patrick.net

Randy,

I also do not like any arguments based on "it's different this time". But was there any previous credit bubble ? What happened at that time ?

If there was no such credit bubble, then isn't it really different this time ? There is a first time for everything/ And every first time is "different", as it has no precedent.

y = c1x1 + c2x2 + c3x3 + … + cixi + err

What are c1, c2, c3 and cixi or should I bother to ask? C1x1 will always be C1 so the first constant is redundant.

All I know is that if money is tight (such as during a recession) and I'm renting an apartment for let's say $1500/month, and the exact same apartment right next door has been vacant for several months and the landlords is crying, "please, please rent my apartment, I beg you. I am going to lose everything, I will give you the apartment for $1200/month". I know that I'm not even going to have to think a second about taking him up on that offer. Eventually, my previous landlord is going to be begging someone to take up at least some of his slack and that will only happen by being competitive and lowering his price until equalibrium is reached which usually results in some landlords losing the property because they can't lower there price anymore and still afford to keep the property, yet can't get someone to rent it because there is a cheaper unit available.

Look at what happened just a few years ago when people were buying up houses left and right. The landlords were lowering their rent and offering incentives such as 3 months free rent and a free laptop computer, free cable, etc. This is a direct result of supply vs. demand as many renters became owners (actually ownees) and fewer people rented pushing up supply. It will happen again when the recession hits and people share rooms and stuff like I mentioned above.

allah,

I don't disagree with your qualitative observations. And they are relevant. They just have to be considered along with quantitative and fundamental aspects. Otherwise they are just anecdotes.

What are c1, c2, c3 and cixi or should I bother to ask? C1x1 will always be C1 so the first constant is redundant.

The "1" "2" "3" etc. are subscripts denoting sequence.

First Constant * First Ind. Var + Second Const * Second Ind. Var and so on.

Another factor is the McMansions that people wanted but now seem to have realized that they weren't such a good idea and now cannot sell them.

I am guessing that some of them will be converted into multi-family housing thus increasing the rental supply side since noone wants to live in them.

Random1,

We at Patrick.net welcome contrarian or unconventional views as long as they're presented without inflammatory racial or sexist slurs, or gratuitous insults. We are not the P.C. police and do not censor unpopular views that are presented in a mature, reasonable manner and provide some evidence/data to back them up.

I can and will remove those posts that I deem inflammatory and/or baseless, in order to prevent flame wars from developing, which tends to drive away quality posters.

If you have something important to say about the racial/demographic makeup of Oakland and how this has or has not contributed to the local crime rate, please feel free to re-state your position in a mature tone, and then present some data to back it up. Thanks.

IMHO, this is housing crash related. Posting today’s SJMN news article …

Killings ripple across much of Bay Area

hmmm, only inasmuch as failing to provide a social guarantee of affordable housing will produce anomie. could just be a cultural swing in MO for gangstas. these guys are certainly not middle class struggling with mortgages or high asking prices... altho maybe disposable income is lower so nobody's buying drugs and they're getting frustrated ;)

this plan calls for bringing in family members and giving them strongly worded warnings as well

right, like 'please ask your son to stop killing people, it's against city ordnance'. i like how they propose to locate and follow exactly 100 violent people as the solution -- i would have thought actually investigating crime scenes and arresting people who kill people would maybe be a good thing...

Randy,

I think a stagflation scenario would depress rent prices. First by depressing demand - stagflation mean people making the same wages but have everything they need go up in price = less money for housing. Stagflation also increases supply by forcing many home owners to let out rooms and basements to make ends meet.

If you want to talk high inflation (above 20% a year) then we're in a whole other ballpark. But if that situation ever occurs (and I certainly hope it does not) periods, then I agree with you. But in that case, we should have plenty of warning and pick up some good deals off of the ARMed FB carcasses.

Can I ask, if you get a FRM in the US for 30 years at, say, 5%, does that rate get reviewed over time, e.g. after 3 or 5 years, or are you guaranteed 5% for 30 years?

littleworried,

If a $150/month rent rise (which may be technically impossible in CA to start with) is enough to get you to buy and double your costs. Then why don't you do us a favor and go do that. I for one can do without the internal monologue of an illogical troll.

As a Maltusian of some sort, I must oppose any quantitative (as opposed to qualitative) immigration scheme to support an economy. That just smells like a pyramid scheme.

