I want to know why it is always the people who made the WRONG decision to buy at the WRONG time and for the WRONG price who are being cast as victims and why its always the people who, for whatever reason, made the RIGHT decisions who get cast as the villains?
The bulls always seem to like to drag out the “didn’t buy = can’t buy = sour grapes” argument, as if the only reason 100% of the bears didn’t make stupid decisions was because they were financially unable to. It’s true that some people were completely priced out of the market and became bears by default; it’s also true that some of those same unqualified buyers went ahead and bought anyway even though they couldn’t afford it. Now those people are losing their homes as a result of their reality catching up with their lies and we’re somehow supposed to feel sorry for them?
From an economic standpoint, the virtues of a RE purchase are established at the time of purchase, not at the time of resale. If we buy well then it turns out well; if we buy poorly then it turns out poorly. If you want to blame someone other than the buyer who made the poor decision, how about pointing that finger at the seller who benefitted at that buyer’s expense?
BTW, prices were a lot lower in 1996 than they were in 1989, so it would be more accurate to say that most of the bears are looking for prices to make sense from the 1996 point. After accounting the effects of inflation on the dollar that might equal 1998 or 1999 prices. We’re already at early 2004 prices in some areas, so we’re getting there.
As a point of reference, we are observers in this drama; we’re not creating it and these people are not losing because of us. That makes us innocent of the charges of tyranny.