Real Estate Broker's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/234310/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/92371-obama-is-bad-for-the-economy-barron-s?source=feed#comment-239526 239526
Who cares about Obama's tax policy or Mc Cain's tax policy. They could eliminate taxes 100% and guess what...?

We would still be cranking out/borrowing upward of $12 billion per month funding Jihad vs. Mcworld.
]]> Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:38:17 -0400
Who cares about Obama's tax policy or Mc Cain's tax policy. They could eliminate taxes 100% and guess what...?

We would still be cranking out/borrowing upward of $12 billion per month funding Jihad vs. Mcworld.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/92371-obama-is-bad-for-the-economy-barron-s?source=feed#comment-239525 239525
Who cares about Obama's tax policy or Mc Cain's tax policy. They could eliminate taxes 100% and guess what...?

We would still be cranking out/borrowing upward of $12 billion per month funding Jihad vs. Mcworld.
]]> Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:38:17 -0400
Who cares about Obama's tax policy or Mc Cain's tax policy. They could eliminate taxes 100% and guess what...?

We would still be cranking out/borrowing upward of $12 billion per month funding Jihad vs. Mcworld.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/90022-fannie-mae-earnings-it-s-not-pretty?source=feed#comment-226441 226441
How is the US (service economy) "headed for a rebound?" This makes absolutely no sense.

You have some random alterior motive that I can't figure out.

As far as you predicting collapse. This is also wrong. Peter Schiff actually made the prediction in "Crash Proof."

]]> Fri, 08 Aug 2008 16:21:24 -0400
How is the US (service economy) "headed for a rebound?" This makes absolutely no sense.

You have some random alterior motive that I can't figure out.

As far as you predicting collapse. This is also wrong. Peter Schiff actually made the prediction in "Crash Proof."

]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/90022-fannie-mae-earnings-it-s-not-pretty?source=feed#comment-226425 226425
Post your address. I want to send you an invoice for: a) wasting everybody's time; b) surplus charge for making yourself look really stupid.

This guys a joke! Someone contact the SA tech support and have this guy removed from the Blog. This dude reaks of "interest only."]]> Fri, 08 Aug 2008 16:08:51 -0400
Post your address. I want to send you an invoice for: a) wasting everybody's time; b) surplus charge for making yourself look really stupid.

This guys a joke! Someone contact the SA tech support and have this guy removed from the Blog. This dude reaks of "interest only."]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/90022-fannie-mae-earnings-it-s-not-pretty?source=feed#comment-226422 226422
This guy Bernstein is a retard. Or rather, a Realtard. I smell this guy is from the Real Estate Industry.

The market will not so much continue to go down as it will continue to correct itself.
Bet we also need two other variables to exist: Real wage increases and population increases.

Until then, market declines are an imminent reality. ]]> Fri, 08 Aug 2008 16:02:08 -0400
This guy Bernstein is a retard. Or rather, a Realtard. I smell this guy is from the Real Estate Industry.

The market will not so much continue to go down as it will continue to correct itself.
Bet we also need two other variables to exist: Real wage increases and population increases.

Until then, market declines are an imminent reality. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/88219-some-real-talk-on-housing?source=feed#comment-221079 221079 ]]> Sat, 02 Aug 2008 14:05:10 -0400 ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/88219-some-real-talk-on-housing?source=feed#comment-220426 220426
First off- I agree with you regarding the change from Industrial to a service economy. We're screwed until we actually start producing and selling in relation to what we buy.

Note: I don't necessarily agree with you as much as I recognize the facts... (No offense, dude!)

And Yes I read. Most important work i've read thus far is Crash Proof. Great book that defined the reason behind artifical and inflationary markets. More importantly-he predicted the collapse of the Real Estate Market.

Let's all get back to the basics. Specifically what drives appreciation:

-Real wage increases
-population growth

If these two variables don't parallel one another in a positive linear progression, then appreciation shouldn't happen.

