May San Diego Home Sales Increase Data Revised from 89% to 6.5% 21 comments
an article to
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
More and more economic data manipulation is coming to the fore, none of which as blatantly obvious as the California housing market. Some of it is palatable, but when home sales in San Diego get revised from 89% down to 6.5% due to a "data glitch", it is no wonder that increasingly more Americans realize every single day they are being blatantly lied to by an Administration whose sole purpose in life is to give out 10 pair of rose-colored glasses to every possible voter in the next election. For the most recent take on this the WSJ chimes in:
The California Association of Realtors expects to make sharp downward revisions in its recent monthly reports of soaring home sales in the San Diego area, Robert Kleinhenz, deputy chief economist of the trade group, said in an interview. Those revisions will mean modest downward revisions in statewide sales, he added.
The revisions are likely to be announced in late July, when the Realtor group reports home sales for June. The problem resulted from a glitch in data from a multiple-listing service in San Diego, Mr. Kleinhenz said. He said a change in computer systems used there resulted in incorrect data being sent to the Realtor association over the past year or so.
Thomas Lawler, an independent economist in Leesburg, Va., who tracks home sales nationwide, raised questions about the San Diego data in a report last week. Mr. Lawler noted that the numbers reported by the Realtors vastly exceeded those from MDA DataQuick, a research firm in La Jolla, Calif., and other sources.
The California Realtors have reported that San Diego sales in April were up about 63% from a year earlier. Mr. Kleinhenz said that is expected to be revised downward to a gain of about 20%. For May, the group reported an 89% increase in sales in San Diego; that will be slashed to about 6.5%, the economist said.
As a result, he said, the state-wide sales gain for May -- reported last week as 35% -- also will be revised down, though it probably will remain above 30%, Mr. Kleinhenz said.
Of course, the problem with this is that as more and more instances of blatant data fudging become obvious, only the most naive citizens will believe anything that is released as "certifiable" economic data.
Hat tip to all readers who brought this to my attention.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
Just wanted to educate our readers on how well our government continues take care of the very people who vote them, another example of why I wanted nationalization (instead of this unlimited funding, market manipulation, etc). This is what billions of your tax dollars have gotten you. Note they can borrow at NO COST!!!!!
You have to pay it back in tax dollars at 3.5%. they charge you 15% now!!!!!!! w need to be in the streets saying"we aren't going to take it anymore", because our elected leaders don't appear to listen
Citi raises card rates on millions
By Francesco Guerrera and Saskia Scholtes in New... and Tom Braithwaite in Washington
Published: June 30 2009 23:59 | Last updated: June 30 2009 23:59
Citigroup has sharply increased interest rates on up to 15m US credit card accounts just months before curbs on such rises come into effect, in a move that could fuel political anger at the treatment of consumers by bailed-out banks.
People close to the situation said that Citi, which is about to cede a 34 per cent stake to the US government as part of its latest rescue, had upped rates on between 13m and 15m credit cards it co-brands with retailers such as Sears.
EDITOR’S CHOICE
Credit card losses hit record 10.4% - Jun-30
In depth: US banks - May-07
Tepid offers for BofA asset manager - Jul-01
Citi’s rate increases emerged on the day the government proposed legislation to create a new regulator with sweeping powers on consumer protection and a week after the bank was attacked by some politicians for raising employees’ salaries.
Holders of co-branded cards who failed to pay their balance in full at the end of the month saw their rates rise by an average 24 per cent – or nearly 3 percentage points – between January and April, according to a Credit Suisse analysis of data from the consultancy Lightspeed Research.
After FT.com broke news of the hike, Citi issued a statement saying: ”We have adjusted pricing and card terms for some customers as part of our regular account reviews. This is an ongoing process to ensure we offer terms, interest rates, credit lines and products based on individual needs and risk profiles. These changes also reflect the dramatically higher cost of doing business in our industry as we work to preserve the broad availability of credit.”
Citi’s move came as the economic downturn caused record defaults among US card users and prompted many issuers to raise rates, both to cushion their losses and pre-empt the new restrictions set to come into effect in February.
