Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Mortgage applications down 17% from last July

+2
no stress
2seaoat
6 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

2seaoat



The population bubble is beginning to show the structural problem with recovery in real estate. The babyboom folks no longer need their two homes and are downsizing. Younger people have neither the numbers to replace those vacant homes or the income at this point in their life as a widening gap between supply and demand will cause real estate prices to continue to struggle and interest rates to remain low. It would be nice if we expanded immigration to cover the gap and create more demand. The first step must be to bring legal status to ten million home consumers who without documentation are in the vapor.

no stress

no stress

Tell me about it. I'm damn near giving away a 4600 sq.ft. log cabin on 9 acres with a stocked 2 acre fish pond and nobody will buy it.

2seaoat



We need people moving up the food chain buying real estate and participating economically above ground in the American economy. I took huge hits in real estate, and I see none of my property making even a scent of recovery for five years. I will be gone and the wife should have things in a good position by that time. Thankfully, they are cash flowing. All these people against immigration do not realize that a bunch of old babyboomers leaving the economy will have a huge depressing effect on our economy. With a path to citizenship we will ignite the housing market again. People need to use common sense.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:The population bubble is beginning to show the structural problem with  recovery in real estate.  The babyboom folks no longer need their two homes and are downsizing.  Younger people have neither the numbers to replace those vacant homes or the income at this point in their life as a widening gap between supply and demand will cause real estate prices to continue to struggle and interest rates to remain low.  It would be nice if we expanded immigration to cover the gap and create more demand.  The first step must be to bring legal status to ten million home consumers who without documentation are in the vapor.

There are plenty of young people to buy homes. Those who can afford have huge student loans the government encouraged them to take out. Given the ease of loans, Universities have raised their rates to unheard of highs.

"Ten million home consumers without documentation...." Do you mean illegal aliens working here below minimum wage? Yeah, they can buy a lot of houses.

2seaoat



"Ten million home consumers without documentation...." Do you mean illegal aliens working here below minimum wage? Yeah, they can buy a lot of houses.


You are clueless. Many of these people could almost pay cash for houses, but they hide in the shadows. They work and produce. I saw hundreds of people under his path to citizenship buy homes within two years. This idea that immigrants illegal or otherwise are leeches and do not work is mind boggling to me that people can be so insulated from the reality of immigrants. They pool resources and share homes. The starter house they purchase frees up the seller to buy a bigger home.....when the bottom of the market has no movement, the chain reaction ends up with a beautiful log cabin and acreage sitting for years not because of any deficiency, rather structural problems with retiring babyboomers and ten million people hiding in the underground economy......stupid is what stupid does.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

2seaoat wrote: Many of these people could almost pay cash for houses

lol

Markle

Markle

no stress wrote:Tell me about it. I'm damn near giving away a 4600 sq.ft. log cabin on 9 acres with a stocked 2 acre fish pond and nobody will buy it.

In our area it has been a strange, unpredictable market. Vacant lots and land are just beginning to have interest shown. I've had recent residential sales well above what anyone expected and I have a beautiful house with over 3,300 square feet well below the market value.

2seaoat



I h.ave been getting phone calls on lots we own in Santa Rosa County, but I simply tell them they are not for sale until next year.....I will let my wife deal with the lowballers......I do not care to give anything away, and eventually there will be demand.....the key word is eventually

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:I h.ave been getting phone calls on lots we own in Santa Rosa County, but I simply tell them they are not for sale until next year.....I will let my wife deal with the lowballers......I do not care to give anything away, and eventually there will be demand.....the key word is eventually

A false belief held by MANY owners of virtually anything. "I won't give anything away". You are not. Low offers are part of the game. It matters not WHERE the bidding starts, but where it ENDS.

Few people are "giving" anything away. They are accepting the real world and what the market value is TODAY.

Saying the market will come back EVENTUALLY is also foolish. President Barack Hussein Obama has guided our economy toward the rocks. See the Cloward-Piven Strategy. Dumping these problems on your wife is incredibly selfish. Liquidate and turn over cash, or properties with substantial cash flows and would be easy to liquidate if she desired.

Don't weasel out of your bad decisions, face up to them and handle the for her. That is an indication of love.


Of course, no one is more important than you and male ego.


