patrick.net

Bap33 says

the whole push for a “rapid rail” to the illegal-immigrant-full central valley is one way to avoid in-fill of the same service workers in the actual bay area area. If those that pull the strings of life get to put in that rapid transport system it will only result in the valley being the crime ridden center of all things , while the Bayarians retain all of their wealth and comfort.

Bap,
can you say, NIMBY?

Bap33 says

I would add is the whole push for a “rapid rail” to the illegal-immigrant-full central valley is one way to avoid in-fill

Not if a train ticket costs $50 one way.

good point. Maybe the business owners will pay a fee to the train for worker passes? No cash transactions, seen as a taxible benifit to the worker .... hmmm... another "company store" deal ?

I'll go ahead and drop my 2 cents in here... Listings have almost doubled in my local (Monterey) area in the past 3-4 months. Price cuts across the board - although not as drastic, they still seem to be falling again since tax credit expired.

Visited my family on the east coast this past week - been monitoring 3 subdivisions since 2008:

Neighborhood #1) $450k - Now $335k
Neighborhood #2) $330k - Now $190k
Neighborhood #3) $280k - Now $150k

While the prices above are just averages - all the floorplans have stayed the same, so what you got in 2008, should be pretty close to what you get now.. I think some of the lower end are near bottom - funny though because some of the existing homes are priced much higher than the newer stuff.

Troy says

His administration was pretty disastrous, really. Tripling the national debt was one thing, and much of that money just went into militarism instead of actual societal investments with long-term payoffs.

One slight, little, insignificant (to liberals that is) dividend to all that was the collapse of the USSR. Oh, I forgot. Liberals never give any credit to Reagan because they loved the Soviet Union. They always said it wasn’t perfect. It just needed to be tweaked a little bit and they would have found Utopia.

Trade with Mexico : 1994 -- $1.3B surplus
Trade with Mexico : 2009 -- $47.7B deficit

clayfire23 says

Corntrollio,

It is folks like you that have never stepped out of the United States, or know nothing of what is happening in the rest of the world, or question the relevance of anything happening outside America, that is the biggest reason for the decline and self-destruction of our great country.

I can guarantee that I've been to India more times than you have. It simply is not as you say it is, and you are unable to provide median housing price statistics that I've asked for. I wonder why that is...

On average people make an incredibly low income in India, and it's only the ridiculously rich robber barons and the extremely rich ex-pats who would be buying the properties you're describing. No doubt India has gone through significant inflation which has raised the price of "normal" properties as well, but the average single family home is not worth anything close to what you're saying.

PolishKnight says

You do realize that you’re on the side of the crony capitalists and wall street, don’t you?

Now that's funny. Democrats are the party of crony capitalists and wall street? Did I read that correctly?

tatupu70 says

PolishKnight says

You do realize that you’re on the side of the crony capitalists and wall street, don’t you?

Now that’s funny. Democrats are the party of crony capitalists and wall street? Did I read that correctly?

I'd agree with that. To be complete though, it should be said that Republicans are the party of crony capitalists and wall street too. These banks give a few million to politicians and then reap billions in profits. Best investments ever.

tatupu70 says

Now that’s funny. Democrats are the party of crony capitalists and wall street? Did I read that correctly?

A sample of Obama’s contributors back in 2008. Note the number of banksters. GE is one of the largest defense contractors in the USA.
This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2008 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organization’s PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals’ immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.
Here’s just a few of the top donors:
Goldman Sachs $994,795
Microsoft Corp $833,617
Google Inc $803,436
Citigroup Inc $701,290
JPMorgan Chase & Co $695,132
Time Warner $590,084
UBS AG $543,219
Wilmerhale Llp $542,618
Skadden, Arps et al $530,839
IBM Corp $528,822
Morgan Stanley $514,881
General Electric $499,130

According to this site, "banksters" seem split their money pretty evenly when giving money to Dems and Repubs.

http://www.opensecrets.org/overview/topcontribs.php

ch_tah says

According to this site, “banksters” seem split their money pretty evenly when giving money to Dems and Repubs.

Money is the mother's milk for BOTH parties. I posted my information in order to dispel the common myth that liberals love to promulgate, which is that Democrats are above being bought by the big money players. Obama ran as a reform type "change" candidate. He has proven he is nothing other than another political hack just like the rest of them.

RayAmerica says

Money is the mother’s milk for BOTH parties. I posted my information in order to dispel the common myth that liberals love to promulgate, which is that Democrats are above being bought by the big money players. Obama ran as a reform type “change” candidate. He has proven he is nothing other than another political hack just like the rest of them

I agree that there's too much money in politics. That's the #1 problem with Washington.

