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.

Politics : Welcome to Slider's Dugout -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RonMerks who wrote (6368)	9/12/2007 4:04:19 PM
From: Broken_Clock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50024

over 2,000,000 foreclosures this year alone is "Much adoo about NOTHING." rotflmao! again, no facts, but plenty of "feeling" Ron. You should have your agent book Oprah & Dr. Phil immediately.

To: RonMerks who wrote (6368)	9/12/2007 5:59:48 PM
From: ecrire	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50024

Excellent post. So many naysayers, so many Cassandras, predictions of an empire in collapse. Can't anticipate what form the eventual resolution to the credit problems will take, but, in time, confidence will be restored to normalcy. In the meantime the dollar weakness is making american assets very attractively priced in foreign currency terms.

To: RonMerks who wrote (6368)	9/12/2007 6:12:44 PM
From: SwingTrader2006	Respond to of 50024

If you knew anything at all about real estate, you would never have made this ridiculous statement: "or that the markets in California which have been in complete disconnect with 90% of America for over 3 decades are seeing double digit declines." What is the NUMBER ONE golden rule for investing in real estate? It's THREE words, Ron. LOCATION LOCATION LOCATION There is a REASON why Califonia has always demanded a huge premium over, oh... let's say, Illinois, Iowa, Oklahoma, etc. etc. PERFECT WEATHER, BEAUTIFUL BEACHES, LOTS OF JOBS, etc. California will ALWAYS demand a huge premium over the vast majority of the country. Oh, and THIS statement by you is just "slighty" flawed: "If someone bought their house 5 years ago for say $400,000 and for the first 3 years it went up 5% per year, and then 40% for years 4 and 5 during the crack up boom of the bubble - making it's 'comp' based market value $907,000 at the end of 5 years, and then it falls 40% today- which would take it down to $545,000- it would still have appreciated at an annual rate of over 7%. Which is still above historic averages." Your are leaving out one VERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRY important FACT about all those people who bought there house 5 years ago and later as the housing prices soared. Wanna know what it is? Lemme tell ya. THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE PEOPLE REFINANCED OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND USED THEIR EQUITY AS A FREAKING ATM MACHINE...THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE PEOPLE WERE TAKING OUT THAT SOARING EQUITY AS SOON AS IT WAS ON PAPER!! HOW IN THE HELL DO YOU THINK THIS ECONOMY HAS THRIVED FOR THE PAST 7 YEARS? As a result, "Joe Q. Homeowner" is now left with a SHIT load of mortgage debt, little or no equity, with no more ability to refinance because of tightening credit, plunging home prices, etc. DO YOU GET IT? It ain't rocket science, pal. TIC TOC.....TIC TOC.....

To: RonMerks who wrote (6368)	9/12/2007 6:20:54 PM
From: Cactus Jack	Respond to of 50024

My point is that 'comp' values at the peak in hot markets are irrelevant, unless you bought at the top and are trying to unload it today The problems always begin at the margins. The people who bought at the top consist of folks buying more than they can afford at market peak, with negative amortization, interest only financing that they need to refinance in order to keep their homes. Additionally, too many homeowners used their increasing "paper" equity to borrow more then they could ultimately afford with variable rate financing. Geez, Greenspan himself encouraged homeowners to borrow with variable rate financing to get lower rates. Irrelevant? If you say so. jpg