Floridatexan

Floridatexan


You are a blatant liar, Markle. Who asked you for advice? You know the housing crash began as early as 2006, and the economic crash followed in September and October of 2008...months before President Obama took the oath of office. Where on Earth do you get the gall to criticize Seaoat's decisions?

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/412/housing-recession.html

The Housing Crash Recession: How Did We Get Here?
By Dean Baker

Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. He is a frequent guest on National Public Radio, Marketplace, CNN, CNBC and other news programs. His economic commentary appears regularly on his blog, Beat the Press and he is the author of several books, including The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer and The United States Since 1980. He received his Ph.D in economics from the University of Michigan.
------


"There is a long list of villains who can be blamed for the current crisis in the housing market, and the recession it has caused, but the key figure in this story is Alan Greenspan, who used to be known as the greatest central banker of all-time.

The reason that we are seeing millions of people lose their homes to foreclosure, and tens of millions see most of their life's savings disappear as plunging house prices eliminate the equity in their home, is that we had a housing bubble that is now bursting. Bubbles always burst and the process is often quite painful. That is why it is best to prevent bubbles from growing in the first place.

The fact that the housing market was in a bubble should have been evident to any competent economist. There was no historical precedent for the run-up in house prices that began in the mid-nineties (which coincided with the stock bubble). The run-up could not be explained by fundamentals of supply and demand in the housing market, most of which indicated that house prices should be stable (adjusted for inflation) or even falling.

It is not clear whether or not Greenspan saw the bubble, since he has not spoken consistently on the topic. It is clear that he did nothing to prick the bubble and arguably even promoted its growth, both by publicly denying the existence of a housing bubble and by encouraging homebuyers to take out adjustable rate mortgages.

The irrational exuberance of a housing bubble created the climate in which homebuyers became eager to take on mortgages that they could not possibly afford and banks and investors were willing to make loans that couldn't be paid back. If house prices always rise, then homebuyers can also meet their mortgage payments by borrowing against the new equity created, or alternatively, they can simply sell the home and pocket the profits.

The lenders could apply the same logic. If house prices are rising rapidly, then it doesn't matter if borrowers can't meet mortgage payments. If house prices are rising, then it is likely that a foreclosed home will cover most or all of the value of an outstanding mortgage. The mentality of a bubble created the environment in which bad lending practices could thrive.

Of course Greenspan not only deserves blame for fostering the housing bubble, he was also seriously negligent in his regulatory responsibilities at the Fed. The abusive mortgage practices that are now being reported so prominently were widely known years earlier. When millions of bad loans are being issued all over the country, it is not being done in secret. People did try to get the Fed to tighten up its regulations on bank lending practices, including Greenspan's fellow Fed governor Ned Gramlich. Greenspan ignored these urgings, and insisted on allowing the banks to continue their predatory lending without any check. This helped to sustain and the bubble and snare millions in loans that they could not pay.

Even if Greenspan is public enemy number 1 in the housing bubble story, he did have many accomplices. There are literally dozens of federal and state regulatory authorities that could have tried to crack down on the predatory lending practices under their jurisdiction. In fairness, several state regulators did try to crack down, but they were preempted in several cases by federal law. Still, as a group, one could have hoped for a more vigorous response to outrageous lending practices that were being carried through on a massive scale and hitting the most disadvantaged segments of society.

Along the same lines, one should add to the ranks of villains a long list of political leaders from President George W. Bush on down to neighborhood community leaders. Instead of cracking down on the predatory lending practices, these people celebrated the growth in homeownership, somehow failing to note that a very high percentage of the new homeowners would soon face foreclosure. The extent to which this celebration was due to a blind commitment to the ideology of homeownership or outright corruption would have to be determined on a case-by-case basis, but it was incredible failure of leadership at all levels.

On the other side, there were all sorts of accomplices in promoting the bubble. Virtually the entire economics profession joined Alan Greenspan in his insistence that there was no housing bubble. Having so much high-powered expertise on the side of the no bubble view undoubtedly made investors more comfortable in gobbling up mortgage debt that they should have recognized as junk.

Of course the investors themselves can't escape blame in this story. People who get paid seven figure salaries to manage hedge funds, pension funds and other large pools of capital are supposed to do something for their money. They should have been able to recognize the housing bubble and the fact that housing-based debt was an extremely risky asset, even if the economists told them otherwise. Their astounding ignorance on this point allowed both the growth of the bubble and for the perpetuation of the worst predatory lending practices.

