versus exburbia, etc.

* Those issues used to be related to supporting theories about whether there was a housing bubble or not, and why one formed. Now they're about how to make a better future...a subject on which people will widely disagree.

* Most topics now quickly digress or go clearly off in the weeds after about 10 posts. That's not a big deal, it was always the case. But now the digressions all go to generally the same place: liberals-v-conservatives, people with issues-v-those they offend, anarchists, trolls, troublemakers, drunks-v-anyone left reading.

* The level of name calling, offensive generalizations, and just down right immature nastiness has exploded. I had been trying to get Dave Barry of the Open MLS initiative to write a guest piece here. He declined recently after reading the site and determining it wasn't worth his time. If a guy trying to break the Realtor(tm) cartel in CA cannot find it worthwhile to use Patrick.net to spread his message and campaign for his initiative, then there is a problem.

* Most of our long-time readers and contributors are either gone or rarely participate anymore.

My personal opinion is that Patrick.net now suffers from the fate of all lightly/unmoderated open forums once they get enough readers. The diversity which once created a lot of value has now degraded into name calling and shouting matches and escalating levels of bigotry. Most people have limited time and will eventually decide it's not worth while to spend it here. Call it the f@ckedcompany.com fate. That was once a very useful forum...until it went mainstream...it is now a wasteland.

astrid, i think the housing boom reflects a retreat from a shaky sharemarket where people realised they could do all their dough, they couldn't trust the system after enron etc, and that individual shares could lose all their value overnight... the security of bricks and mortar beckoned... and low interest rates... and spruikers pushing their $5 000 get rich quick courses -- and residential real estate is easy to understand, everyone lives in a house...

you're right, just as there are even now tulips in holland, i predict you will still find houses dotted around america in 100 years... ;)

DS,

Except that most people don't understand residential housing at all. They don't comprehend the nitty gritties of codes, taxing schemes, home owner association rules, school districts, mortgages, debt collections, etc. Unlike stocks and bonds, there is virtually no oversight over residential housing because it was not considered to be a financial instrument.

Furthermore, one of the major points of the current boom, and one frequently noted by DinOR, is that houses built today are of a terrible and will not last 100 years and are pretty terrible living spaces.

SR,

I do disagree with the Democratic party's stand on illegal immigration and tons of other things. However, I disagree with the Republicans on even more things. Furthermore, the Republicans are indeed the ones in control of all three branches of government, if they wanted to act, they had the last 6 years to do so. Instead of doing a good job, the Republican leadership has created demonized "lib" strawmen to distract its followers from their terrible record.

So you can vote Democrats (as I do, because I firmly believe it is the much less bad option) or you can vote independent, but I really do believe that anyone who still supports Republican national leadership is not politically teachable. That is, they care more about finding a scapegoat (me) than finding a government that will make their life better.

yeah, agreed to all that. i don't know if they sit down and spreadsheet all the ongoing costs, despite the fact they are treating it like 'a business' or investment. the spruiker at the $5 000 course didn't tell them about any of that. there's no doubt money can be made in holding property, lots of people have done it historically, but the market will saturate before too long, and it's fundamentally exploitative of a pool of renters. some of them will be burnt, some of them may be lucky or chose well. all of them think they are setting themselves up for retirement.

re shoddy construction, although it's really land speculation vs the cost of the actual construction on the land (backed by rents to be gathered), it starts to smack of the stratospheric P/E ratios we've seen elsewhere... that's irrational exuberance for ya....