However, Citi’s increases have been larger than those of its main rivals, according to Lightspeed, which tracks about 12,000 US credit card accounts.
Carolyn Maloney, Democratic representative for New York, the author of the new rules that will sharply constrain lenders’ ability to raise rates for risky borrowers, criticised Citi’s move. “It’s hard to tell if rate hikes on existing balances being put in place now are the result of prior bad business decisions or getting in under the wire of the new law,” Ms Maloney told the Financial Times.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
financialservices.hous...
On Jul 01 08:22 AM dcb wrote:
> If anyone wants the link for the house financial services committe
> to complain about what citi is doing here is the link
The "data" has been corrupted and full of crap for a lonnnnggg time.
In 2006 the realtors' mouthpiece was on tv talking about a drop in home sales & prices, it was called a "glitch."
And yes, the average American can't figure out that a Big Mac meal is full of calories and fat, why would we think that they can figure out financial stuff without being told what it means.
Mommy & Daddy gubment need to get busy telling us how great our empty bank accounts and rising taxes are.
I pray they are wrong. Dead wrong!!!! Time to clean the house out next election. Let the people speak.
On Jul 01 07:34 AM Dave Wrixon wrote:
> It might also reflect that Numeracy is a growing problem in the US!
WTF????????????????? Go back to your crack.
Trust government statistics at your peril.
According to the sales listed, yes, we were up in May. Most of that increase was cash sales.
Current sales as of June 30th have dropped back to March/April levels (they were nearly identical).
Everything I've seen is pointing to stagnation for a while. I'll have to wait until the end of July to see if my guess is on track.
On Jul 01 12:46 PM Rix wrote:
Everything I've seen is pointing to stagnation for a while. I'll have to wait until the end of July to see if my guess is on track.
Add to that one big condo development just returning 300 deposits, effectively leaving that building idle. There is still the blue protective covering on some of the windows, and yet not a worker has been seen there in over a month. Many here doubt this is unique, and expect more of the overpriced condos downtown to fail.
Several places now have HOA fees rocketing out of control, due to a lack of owners. A few high rises have already become insolvent. It is very tough to see where this is going.
Quite simply, all the development was self fueling. There was little in the way of jobs creation that could sustain these propertied that were being built. Now with many people working shorter work weeks, and lots of former real estate agents looking for other work, there is little hope of the local economic conditions improving anytime soon. If a few companies relocate here to boost better paying employment, then maybe the housing market here can recover. Unfortunately, with California in deep sh*t financially, and the possibility of increased utilities costs and taxes, it would take someone wildly optimistic to see a recovery.
On Jul 01 09:54 AM doubleguns wrote:
> San Diego is a strong republicrat area thus proving that BOTH sides
> are working hard against us to support their corrupt form of financially
> enslaving the taxpayers. They have been shearing the sheeple for
> so long they think it will continue indefinitely.
>
> I pray they are wrong. Dead wrong!!!! Time to clean the house out
> next election. Let the people speak.
Patience. Housing will not reach a long term bottom for YEARS.
The "California Association of Realtors" expects to make sharp downward revisions in its recent monthly reports of soaring home sales in the San Diego area. The problem "resulted from a glitch in data from a multiple-listing service in San Diego". In this case, neither the government nor the current Administration seemed to be involved.
There seems to be a faulty but generally accepted leap in logic here that this is an example of how we are lied to by the "Administration" that wants to put rose colored glasses on our eyes. The comments endorse this and suggest this is an example of the "Government" lying to us.
While I understand that many of you are Ron Paul supporters who believe the government is at fault for all of our problems, I don't think this is the example you are looking for.
Clearly this is a situation where the data was fudged by free market individuals with a vested economic interest in having data come out a different way. This is a different issue that many of you who believe there is an invisible hand that will make everything turn out well ought to consider.
The article was a good one but, in my view, the conclusions missed the mark this time.
In my opinion, unless we address both these problems, we are in danger of merely electing a reactionary government next time that will merely give free reign for someone else to lie to us.