I will reconsider this position when someone figures out a way to turn us into energy beings living in cities powered by a couple duracell batteries.

Or at least cracked cold fusion and built economically viable floating cities in the sky/ocean...

Some parents in China would happily give their lives if that would help establish their kids into a prosperous life.

hmmm, isn't that logic a bit off?

1) i don't think it would be a prosperous life, it would be a one-off sale with quickly spent proceeds.
2) do parents really value their kids lives more than their own? how will the kids survive if they lose a parent if life is really that hard? surely the logic defies itself.
3) the law recognises every individual's right to safety and security of person, and the recognition of personhood -- this would completely usurp that. the whole legal and welfare framework, in the west at least, revolves around it.
4) it would be too tempting to murder strangers or other people to sell to body part sellers, thus starting a kind of thuggi movement in various areas -- thus reducing everyone's safety and undermining the social fabric entirely.
5) some Indian villagers are known to have donated a kidney, and limp along for the rest of their lives without one -- and are run-down and sick from that point on, making them less able to cope with what is already a difficult life.
6) a national economic system in a state of surplus should be able to provide adequately for all who want to participate without resorting to suicide/murder or lifelong incapacitation. the communist dream, in particular, should be more inclined to this view than the capitalist one.
7) apart from the low ethics of the act -- regardless of one's wealth, becoming ill and needing an organ transplant is an act of nature and is just fate and bad luck, paying for organs is a deliberate wilful social choice with all its attendant implications of right and wrong, and needs to be judged accordingly...

I must oppose any quantitative (as opposed to qualitative) immigration scheme to support an economy. That just smells like a pyramid scheme.

this is exactly what 'property councils' want -- they want to prop up their members' property values by immigration if necessary -- anything to keep that property value growth alive -- and they lobby govts for it. they just assume that the immigrants will get jobs in the economy, and they will need to rent of course -- price fixing will ensure they will never be able to afford to buy... talk about vested interests...

DS,

Oz doesn't have our 30-year product, which guarantees a rate for the course of 30 years regardless of what happens. As far as I know, you guys have something like 5-year fixed or 10-year to the most, but majority of the mortgage taken out in Oz is floated with the cash rate.

thanks, OO

yeah, they wll review the rate after 3 or 5 years, as the banks don't want to get locked into a low interest loan for 30 years, they wouldn't be able to milk you then -- in effect, a FRM mortgage here is like a slow-motion ARM...

allah
Nice link. Thanks.

agreed. if 2 doctors can't afford a single mortgage, what chance is there? now they're apparently running with 2 mortgages -- must be renting the mcmansion out...

there are environmental benefits to occupying smaller houses also, being reduced power/heating /cooling usage in particular.

plus, there was the case of the michael peterson who was convicted of killing his wife in order to retain his 11,000 sq ft place (which she was doing the lion's share of paying off) and paying off credit card debt with a $1.4 M insurance payout - not the best link, but nevertheless:
http://www.peterson-staircase.com/financial_fire.html

astrid Says:

As a Maltusian of some sort, I must oppose any quantitative (as opposed to qualitative) immigration scheme to support an economy. That just smells like a pyramid scheme.

First of all, I have serious doubts about the so-called qualitative immigration. If the quality you refer to is the level of schooling, I'd say the US has been doing extremely well with regard to immigration. We don't need many highly schooled and pompous asses.

Those illegals who are daring enough to seek a better life in US, despite all kinds of risks and adversities, are far worthier than those better schooled or moderately-moneyed smart-asses who are good at taking office jobs but have contribute nothing of greatness to this country. BTW, I am one of those second type, but not smart enough to call myself a smart ass.

Secondly, Astrid, whether you like it or not, these (illegal)immigrants will still arrive en masse. Within 50 years, there will be a hispanic president in US of A. Hispanics are already re-shaping the US pop culture. Sure, the Blacks have done so. But they, as a group, have never capitalized on their cultural domination to win true political power. Hispanics may fare completely differently.

Highly talented people are to be recruited. But they will come if (1) the country has economic might and (2) it is free of persecution. Fermi did some good work with the bomb, so did other imported European phycists. But native-born Americans also contributed their (probably significant) share to the making of the bomb. Other than that, I thought American power (over the rest of the world) was established long before these great European intellectuals arrived.

She can always fool some people. This is the downside of a free market.

I guess that’s what happens when you’re scared.