But to the point. I look at actions. eg. From today's news:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Bank-of-America-posts-77B-apf-4096614857.html?x=0

"The new legislation that caused Bank of America to take the $10.4 billion charge limits fees banks can collect when merchants accept debit cards. BofA said that change would reduce future revenues in its card business."

Sounds like B of A definitely didn't get its money worth on their contributions, huh?

tatupu70 says

Sounds like B of A definitely didn’t get its money worth on their contributions, huh?

How much TARP money did BoA get? They (like other big banksters) didn't use TARP to "lend" money out into the market (as our lying politicians claimed) but instead used it to balance off their toxic loans that were on their books. So I guess they didn't do too awful bad now did they?

Duck .... did Obama & the Democrats vote for TARP .... or were did they vote against it (as you obviously think as you paddle around on Fantasy Pond)?

klarek says

Yes, you already said above: the evil Republicans TRICKED them into signing it.

LOL!

RayAmerica says

Sometimes I wish I could be more like you. It must be lots and lots of fun living in a fantasy world of make believe

Who is in the land of make believe exactly? Please find me any expert who believes TARP was not necessary.

tatupu70 says

Who is in the land of make believe exactly? Please find me any expert who believes TARP was not necessary.

Exactly. There really is a Wizzard of Ozz. All you need to do is "follow the yellow brick road."

RayAmerica says

tatupu70 says

Who is in the land of make believe exactly? Please find me any expert who believes TARP was not necessary.

Exactly. There really is a Wizzard of Ozz. All you need to do is “follow the yellow brick road.”

OK--you keep reading Mish and the shadowstats world....

Picture worth a thousand words...

In 2004 he said: "I believe that we, as the federal government, have probably done too little rather than too much to push them to meet the goals of affordable housing." He went further: "I would like to get Fannie and Freddie more deeply into helping low-income housing."

"I did. I saw them on TV," she said. But Barney Frank did not budge. He understood that a good offense is the best defense. He also understands that rewriting history this election year is his best bet for keeping his long political career alive.

thomas.wong1986 says

Picture worth a thousand words…

"If I only had a brain ......"

RayAmerica says

There really is a Wizzard of Ozz. All you need to do is “follow the yellow brick road.”

Tatupu70 asks: "What exactly is “fundamental” value of a house?"

VERY good question.

Let's start with the house itself. The fundamental value would begin with the root cost of labor and materials to actually build it When most people think of a "house", that is the basic thing that pops into their head and also what most people spend their time looking at.

Next, there's the old saying in real estate: location, location, location. This is referred to as the "land" value.

These are both listed in the county assessment public listings. Interestingly enough, the "land" value for my (rented) condo was 80% of the value with the land at 20%. That surely can't be correct since I know I can buy the same place for half that value about 30 miles out in the exoburbs. But it's the same materials and overall probably the same labor that built it.

Of course, these so-called fundamentas are subject to "market" conditions. The labor and land, especially, vary wildly by location while materials less so.

PolishKnight says

Next, there’s the old saying in real estate: location, location, location. This is referred to as the “land” value.

And where land values are low and inexpensive as was the case early on in Silicon Valley business and industry flurish providing income and robust growth to the population.

Housing prices crash and what happens next ? This...

Intel to spend up to $8B on US manufacturing
Intel spending up to $8 billion on US factories as it pushes chip industry's pace

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Intel-to-spend-up-to-8B-on-US-apf-2298150898.html?x=0

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Intel Corp. on Tuesday revealed the scope of its latest infusion to keep its factories cutting-edge and push the chip industry's pace: an investment of up to $8 billion to build a new factory in Oregon and upgrade four existing plants in Arizona and Oregon.

In all, the projects will create up to 8,000 temporary construction jobs and up to 1,000 permanent positions in Oregon when that factory opens in 2013.

Tatupu asks: "Now that’s funny. Democrats are the party of crony capitalists and wall street? Did I read that correctly?"

Answer to both questions: Yes. And it is funny as hell.

Is George Soros a Republican? How about Steve Jobs? Or Warren Buffet? Or Steven Spielberg? Wall street gives more money to the Democrats than the Republicans.

This is nothing new, really. Nobody, leftist or right wing, goes into politics to hang around with POOR people or to get connections with companies that won't pay their niece well. Bill Clinton didn't throw his daughter a multi-million dollar wedding because his speaking tours to big corporations (that just happen to get corperate welfare) flew them to their events economy class!