If appreciation does occur, then someone's meddling with the market. IE- Burnout Bernanke]]> Fri, 01 Aug 2008 13:44:37 -0400
First off- I agree with you regarding the change from Industrial to a service economy. We're screwed until we actually start producing and selling in relation to what we buy.

Note: I don't necessarily agree with you as much as I recognize the facts... (No offense, dude!)

And Yes I read. Most important work i've read thus far is Crash Proof. Great book that defined the reason behind artifical and inflationary markets. More importantly-he predicted the collapse of the Real Estate Market.

Let's all get back to the basics. Specifically what drives appreciation:

-Real wage increases
-population growth

If these two variables don't parallel one another in a positive linear progression, then appreciation shouldn't happen.

If appreciation does occur, then someone's meddling with the market. IE- Burnout Bernanke]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/88219-some-real-talk-on-housing?source=feed#comment-219491 219491 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 13:43:23 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/88219-some-real-talk-on-housing?source=feed#comment-219464 219464
So here's a more realistic question to the only person on the blog that seems to know their stuff (Mr. "Believe it or not"):

Who would you rather do? Jack Nickelson or Meg Ryan?]]> Thu, 31 Jul 2008 13:14:20 -0400
So here's a more realistic question to the only person on the blog that seems to know their stuff (Mr. "Believe it or not"):

Who would you rather do? Jack Nickelson or Meg Ryan?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/88219-some-real-talk-on-housing?source=feed#comment-219441 219441
The only thing that should drive appreciation are real wage increases and population growth. During the boom there was a an inverse relationship between home appreciation (upside) real wage increases (down) population growth (somewhat down).

So clearly, the rampant running appreciation in the RE market was a farce.

Oh and by the way, no offense on the "Realtard" comment. I can't knock the facts.

Well, that and Lawrence Yun-the NAR's chief economist is the biggest spinmaster and Realtard of them all!! ]]> Thu, 31 Jul 2008 12:51:11 -0400
The only thing that should drive appreciation are real wage increases and population growth. During the boom there was a an inverse relationship between home appreciation (upside) real wage increases (down) population growth (somewhat down).

So clearly, the rampant running appreciation in the RE market was a farce.

Oh and by the way, no offense on the "Realtard" comment. I can't knock the facts.

Well, that and Lawrence Yun-the NAR's chief economist is the biggest spinmaster and Realtard of them all!! ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/88268-john-hussman-can-the-emergency-housing-bill-be-fixed?source=feed#comment-219431 219431
So here's what the future holds:

-The Fed/Bush Administration ok's FHA to refinance overinflated homes at today's 2004 pricing.

-x amount of homes are refi'd at max value (today's percieved value).

-The RE market continues to adjust downward, slowly but surely ebbing its way to 1998 levels (market equilibrium/Where it's supposed to be).

-Vwallaaa! The "$700k home" that they refinanced has predicatably adjusted downward and is now worth $650k.

-So to start: $50k drop per home (not substantial or remotely unrealistic) multiplied by the 400,000 homeowner's the plan "will benefit" = larger deficit/another failed government plan.

But, my friends it like a hard night out on the town after a good payday; it's fun in the beginning but the morning hangover reveals the truth.

Mr. Bernanke I have two questions:

1) Where do we get that giant bottle of Motrin for the bigger economic hangover to come?

2) Where do I get and send the government paperwork that ensures my business has not downside risk and i'll be bailed out?
]]> Thu, 31 Jul 2008 12:41:02 -0400
So here's what the future holds:

-The Fed/Bush Administration ok's FHA to refinance overinflated homes at today's 2004 pricing.

-x amount of homes are refi'd at max value (today's percieved value).

-The RE market continues to adjust downward, slowly but surely ebbing its way to 1998 levels (market equilibrium/Where it's supposed to be).

-Vwallaaa! The "$700k home" that they refinanced has predicatably adjusted downward and is now worth $650k.

-So to start: $50k drop per home (not substantial or remotely unrealistic) multiplied by the 400,000 homeowner's the plan "will benefit" = larger deficit/another failed government plan.

But, my friends it like a hard night out on the town after a good payday; it's fun in the beginning but the morning hangover reveals the truth.