I guess it's also what happens when you live in an unreflective capitalist market economy where acquisition and profit-taking are held up to be the only worthwhile human value...

Littleworried Says:

"...I believe we are in the middle of big housing bubble and I believe that home values might go down as much as 50% in bay area..."
_____

I'm down with that, bro. I'm down with it. You're cool bro. You coo...

Here, here's a Corona (hands Littleworried a cookie and Corona and pats him on the head).
_____

stcamp Says:

"...The 70’s..it was were it was happening LA - the Whiskey and smoking J’s inside at our table…Returned in 2000 and the grafiti and ugliness was a everywhere…thats all gone and will never come back...Someone said we are driving around trying to find it. No. just the white folks are..no one else got a taste..."
_____

You forgot the Zep.

"...Just the white folks?"

WTF?

I think "the Whiskey and smoking J’s" put the zap on your Boomer head.

Who in their right mind would believe someone that says things along the lines of waiting out the market until a currently listed $750,000 place becomes $550,000? If you believe that you are delusional. That is like believing gas prices will get back to $1/gallon, and Coca Cola will be 10 cents again. Ain’t gonna happen. Life, in general, is and will continue to be more expensive, and real estate is a fact of life.”

They need to publish "Inflation for Dummies", or maybe just require aspiring real estate agents/brokers to take a community college Econ 050 remedial course.

There are so many things wrong with her reasoning that I get a headache even thinking about a refutation.

Now I understand.

http://www.hill-co.com/about/detail.php?aUID=178

Inflation, Rent Increases, Wages, and Stagflation

Modeled from empirical studies of the 1970s stagflationary cycles [Mankiw]:

Wages, like rent, will tend to rise with the progress of inflation and population, even while profits, growth and wealth are falling. However, the prices of subsistence items will tend to increase even faster. Whereas landlords benefit under such circumstances by rent increases that outrun cost increases, labor falls behind.

Rent levels are the largest component of broad-based consumer inflation, and it is considered a leading not a lagging indicator. During both stagflationary cycles rent increased faster than operating costs for landlords. This is of particular note because the two cycles were distinctly different from one another in terms of housing prices, mortgage rates, and the depth of labor-recession.

The surprise would be if this time rents fail to increase or even fall. No one should be surprised or alarmed as rents rise. This is a case where macroeconomic factors -- namely inflationary pressure -- overtakes local market microeconomic factors such as simple supply and demand.

Inflation is cruel and always misread by the general population. Stagflation is even more cruel, but it at least has the saving grace of irritating the electorate. If stagflation starts up, the media will eventually begin broadcasting that fact. It won't be long before the voting public forms lynch mobs.

[Paraphrased from Mankiw, Easterley, and King]

DS,

"Some parents in China would happily give their lives if that would help establish their kids into a prosperous life.

hmmm, isn’t that logic a bit off?"

Their's or mine? Mine are based on quite a bit of first hand observation, a fairly in-depth understanding of Chinese culture and supported from observations of academic researchers who worked exclusively or extensively in China. Unless stated otherwise (like "my mom's friend said "XYZ"), that is how I arrive at most of my seemingly general comments on China.

DS, I've said this time and again, but your discussion format is just scatterbrained and extremely frustrating, since you usually ignore or go completely tangential on other people's initial comments and replies to you.

Furthermore, it gets get a bit insulting for me to have you constantly lecture down to me. I know this stuff very well, I know it on conceptual and everyday levels. While my knowledge is by no means perfect, I'd rather have on-point observations than have you throw back a lot of stuff that have very little to do with my original point.

Having said that, I will answer your first set of questions.

(1) I didn't say organ sale would be a road to the children's prosperous life. Note that I said "lives" and organ sale is usually not a life or death situation. Furthermore, what do you know about the home economy of rural peasants? I can say that many of the peasants do renumerate much of their income towards very constructive purposes, like educating their kids, building family homes, paying for weddings and funerals, and building businesses. (If you want to see how ignorant certain peasants are and how callously their lives have been treated, I suggest you check out the phenomena of tainted needles during blood sales and HIV.)