All leftism really is just a cheerleading section for a kind of Marxist priesthood and they're the altar boys getting molested. The working and middle class who've fled the socialist democrats are ahead of the curve. Unless you're gay or living in a limosine liberal bubble, that is.

Thomas.Wong observes: "SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Intel Corp. on Tuesday revealed the scope of its latest infusion to keep its factories cutting-edge and push the chip industry’s pace: an investment of up to $8 billion to build a new factory in Oregon and upgrade four existing plants in Arizona and Oregon."

There goes the neighborhood!

How many Oregonians does it take to change a lightbulb?

10. 1 to change it and 9 to keep those friggin' Californians from sharing the experience! :-)

PolishKnight says

Of course, these so-called fundamentas are subject to “market” conditions. The labor and land, especially, vary wildly by location while materials less so

That was kind of where I was going. It's really market driven. The house is worth what someone will pay for it. I don't see how "fundamentals" apply.

PolishKnight says

Is George Soros a Republican? How about Steve Jobs? Or Warren Buffet? Or Steven Spielberg? Wall street gives more money to the Democrats than the Republicans.

Is Steven Spielberg a crony capitalist? Does he work on Wall St.? How about Steve Jobs? It's a huge stretch to even portray Warren Buffet as such.

I'm just surprised that someone would seriously argue that the Democrats are the party of Wall St. I thought it was pretty well established that they were firmly Republicans...

Tatupu70 says: "I don’t see how “fundamentals” apply."

Fundamentals are the foundation of a cost beyond what "market" will drive them up from. A tulip costs about a buck to make. Speculation may drive it beyond that price, but the "fundamental" is that the tulip costs a buck.

Regarding crony capitalists. If Warren Buffet isn't a capitalist, who is? I'm amused at you saying "I thought it was pretty well established" So much for thinking for yourself and challenging the status quo, eh? See you in church! :-)

The FACTS is that Wall Street gives more money to Democrats than Republicans, it's democrats who support wall street bailouts more than Republicans (Reagan cut them off during the 80's!) and NYC overall is a leftist stronghold. At best, Wall Street are political moderates on fiscal matters and outright liberals on social ones. This goes even for the Wall Street Journal.

And it's reflected in the anemic sales of the NYT.

PolishKnight says

At best, Wall Street are political moderates on fiscal matters and outright liberals on social ones. This goes even for the Wall Street Journal.

Now you're being funny again. The Journal as a moderate on financial matters? Really?

Warren Buffet is a capitalist, of course. But he supports regulation of the financial markets, which sets him apart from what I would term the crony capitalists.

regarding fundamental home value.--so what is the fundamental cost of land? That's the crux of the issue.

tatupu70 says

so what is the fundamental cost of land?

The actual *cost* of land is unknown, since its Maker hasn't gotten around to invoicing us yet.

The inputs into the *value* of land are simply its zoning and its degree of access to positive externalities like parks, schools, medical care, shopping, and employment. Views, safety, and microclimate also enter what we are willing to pay, which theoretically is relative to the most crappy piece of land on the market -- every positive externality theoretically adds to the price.

The zoning serves as a multiplier, there was a nice 5 acre lot in NW Fresno that I had my eye on, it was big enough to put 100 garden apartment units on, but it was on the market for $1.6M since no way would that project get through planning. Without bribes at least.

http://www.homes.com/property/13565665/5690_N_Forkner_Ave-Fresno-CA-93711

Until we invent antigravity or teleportation devices to break the land monopoly, the value of any given parcel is largely driven by its location within a community and how well that community provides human services and jobs, and how much housing one is allowed to build on it.

PolishKnight says

Regarding crony capitalists. If Warren Buffet isn’t a capitalist, who is?

Confusion of terms. Not all capitalism is bad, or "crony". Warren Buffet deploys his money to find value where others don't, it borders on predatory capitalism but I think he stays on the OK side of that line since he doesn't force people to sell to him.

Crony capitalism can be defined as basically skimming the productive efforts of others through the leveraging of privilege and "guanxi". Steve Jobs and Spielberg do not fall into this category either, they made their billions the old-fashioned way, in the free market with superior consumer products.

Corntrollio,

It is only a few countries like the United States where every transaction is legal, made public and there is plenty of disclosure of "median" stats like income and home prices. Countries like India and China do NOT publish any kind of median price. Even median income is not disclosed. However, not publishing this data does not mean that we cannot estimate median income or median home prices. If you have really been to India or China, you should already know that.

