Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (69378)	12/26/2006 10:22:52 AM
From: Micawber	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Maybe even Real Estate will never make a good "sure" long term investment in our lifetimes, either. That's what everyone was saying after the late 80's meltdown. I love when people talk like that.

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (69378)	12/26/2006 10:30:22 AM
From: John Vosilla	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Jim I don't blame Clinton and the democratic Congress for that. Things were going along just fine down here in the late 1990's. It was Greenspan,the socialized ownership society, loose lending, financial engineering in DC, global warming and a lot of greed and short term thinking by local government and RE insiders down here that did us in. $250/500k tax free gain on homestead in 1997 was a badly needed stimulus at the time.. Who would have thunk things would change so dramatically.. Oddly when you step back we've got all these incredible events and add in record low interest rates to the mix and yet more than half the country didn't even participate in the appreciation boom.. Some of these are very fast growing metro areas like Atlanta, Dallas and Denver that now look much more competitive in competing in the real economy going forward versus the bloated coastal markets....

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (69378)	12/26/2006 10:42:45 AM
From: Metacomet	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

As much as I hate to harp on it... if SOB's Clinton, his Congress and Greenspan hadn't promoted it, we wouldn't be in this position. Misguided idiot...

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (69378)	12/26/2006 11:59:43 AM
From: ChanceIs	Respond to of 306849

>>>Real Estate will never make a good "sure" long term investment in our lifetimes<<< Several thoughts: 1) I think that there will be a very long cooling off period. We have had a huge excursion, which will take an long time to repair. In the sense that the market is about affordability, I think that this will take even longer. From a fundamental perspective, in order to be compensated, workers need to create wealth. I see WalMart importing a lot of wealth creation from China and a lot less wealth creation here. We may do homeland security well (which I doubt) but that is an overhead cost - which may or may not add value. Is China doing homeland security??? I doubt it. We will have to increasingly import our energy wealth. I question whether ethanol isn't wealth or energy destruction. >>>if SOB's Clinton, his Congress and Greenspan hadn't promoted it, we wouldn't be in this position<<< 2) There is a lot of truth here. Certainly the reserve requirements were effectively lowered around '95, beginning the liquidity bubble. I am not sure who own's the blame there. Greenspan pumped for the Y2K computer crisis - not sure that I blame him, and again for 9/11. I think that was a major mistake. 9/11 is highly overblown in its significance. "W" has certainly been printing the green stuff to fight the war. He deserves a lot of the blame for that, as well as letting the mortgage institutions be as lax as they have been. >>>Now we are left with even a bigger gap between the haves and have nots,<<< For sure. I believe that we are experiencing massive inflation. The only way to combat that is to hold assets through it. If you didn't have a house before, you are in a heap of hurt now - except you might receive a lot of help from the upcoming bust. I would add that the have nots are much better off than they were 15 years ago - although they may not stay that way. As far as the haves having more, I am not sure that is a bad thing. At the end of the day, it all comes down to who manages money better - rich folks or the government. Rich folks tend to invest in factories and buy the occasional yacht - which has a positive knock on efect in yacht construction employment. The government??? Has the government ever spent a dollar efficiently?? On many occasions (more often than not) the haves engage in market restriction once they "have it" in order to keep it - the downside of the haves having more.