(2) If you'd talked to people, either in urban or rural China, you will find that many (I never said all, in fact, I said explicitly "some") do. Families have fled their villages to move to harsh hinterlands to evade the birth control police and have extra children. I personally know urban parents who've spent every dime of their savings (equal to 10 years of wages) and sold their family homes just to send their kids to university in China or abroad. Furthermore, such instincts should not be alien to anyone in any society. Haven't you ever seen people dying to defend the rest of their family? Is that sentiment really so hard to comprehend? Especially when you consider (if you were paying attention to OO and GC and my own comments on this board) how family lineal based traditional Chinese society is? One of the most famous of the ancient sage teachings says "there are three unfilial acts, of which being heirless is the greatest."

(3) Huh? I was commenting on the people's mental state. I'm sorry if you did not catch that. The comment was not a direct comment on the running of Chinese society.

(4) I wasn't commenting on the organ trade. Furthermore, while I support a strongly supervised and fair organ market (which would take out the blackmarket on such things), I would be much more troubled by any market without such legal protections.

(5) Organ selling (I don't know where you get the idea that those Indian villagers donated their kidneys. Since their friends and family are too poor to have such operations, those "donations" are almost certainly sales) is dangerous. But so is being run off one's land for failure to pay taxes and so is having children be forced to live a subsistance life because the parents can't afford their tuitions, so (in their mind) is being too poor to marry and continue the family line. These people aren't going in with the alternatives of carefree hippy lives, it's always a life or death set of choices confronting them.

6) And of course, you're totally ignoring the horrendous man made disaster of the Great Leap Forward famines, which was precisely due to push China quickly into a forward phase of Communism. We've had this discussion several times already, in great detail. Conceptually pure Communism goes against human instincts and is destined to fail.

7) "regardless of one’s wealth, becoming ill and needing an organ transplant is an act of nature and is just fate and bad luck"

That's pretty fatalistic, isn't it? Can't that logically be applied to the other sick people or to poor people or to the mentally retarded or the heroin addicts?

Actually, I'm not sure what you're saying in this comment. Are you impugning that an organ market is inherently evil? Or that people who participate in an illegal organ market in defiance of a Judeo-Christian system of morality inherently evil?

---> Please don't bother to reply unless you are going to answer the questions I directly posed at you. If your reply turn out to be another rambling bunch of tangential points, I will not reply and your reply will be taken as further proof of what I said about you in my 2nd and 3rd paragraph.

GC,

I can't refute your arguments per se. I guess it goes more into my wishful thinking about negative population growth. I just hate policies predicated on population growth, because I think we're already on the outer bounds of what this planet can hold comfortably and I don't like overpopulation --> genocidal war path that most of history has taken.

As for the qualitative argument. I suppose a strong case can be made that I'm no more useful (that can be said of most people in the legal and consulting professions, as well as realtors and mortgage brokers and sales people and HR and account managers and so on) than a barely English speaking Hispanic pool boy. However, modern technology can make much of the low paying low skill jobs disappear, if these people leave the population. So I'd contend that their leaving would not be as devastating for the US as many have supposed. Further, the "qualitatively" better people would likely have better educated kids - some of whom might indeed be great and most of whom will be able to stay off of welfare.

SFWoman,

That realtor sounds like another person who doesn't understand inflation or indexing purchasing power of current wages. Oh yes, and no awareness of history or news. The RE markets of Japan, Hong Kong, SE Asia, NY AND LA all comes to mind to refute her "never gonna happen" assertion.

Randy,

In case of inflation, I do agree that house prices can go up. However, in the current market - loaded up with ARMed and overburdened FBs, these people will be pushed into default by the high interest rates and tightening lending standards of a high inflation economy before they'll be rescued by higher wages (which lags inflation). Thus, in case of true inflation, there should be a good window of opportunity for picking these carcasses for those ready to buy.

My refutation to stagflation --> higher rents/house prices is the industrial midwest. The wages have been stagnant there while commodities inflation has dropped their real wages. Housing prices there have been stagnant since the 70s.

I took Mankiw's statement to mean that landlords, who have high fixed capital costs but low running costs, will benefit from inflation. That seems almost tautological. The landlords essentially locked up a low interest rate to finance their rental property and reap the benefits of the difference between the real r and their r. Furthermore, high inflation/high interest rates tends to push out potential buyers and force them to rent, once more to the landlord's benefit. If I could borrow money at a low fixed interest rate and use it to buy commodities futures immediately, I would also be more than likely to make money when inflation zooms up.

astrid,

are you talking about organ harvesting from people who've died of natural causes? as in the thing you sign on your driver's license? not sure what your original post was about then. some indian villagers have sold 1 kidney while they're still alive to Westerners yes, for the money. the other points I was making were concerning a 'black market' in organ provision, which are not rambling or tangentail in that context.