Having said that, just calculating median home prices without considering the type of home, size, features is itself faulty. After all, there are plenty of trailer homes and manufactured homes available for anyone to purchase in America for less than USD 20,000.00. Should those be included in the median home price, since those are available for sale anyway? Is comparing a 4 BR 2000 sqft home with a nice lot and attached garage in America with a 2 BR 1000 sqft apartment in Beijing or Mumbai fair? That is what "median" price comparisons across places seem to do.

Next, how do you define your "prime" area or "city center"? If I give you a link to the high prices in the outskirts of Mumbai, you may still claim that it is the "city center", and say that a high price is justified. What areas constitute "prime" in Los Angeles, San Francisco or New York? In any case, just look up Mumbai or Beijing or other Indian and Chinese metros on Google Maps, then find your own reasonable non-prime area, and then look up that area on that city's CraigsList. Look for apartments and land/single family residences. Here is an example. In the suburb of Andheri in Mumbai, a 600 sqft, 20 year old 14th floor apartment is selling for close to USD 200,000.00 : http://mumbai.craigslist.co.in/reb/2001803047.html . Or this one in the suburb of Goregaon, for close to USD 500,000.00. You will find plenty of such examples. Good luck finding a private single family home cheaper than a few million USD.
Again, do this for Beijing, Shanghai, whatever.

You and I made similar observations though. If you read all my previous posts, I have repeatedly called the prices in India and China the most ABSURD bubbles in the world. Even before you said it, I already have stated that majority of the local population in the metros of these countries has no hope whatsoever of buying even an apartment and so live in slums on illegal land, in makeshift tents. Affordability is almost non-existent, and yet prices have been doubling in India and China every 2 to 3 years. Like you, I am also astounded at the prices in these places, and wonder how this is even possible. However, this impossibly ABSURD ponzi game has been going on for 20-30 years, and shows no signs of stopping. Folks that have bought anything in the last 20-30 years are now extremely affluent, and even folks who bought recently are still sitting on huge gains. If the expectation is that prices will always go up double digits every year, the upper class and the upper middle class speculates and rides this ponzi game all the way and gets richer and richer with every flipped apartment.

Link to the one in Goregaon that I referenced above : http://mumbai.craigslist.co.in/reb/1993305226.html

"Corntrollio" ... sorry, but that name made me laugh alot ... I can just see Ace Ventura calling it out .... lol

clayfire23 says

Corntrollio,
It is only a few countries like the United States where every transaction is legal, made public and there is plenty of disclosure of “median” stats like income and home prices.

Hmmm... not really true. "Every transaction is legal"? Not even close. There are inside deals, secret payments on the side to sellers, and "floppers" who defraud banks into short sales at below market value, then turn around and sell to another buyer who was already lined up, just to name a few of the illegal scams going on. Every transaction made public? Not really. That info was a closely guarded secret, available only to realtors. The only reason we can get that info now is due to some enterprising people who sleuth out the information from tax rolls and make it available to the public. It is not officially "published".

wow... truly depressing thread - if so many people still believe "TARP saved the economy", there is no hope for this country. The banksters have won.

native94027 says

if so many people still believe “TARP saved the economy”

I'm still in the camp that the financial system is the cardio-pulmonary system of the debt-based economy.

If companies didn't need credit we wouldn't need banks, just check-clearing facilities. Every company I've worked for save one was utterly reliant on credit to keep the lights on.

"Warren Buffet is a capitalist, of course. But he supports regulation of the financial markets, which sets him apart from what I would term the crony capitalists."

From: http://www.nndb.com/people/445/000022379/

Warren Buffett, classified Democrat, associations:
Hillary Clinton for President
Hillary Rodham Clinton for US Senate Committee
John Kerry for President
Obama for America

He was apparently in the young republicans and may have swung over to the left later, but he is a wealthy capitalist.

And indeed, like with Bill Gates Sr, he probably supports "regulations" provided he has a way out of them. :-)

Troy says: "Confusion of terms. Not all capitalism is bad, or “crony”. Warren Buffet deploys his money to find value where others don’t, it borders on predatory capitalism but I think he stays on the OK side of that line since he doesn’t force people to sell to him.
Crony capitalism can be defined as basically skimming the productive efforts of others through the leveraging of privilege and “guanxi”. Steve Jobs and Spielberg do not fall into this category either, they made their billions the old-fashioned way, in the free market with superior consumer products."

Apparently, not all capitalists are bad "cronies" just as not all cars and private jets destroy the planet. When the cars and private jets are driven/flown by Al Gore, respectively, then it's ok.

Sheesh, television evanglists are less hypocritical! :-)

I prefer Catholic church and drinking the wine and eating the wafers. Make a lot more sense than leftism...