Banks were anxious to issue loans that could not be paid off because they knew that they would be able to quickly sell them in the secondary market. If there were not a vast pool of suckers waiting to gobble up this debt, predatory lending would not have looked nearly so profitably.

This raises another villain in the story - the bond rating agencies. Much of the junk mortgage derivative debt got top credit ratings. This helped to convince investors that they were buying safe assets. As it turns out, the bond rating agencies don't do much independent analysis of the assets they rate, they mostly take at face value the information presented to them by banks and financial companies that pay them to do the ratings.

The media also deserve blame in helping to promote the housing bubble. It is reasonable to expect that at least some reporters would have sufficient expertise that they could independently evaluate the state of the housing market. If the major news outlets were running regular pieces on the housing bubble and the risks it posed to the economy and homeowners, it is likely that it would have burst somewhat sooner. In fact, warnings on the bubble very rarely appeared in the media. (The New York Times is an important exception; it did run several pieces presenting warnings about inflated housing prices). The most widely cited expert on the housing market was David Lereah, the chief economist for the National Association of Realtors and the author of the 2005 best seller, Why the Housing Boom Will Not Bust and How You Can Profit From It.

In short, there is a long list of culprits in the housing bubble disaster. Alan Greenspan sits in the center of the circle, but he is surrounded by a vast group of clowns and criminals. It is not clear that many will suffer any consequences for their actions or even that they will be prevented from doing it all over again."

boards of FL

boards of FL

Markle wrote:Saying the market will come back EVENTUALLY is also foolish.  President Barack Hussein Obama has guided our economy toward the rocks.

By "guided our economy toward the rocks" Markle means to say "guided our economy to the highest level of GDP ever seen by any advanced civilization in the history of the entire universe".  Literally.

Yes, I see the fallacy in the comment, though I'm employing Markle logic on this one.


_________________
I approve this message.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

Mortgage applications down 17% from last July Popup

“At the Oval Office, 1974. From left are Rose Goldsmith, mother of Alan Greenspan; President Ford; Greenspan; Rand; and her husband, Frank O’Connor.” (From the New York Times)

"Ayn Rand might have been little more than a literary and political curiosity, except for one very important accident of history. In 1974, Alan Greenspan, one of her most devoted followers, was sworn in as the Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, with Rand standing by his side. Thirteen years later, in 1987, Greenspan would ascend to the most important economic position in the United States: Chairman of the Federal Reserve.

Greenspan was a member of Rand’s inner circle from the 1950′s. In fact, he was an “official” member: as part of the “Ayn Rand Collective,” he read chapters of “Atlas Shrugged” as Rand composed the book. He would later contribute an introduction to it, as well as essays (including one in support of the gold standard) to Rand’s 1966 collection, “Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.”

Luckily (we’re not fans of Rand’s theories over at The Devoted Intellect) Greenspan wasn’t able to apply all of his “Objectivist” ideals while heading up The Fed. (That’s right: the economic crisis could have been that much worse.) As he told the Fox News Network in 2007, he had to make compromises as an official in a democratic society (including, presumably, the compromise that prevented him from reintroducing the gold standard). A year later, he would famously concede that his ideologies about market economics (his views were far too irrational and fixed to simply be called “ideas”) were “flawed.” For a detailed description of those flawed theories, you can’t do better than to make your way through the 1,368 pages of “Atlas Shrugged.” Though we wouldn’t suggest that you actually do it…"

*************************

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ah5qh9Up4rIg

Greenspan Concedes to `Flaw' in His Market Ideology (Update2)
By Scott Lanman and Steve Matthews - October 23, 2008 14:14 EDT


Greenspan testifying in Washington today

Oct. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said a ``once-in-a-century credit tsunami'' has engulfed financial markets and conceded that his free-market ideology shunning regulation was flawed.

``Yes, I found a flaw,'' Greenspan said in response to grilling from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. ``That is precisely the reason I was shocked because I'd been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.''

Greenspan said he was ``partially'' wrong in opposing regulation of derivatives and acknowledged that financial institutions didn't protect shareholders and investments as well as he expected.

``We cannot expect perfection in any area where forecasting is required,'' he said. ``We have to do our best but not expect infallibility or omniscience.''