Yup. I wish Westerners were less hung up on bio-ethics and Judeo-Christian ideals about what’s acceptable and what is not. Homo economicus is ruled to be unethical by people who have a 2000 year old value system that they’re constantly reinterpreting for the sake of political expediency.

I actually like the idea of a limited organ market. Properly overseen, there’s virtually no downside for any of the players involved. Some parents in China would happily give their lives if that would help establish their kids into a prosperous life.

given the above comments, and the fact that the preceding thread was discussing selling 1 kidney to a stranger and making do with 1 solely for money, what are you saying about 'parents in china would happily give their lives'? given that the sentiment, meaning and ethics are rambling all over the place in that lot, i think my comments were remarkably focused, addressing why a supposed '2000 years of judaeo-christian ethics' might actually be a good thing... if the parents giving their lives is a simple over-statement for effect, there is still the question of making people do with 1 kidney for life when they need 2. 'pure Communism' etc as we've disucssed has nothing to do with the totalitarianism of china, and there's real doubt and greyness over what a 'pure communist' system should look like, vs a market-based social democracy, etc. hopefully 'cia lis' doesn't appear anywhere in that lot...

SQT Says:
DS
Have you ever lived in the U.S.? You make so many assumptions about us and what we value that I would like to know what your experience is.

by international comparison, americans often come across as braggarts in speech, and overweening moralists in tone. as per the 'travel tips' that had to be put out saying 'you can think big, but talk small when you're O/S. foreigners don't like to hear about your unlimited wealth and power.' apart from some american relatives, whose letters always say how 'blessed' they are, i'm just used to hearing US tourists walking around bellowing 'HEY HONEY, I HAVE TO GO TO THE CAN! DO YOU KNOW WHERE THE CAN IS?' and remember pausing outside a Buddhist temple once wondering whether it's appropriate to just walk in, to have an American say 'I don't see any signs saying not to' and barging on in anyway, and such respect for local customs... apart from saturation TV content, Internet content, and US news feeds to also gain an impression... but this is not an atypical anglo-australian view of the US...

DS,

See reply to point #4 and my original comment. I support an organ market that is properly overseen to ensure fairness. I'm ambivalent about live organ markets because the great temptation for abuse and the high level of potential harm to the organ seller. However, our society has allowed live organ donors for kidney and liver, even though there are risk factors and the potential for under-the-table financial exchanges and coercions.

Please let me know how your advocacy of Judeo-Christian ethics, without consideration for and knowledge about the non-Judeo-Christian societies (such as India and China), does not constitute cultural imperialism. You're assuming an inherent superiority for a set of ethics developed away from China over the native ethics system. Ditto your Aussie take on the US situation. While posters like ahj and tsusiat often posts valid and well informed critique about the US situation, you're the one who is constantly telling us that you KNOW how US can be better runned.

Thirdly, I don't know what your concept of pure Communism is... Could you define it please? If it's just an impossible to achieve ideal then its rubbish and ought not be brought up in discussion as a counterpoint to other realistic (but imperfect) solutions.

Do you know anything about the CCP's innovations for the Great Leap Forward? That was when ownership was fully abolished and people were told to gather up their resources, in return they were told to take as much as they need from the Commune. GLF was greeted with general enthusiasm by the populace (the de-Kulakization and parceling out of land in China happened before GLF, and was largely over by 1957). But it failed, people didn't produce enough when they were to just contribute as much as they're willing, and they used too much and didn't conserve, and they took radical measures (like going against traditional agarian calendar/techniques and pushing radical untested techniques that failed), all in the name of fairness, freedom from oppression, sharing of resources, innovation, progress, etc. As far as I know, that is the high point of true Communism, relatively humanely and effectively (so far as implementation of the actions) done. And it failed horribly!

DS,

Because all Americans are the same. 300 million plus Americans, with all kinds of backgrounds and all kinds of belief system, with political and social dynamics that vary hugely region by region, with economic situations that even the experts on America (foreign and domestic) are constantly going back and forth on -- and you decide to judge us all based on your observations of a couple tourist (BTW, Buddhist monasteries are walk-ins, they're not like churches with a regular body of attendants) and your religious relations?