Mr. Bernanke I have two questions:

1) Where do we get that giant bottle of Motrin for the bigger economic hangover to come?

2) Where do I get and send the government paperwork that ensures my business has not downside risk and i'll be bailed out?
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/88219-some-real-talk-on-housing?source=feed#comment-219349 219349 Point-98 was when the market was closest to its equilibrium, and somewhat void of artificial inflationary drivers. ]]> Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:34:11 -0400 Point-98 was when the market was closest to its equilibrium, and somewhat void of artificial inflationary drivers. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/88219-some-real-talk-on-housing?source=feed#comment-219345 219345
Homes will need to adjust to 1998 levels in order for the market to plateua, and then eventually converge back to the 5%/annum norm that has defined the last 50-years in California.

Remember-The real estate market in California tanks about every 15 years. Homes don't actually appreciate at a rate of 5% every year. But if you average-out everything you get a linear progression of 5%.
Three percent real growth and 2% adjustment for inflation. ]]> Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:31:00 -0400
Homes will need to adjust to 1998 levels in order for the market to plateua, and then eventually converge back to the 5%/annum norm that has defined the last 50-years in California.

Remember-The real estate market in California tanks about every 15 years. Homes don't actually appreciate at a rate of 5% every year. But if you average-out everything you get a linear progression of 5%.
Three percent real growth and 2% adjustment for inflation. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/86724-foreclosures-still-on-the-rise-in-california?source=feed#comment-217695 217695
I agree with Mr. "Believe or not.'" He's obviously speaking from a fundamental perspective.

The problem is not with what he has already said. Rather, the problem lies (as it always does) with people's unwillingness to accept the truth.

Homes will continue to adjust downward, until they converge to the the 5% per annum norm that has defined California Real Estate for 50+ years. In fact, they may even dip lower first. This depreciation or devaluation has little do with foreclosures and the like. It's simply an economic reality.

Everyone on this blog should just admit that they got caught up in the hype of the "ScAmerican Dream," overleveraged to buy non-performing, overinflated, liabilities dressed up as assets.
In other words, we all fell victim to the middle class trap, and the Snake Oil salesman with the GED. I'm referring to Realtwhores that took a 3-week internet course, bubbled in their Scantrons, and were somehow deemed "licensees" by the Deparment of Real Estate.

I did it too, admitted defeat, short sold my home, and got my a** handed to me. But I didn't continue to live in some non-analytcal, opinionated, fairy tale, where prince Charming (Ben Bernanke) bails me out and the PERCIEVED value of my home goes up. Or rather, the value of the banks home, that I rented, and assumed all the liability for... For the lay person, my reference is the American perception of ownership.

I dare you to show me how ignorant you are...]]> Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:48:07 -0400
I agree with Mr. "Believe or not.'" He's obviously speaking from a fundamental perspective.

The problem is not with what he has already said. Rather, the problem lies (as it always does) with people's unwillingness to accept the truth.

Homes will continue to adjust downward, until they converge to the the 5% per annum norm that has defined California Real Estate for 50+ years. In fact, they may even dip lower first. This depreciation or devaluation has little do with foreclosures and the like. It's simply an economic reality.

Everyone on this blog should just admit that they got caught up in the hype of the "ScAmerican Dream," overleveraged to buy non-performing, overinflated, liabilities dressed up as assets.
In other words, we all fell victim to the middle class trap, and the Snake Oil salesman with the GED. I'm referring to Realtwhores that took a 3-week internet course, bubbled in their Scantrons, and were somehow deemed "licensees" by the Deparment of Real Estate.

I did it too, admitted defeat, short sold my home, and got my a** handed to me. But I didn't continue to live in some non-analytcal, opinionated, fairy tale, where prince Charming (Ben Bernanke) bails me out and the PERCIEVED value of my home goes up. Or rather, the value of the banks home, that I rented, and assumed all the liability for... For the lay person, my reference is the American perception of ownership.

I dare you to show me how ignorant you are...]]>