Part of the problem was that the Fed's ability to forecast the economy's trajectory is an inexact science, he said.

``If we are right 60 percent of the time in forecasting, we are doing exceptionally well; that means we are wrong 40 percent of the time,'' Greenspan said. ``Forecasting never gets to the point where it is 100 percent accurate.''

Self-Policing

The admission that free markets have their faults was a shift for the former Fed chairman who declared in a May 2005 speech that ``private regulation generally has proved far better at constraining excessive risk-taking than has government regulation.''

Today Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, a California Democrat, said Greenspan had ``the authority to prevent irresponsible lending practices that led to the subprime mortgage crisis.''

``You were advised to do so by many others,'' he told Greenspan. ``And now our whole economy is paying the price.''

Waxman and other lawmakers repeatedly interrupted Greenspan as he answered their questions, in contrast to deference to his testimony while he was Fed chairman.

Firms that bundle loans into securities for sale should be required to keep part of those securities, Greenspan said in prepared testimony. Other rules should address fraud and settlement of trades, he said.

Resistant to Regulation

Greenspan opposed increasing financial supervision as Fed chairman from August 1987 to January 2006. Policy makers are now struggling to contain a financial crisis marked by record foreclosures, falling asset prices and almost $660 billion in writedowns and losses tied to U.S. subprime mortgages.

Today, the former Fed chairman asked: ``What went wrong with global economic policies that had worked so effectively for nearly four decades?''

Greenspan reiterated his ``shocked disbelief'' that financial companies failed to execute sufficient ``surveillance'' on their trading counterparties to prevent surging losses. The ``breakdown'' was clearest in the market where securities firms packaged home mortgages into debt sold on to other investors, he said.

``As much as I would prefer it otherwise, in this financial environment I see no choice but to require that all securitizers retain a meaningful part of the securities they issue,'' Greenspan said. That would give the companies an incentive to ensure the assets are properly priced for their risk, advocates say.

Subprime Lending

Greenspan said the Fed didn't know the size of the subprime mortgage market until late 2005.

Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox and former Treasury Secretary John Snow also appeared at the House committee hearing.

Snow said the economy is headed down a ``bad, bad path'' and he endorsed consideration of more fiscal stimulus. For the longer term, Snow said the global financial system should be reorganized by focusing on increasing transparency of ``excessive'' leverage to prevent institutions from creating too much risk.

The U.S. needs ``one strong national regulator'' to oversee firms and fix what Snow called ``a fragmented approach'' to regulation. ``Steps to restore transparency and responsibility in the marketplace will go a long way towards restoring stability and confidence,'' he said.

Addressing the trio that oversaw the U.S. financial markets as the housing bubble developed, Representative John Yarmuth, a Democrat from Kentucky, characterized them as ``three Bill Buckners,'' referring to the Boston Red Sox first baseman whose fielding error some fans blame for the team's loss in the 1986 World Series."

To contact the reporter on this story: Scott Lanman in Washington at slanman@bloomberg.net; Steve Matthews in Atlanta at smatthews@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Chris Anstey at canstey@bloomberg.net

**************************

Mortgage applications down 17% from last July Image1258508

Mortgage applications down 17% from last July Greenspanbush

2seaoat



Saying the market will come back EVENTUALLY is also foolish.

Not when you think the Democrats will win in 2016 and the Senate immigration bill will pass......there will be a boom in real estate prices after the immigration bill is passed, or at least within three years......ten million people finding home ownership is a good thing. Also, the United States is becoming the largest producer of oil and gas. This means the dollar will remain strong and inflation will be minimized. Low inflation means continued low interest rates. When a person does not have to sell something, why would they give something away when the price of that item will go up. My only caveat is most of my property is waterfront and with the rising seas, my property could also become worthless in twenty years.......but I will not be here so that will be my wife's decision.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:Saying the market will come back EVENTUALLY is also foolish.

Not when you think the Democrats will win in 2016 and the Senate immigration bill will pass......there will be a boom in real estate prices after the immigration bill is passed, or at least within three years......ten million people finding home ownership is a good thing.  Also, the United States is becoming the largest producer of oil and gas.  This means the dollar will remain strong and inflation will be minimized.  Low inflation means continued low interest rates.   When a person does not have to sell something, why would they give something away when the price of that item will go up.  My only caveat is most of my property is waterfront and with the rising seas, my property could also become worthless in twenty years.......but I will not be here so that will be my wife's decision.