It doesn't matter how you view us, that doesn't mean your view is sufficient to form an informed judgment about Americans, anymore than Americans witnesses some radical Muslims committing terrorism is able to make informed decisions can make decisions about the best government for Iraq or Iran.

BTW, Buddhist monasteries are walk-ins, they’re not like churches with a regular body of attendants

yes, you know that, but the white american with the camera visiting HK didn't.

it's more than enough that i get news feeds from speeches by george dubya and condi rice...

my best mate in australia was from LA, in fact, but he preferred the lifestyle in oz to the US, as it was generally easier and more 'real'. compared to australians, he was always frantically rushing around, altho not always in the most productive way. he was also fatalistic, etc.

i've worked with other americans, they're a bit too dogmatic and black-and-white thinking for my liking, and i think that's where a lot of your foreign relations problems come from. i'm also a sociologist, so observing cultures and their quirks comes fairly easily to me.

every country has its pros and cons, i prefer england to australia, except for the weather. my orderred choice of preferred english-speaking countries to live and work would be UK, oz, US, but i would be happier working in france or germany or elsewhere in europe before US and oz, in all honesty.

While posters like ahj and tsusiat often posts valid and well informed critique about the US situation, you’re the one who is constantly telling us that you KNOW how US can be better runned.

they seem much the same to me, i think you're just having a go for the sake of it. i suppose i have views on gun control and a number of other social issues, but that's my training as a sociologist and work as an activist. i have views on how a whole lot of things can be better runned in the laissez-faire anglo-american economies, and i haven't shrunk from posting them here.

astrid, i can't address all the longer posts above, there's too many points, and not enough time or space in this forum, along with the appropriateness of the digression.

i'm familiar with the problems with the great leap forward, etc, there's just no space to go into why errors the CCP have made and dodgy ethics in the USSR and PRC in general don't make 'pure communism' impossible and don't live up to the ideals of marxist or indeed anarchist communism. many ordinary americans in fact unwittingly subscribe to a form of anarchist communism in their world view, including many libertarians. so could debate philosophy forever. just on definitions alone, the very notion of describing something as 'pure communism' when in fact it's a cluster of ideas to address the problems of 19th C. capitalism shows some rigidity of thinking and an unreflexive and unworkable 'modernist' framework of thought and analysis.

in the meantime, i have to write 800 words on the housing affordability crisis for publication, and have a series of meetings this week with an expert group and finally the state minister for planning on reuse of an industrial site -- and further meetings on crime and public transport solutions. so, sorry about that...

discussing the ethics of organ harvesting will have to remain for another time. i don't think they should be 'sold' in a 'market'. many live donors are often very near relatives making a willing sacrifice. others have indicated harvesting is OK on their accidental death. the ethics of bribing someone to make their health worse and bodies incomplete in other countries for money makes no ethical sense. there are still problems with organ rejection which make organ transplantation less than wholly desirable as a medical intervention. sometimes you just have to take what nature deals you when it comes to personal health until such time as we can ethically generate organs from DNA, etc. did anyone say 'stem cells'?

Astrid,

My refutation to stagflation –> higher rents/house prices is the industrial midwest. The wages have been stagnant there while commodities inflation has dropped their real wages. Housing prices there have been stagnant since the 70s.

Real rent prices have risen in the Midwest since the 1970s, and rose sharply during the stagflationary cycles. In the upper midwestern rustbelt, what has given way is the standard of living due to stagnant and shrinking real incomes, not stagnant or real shrinking prices. This is largely why home ownership has been a financial advantage in the Midwest for so long: it has been a strong inflation shield of those who were able to keep up with their fixed mortgage payments. This also kept real prices of homes from inflating too much in most areas.

I am primarily refuting the suggestion that rents won't rise but actually fall this time. That would be an extraordinary event and essentially break all the rules ... that is unless we enter another Great Depression. For everything to fall as some seem to insist, there would be no inflation, but general deflation. In that case, all bets are off.

HARM,

Thanks for having the maturity and patience to deal with a baseless and ignorant claim. To say that patrick.net goes back to 1995 is to imply that we "invented the information super highway" to dissuade would be "homeowners" from their rightful California Real Estate Lottery ticket!

Additionally to say that you bought a house/stock/pork bellies etc. at multiple entry points over a decade and a half and then flaunt your profitability is just that much more ignorant. It's called "dollar cost averaging" and no, "buddy puddy surfer" you did not invent it! This "concept" pre-dates clay tablets. If you throw enough crap against the wall, some of it is going to start sticking. Don't be sore! Buy some more! Dollar cost averaging (while effective in say owning company stock over the course of a CAREER) is a great way to get fired and draw unwanted scrutiny upon your head in my business. "If you liked the stock at $40 a share you're going to LOVE it at $10! When people do this to themselves it's considered "smart investing". When I do it to YOU I'm a j@goff! Basically you're saying, I can't properly estimate fair market value, have no IDEA what I'm doing so I just keep buying! In the case of real estate you keep buying with borrowed money! For someone that works the 3rd shift at a turkey processing plant, this is a great strategy.

george, send it to my address,which you can get by clicking my name. i'll put it on my blog and send you the URL

The current sentiment is 20% chance of rate hike, so they are definitely full of it.

George,

I have a buddy that worked as a mortgage broker and he said the "leads" from these guys were an absolute joke! They re-sell the list time after time! He would get responses like, "I just went to their stupid web-site once b/c I was shopping for rates and I must have gotten calls from 20 of you guys"!

Yet another shining example of "ethics" from these "internet based" companies! Their "economist" is a joke too. All during the "re-fi frenzy" he was ejagulating all over himself. I can't wait to see these a$$clowns take it dead in ying yang!

Remember all of their "ETradesque" commercials? The ones with the FB couple lounging around their house eating ice cream and having impeccably attired "bankers" falling all over themselves to get them the lowest rate and best possible deal?

As this thing continues to evaporate MB's will pay more for leads initially but further on into an extended drought advertising budgets will dry up and Spendingtree.com will become another domain name for sale. Have fun squinting, wincing and mumbling "ouch" fellas!

Wow.. Lots of people jumping in on this one.
As far as the " view" of California as seen through the lens of a hollywood camera, I never looked at California as a place that was accuratly depicted by the media.Prior to moving here, I didn't think much about the way people lived in California. I figured they lived about the same way as I did. There would be rich people, poor people, and lots of average everyday Joes. I expected there would be a wide range of creative people like myself- more so than back home. Even so, I was surprised at what the state of the area really was like.
What I did find was that people live lives with entirely diffrent views on what most of us in other parts of the country consider the basic essentials. Housing of course is a MAJOR issue to longterm residents. A house here is what gives a person status. The younger you are, the less likely you are to own. A person in their 30's who owns in Cali is a rarity. I thought that was pretty interesting since most people back home go to college, get a job, get married, go to church, buy a house... simple. easy. done.
So in the spirit of this topic, I'll agree that the cost of housing has caused the deterioration of the middle class. At the same time it has been a benefit to the upper classes. They get to " clean up" the poor impoverished areas by gentrifying neighborhood after neighborhood. They ruin entire towns like Nevada City, Grass Valley, Marin, and a hundred other small places by turning them into little rich person getaways full of candle, paintings, and expensive cheese shops. That aspect alone disgusts me because it displaces the very people that made that town what it was.These people that take over simply move and and make-believe that they too are really part of the town.let me get this straight... people that cleaned sardines in Monterey drove Bimmers?

I'm to the point now where I'll take a Wal-Mart anyday to some damned richperson hovel. The point I am making is that I feel uncomfortable being in wealthy areas and these former towns that housed working Joes and people that cared about their community. To me, feeling out of place is what makes me dislike this state more and more. I can also see right through the veiled lies that they have become.
At least where I'm moving to, there are more people like me. Interesting people with a million diffrent stories to tell and places they've been. People that go to chuch, people that don't go to church. People that eat Japanese food. People that eat hamburgers.
"regular" people in the sense that people that have a decent job, aren't absolutly loaded, or come from some euro-pedigreed family simply don't exsist here anymore. At least there aren't any that are having an easy time of it. I see a sea of unhappiness all around.
As the weeks have passed and I check out sites pertaining to TN, GA, NC.. these states I'm picking to move to, I see literally hundreds of posts on Craigslist sites in these cities of people asking questions like: " I'm a native californian moving to Asheville.... what's it like?" I find this funny because while the country gets a healthy dose of california crammed down it's throat every day on the TV, most people moving out of here because they can't afford it know NOTHING about these other regions, which speaks volumes. It also scares me because if that's the way they think, then they'll probably try to import their california habits- house mongering included- with them.