What does illegal aliens, with nearly LESS than no skills have to do with a boom in the real estate market?

Leaving a mess for your wife to deal with after you croak is one of the most selfish things a person could do.

Dump the junk for what someone is willing to pay and leave your wife without headaches and able to take that trip she has dreamed of instead of cleaning up another of your messes.

Buying property that floods ever few years is not a bright move. Given the cost of flood insurance, it will be a chore to find another fool willing to take that off your hands.

Markle

Markle

Floridatexan wrote:
You are a blatant liar, Markle.  Who asked you for advice?  You know the housing crash began as early as 2006, and the economic crash followed in September and October of 2008...months before President Obama took the oath of office.  Where on Earth do you get the gall to criticize Seaoat's decisions?  

Because I'm a real estate Professional. The housing crash was foreseen by MANY and crashed July 2006. ANYONE who didn't know the mortgage and financial markets would HAVE to follow were fools. Naturally, Progressives led the way in creating the collapse. MANY Realtors also believed it could never happen. For the most part, they had been in the business less than 10 - 12 years and had never seen a collapse.

ONCE again, to help you.

Just to remind all our FRIENDS from the far left, the responsibility for this mess lies with Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. AND WITH REPUBLICANS for backing off every time Barney Frank and his cronies played…THE RACE CARD! The housing bubble is what led to the downfall and that was driven by Democrats, starting with Jimmy Carter and hugely expanded by Bill Clinton. Here are the facts, once again, for you to ignore, put your fingers in your ears and scream la la la la la as loud as you can like screaming little girls.

HUD TO FIGHT DISCRIMINATION, BOOST MINORITY HOMEOWNERSHIP AND WORK WITH URBAN LEAGUE TO FURTHER GOALS
August 5, 1997
http://archives.hud.gov/news/1997/pr97-135.cfm

New York Times - 1999
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending -
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html


President Bush’s and the Administrations Unheeded Warnings About the Systemic Risk Posed by the GSEs – Fannie and Freddie dating back to 2001

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/09/20080919-15.html

By Elliot Blair Smith,
USA TODAY
Fannie Mae to pay $400 million fine
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&refer=columnist_hassett&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0

Franklin Raines was Director of the Office of Management and Budget under Clinton and returned to Fannie Mae as its CEO in 1999.
Raines is not a “chief” economic adviser for President Barack Hussein Obama but has advised the administration on mortgage and housing matters. Obama had hired another former Fannie CEO, Jim Johnson as a member of Obama’s V.P. search committee and who was forced to quit under fire.

Bloomberg News -
How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis -
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&refer=columnist_hassett&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0

Democrats in their own words covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyqYY72PeRM

Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Democrats of Financial Crisis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&feature=related


From the New York Times
New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: September 11, 2003 WASHINGTON,

Sept. 10— The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/new-agency-proposed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html

2seaoat



Why would I dump real estate which is either free and clear, or has mortgages below 4%, and everything is cash flowing with tenants. I think I will pass on your advice. My wife has a masters and is astute and capable after I am gone. One business has a buy sell agreement with partners and she will be fine. The real estate will be gifted to the children and grandchildren with the annual gift estate tax exemption. It is not rocket science, and this idea that all women are ditzzy and cannot figure they have to pay real estate taxes, will not be a problem with an intelligent woman.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:Why would I dump real estate which is either free and clear, or has mortgages below 4%, and everything is cash flowing with tenants.   I think I will pass on your advice.  My wife has a masters and is astute and capable after I am gone.  One business has a buy sell agreement with partners and she will be fine.  The real estate will be gifted to the children and grandchildren with the annual gift estate tax exemption.  It is not rocket science, and this idea that all women are ditzzy and cannot figure they have to pay real estate taxes, will not be a problem with an intelligent woman.

Where did I say any, much less all women are ditzzy? Has nothing to do with her being educated.

Totally aside, just because someone has a "masters" doesn't mean they have the common sense to come in out of the rain.

2seaoat



Totally aside, just because someone has a "masters" doesn't mean they have the common sense to come in out of the rain.

Agreed, but her intelligence AND common sense make it a no brainer. By the way, she had a sales license for 20 years.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum