Inflation – Has it arrived?

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.

[sdrealtor]

[quote=CA renter][quote=paramount]So in general, would the near term (~6 mths) be a bad time to acquire real estate?[/quote]

Yes, it’s a bad time, IMHO.

The end of 2008/beginning of 2009 was a good time — when the private mortgage market which pumped up the bubble had disappeared, and the govt-backed mortgages and various incentives were in the future.

Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

First, I disagree that it is a bad time. That is a blanket statement and for many (but not all) it is a great time. I have a client closing on a 2/2 condo in PQ next week for $180K. His monthly payment with everything included (20% down, HOA, Taxes, Insurance) is just over $1,000 per month and it would cost him about $1400 to rent that place. For him its a great time.

I also disagree that this was always about saving the banks though that was a part of it. Politicians always act with one goal and that is ALWAYS about staying in office and in power. That job is NEVER done so dont expect them to pull the plug.

Americans love their homes and love to see them increase in value. When they dont, they blame the politicians. SO the politicians will continue doing whatever is necessary to protect home (and other asset) values. If you beleive they will allow deflation to happen you are betting on a horse that is in the back of the pack chasing butterflies not the one racing to the finish line. It is what it is….

[sdrealtor]

[quote=CA renter][quote=paramount]So in general, would the near term (~6 mths) be a bad time to acquire real estate?[/quote]

Yes, it’s a bad time, IMHO.

The end of 2008/beginning of 2009 was a good time — when the private mortgage market which pumped up the bubble had disappeared, and the govt-backed mortgages and various incentives were in the future.

Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

First, I disagree that it is a bad time. That is a blanket statement and for many (but not all) it is a great time. I have a client closing on a 2/2 condo in PQ next week for $180K. His monthly payment with everything included (20% down, HOA, Taxes, Insurance) is just over $1,000 per month and it would cost him about $1400 to rent that place. For him its a great time.

I also disagree that this was always about saving the banks though that was a part of it. Politicians always act with one goal and that is ALWAYS about staying in office and in power. That job is NEVER done so dont expect them to pull the plug.

Americans love their homes and love to see them increase in value. When they dont, they blame the politicians. SO the politicians will continue doing whatever is necessary to protect home (and other asset) values. If you beleive they will allow deflation to happen you are betting on a horse that is in the back of the pack chasing butterflies not the one racing to the finish line. It is what it is….

[sdrealtor]

[quote=CA renter][quote=paramount]So in general, would the near term (~6 mths) be a bad time to acquire real estate?[/quote]

Yes, it’s a bad time, IMHO.

The end of 2008/beginning of 2009 was a good time — when the private mortgage market which pumped up the bubble had disappeared, and the govt-backed mortgages and various incentives were in the future.

Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

First, I disagree that it is a bad time. That is a blanket statement and for many (but not all) it is a great time. I have a client closing on a 2/2 condo in PQ next week for $180K. His monthly payment with everything included (20% down, HOA, Taxes, Insurance) is just over $1,000 per month and it would cost him about $1400 to rent that place. For him its a great time.

I also disagree that this was always about saving the banks though that was a part of it. Politicians always act with one goal and that is ALWAYS about staying in office and in power. That job is NEVER done so dont expect them to pull the plug.

Americans love their homes and love to see them increase in value. When they dont, they blame the politicians. SO the politicians will continue doing whatever is necessary to protect home (and other asset) values. If you beleive they will allow deflation to happen you are betting on a horse that is in the back of the pack chasing butterflies not the one racing to the finish line. It is what it is….

[sdrealtor]

[quote=CA renter][quote=paramount]So in general, would the near term (~6 mths) be a bad time to acquire real estate?[/quote]

Yes, it’s a bad time, IMHO.

The end of 2008/beginning of 2009 was a good time — when the private mortgage market which pumped up the bubble had disappeared, and the govt-backed mortgages and various incentives were in the future.

Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

First, I disagree that it is a bad time. That is a blanket statement and for many (but not all) it is a great time. I have a client closing on a 2/2 condo in PQ next week for $180K. His monthly payment with everything included (20% down, HOA, Taxes, Insurance) is just over $1,000 per month and it would cost him about $1400 to rent that place. For him its a great time.

I also disagree that this was always about saving the banks though that was a part of it. Politicians always act with one goal and that is ALWAYS about staying in office and in power. That job is NEVER done so dont expect them to pull the plug.

Americans love their homes and love to see them increase in value. When they dont, they blame the politicians. SO the politicians will continue doing whatever is necessary to protect home (and other asset) values. If you beleive they will allow deflation to happen you are betting on a horse that is in the back of the pack chasing butterflies not the one racing to the finish line. It is what it is….

[sdrealtor]

[quote=CA renter][quote=paramount]So in general, would the near term (~6 mths) be a bad time to acquire real estate?[/quote]

Yes, it’s a bad time, IMHO.

The end of 2008/beginning of 2009 was a good time — when the private mortgage market which pumped up the bubble had disappeared, and the govt-backed mortgages and various incentives were in the future.

Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

First, I disagree that it is a bad time. That is a blanket statement and for many (but not all) it is a great time. I have a client closing on a 2/2 condo in PQ next week for $180K. His monthly payment with everything included (20% down, HOA, Taxes, Insurance) is just over $1,000 per month and it would cost him about $1400 to rent that place. For him its a great time.

I also disagree that this was always about saving the banks though that was a part of it. Politicians always act with one goal and that is ALWAYS about staying in office and in power. That job is NEVER done so dont expect them to pull the plug.

Americans love their homes and love to see them increase in value. When they dont, they blame the politicians. SO the politicians will continue doing whatever is necessary to protect home (and other asset) values. If you beleive they will allow deflation to happen you are betting on a horse that is in the back of the pack chasing butterflies not the one racing to the finish line. It is what it is….

[sdrealtor]

[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Rich,
Funny, I was typing my post saying essentially the same thing at the same time.

[sdrealtor]

[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Rich,
Funny, I was typing my post saying essentially the same thing at the same time.

[sdrealtor]

[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Rich,
Funny, I was typing my post saying essentially the same thing at the same time.

[sdrealtor]

[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Rich,
Funny, I was typing my post saying essentially the same thing at the same time.

[sdrealtor]

[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Rich,
Funny, I was typing my post saying essentially the same thing at the same time.

[Arraya]

[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Well it depends on their perceived need and if the banks are sufficiently protected. Geithner did come out with his “white paper” after two years in the making – stating the NEED for higher down payments and interest rates. Now, obviously, if this was done it would be implemented at a strategic time for election and appointment purposes and probably with bipartisan support and big fan fare as a necessary evil or maybe not

[Arraya]

[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Well it depends on their perceived need and if the banks are sufficiently protected. Geithner did come out with his “white paper” after two years in the making – stating the NEED for higher down payments and interest rates. Now, obviously, if this was done it would be implemented at a strategic time for election and appointment purposes and probably with bipartisan support and big fan fare as a necessary evil or maybe not

[Arraya]

[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Well it depends on their perceived need and if the banks are sufficiently protected. Geithner did come out with his “white paper” after two years in the making – stating the NEED for higher down payments and interest rates. Now, obviously, if this was done it would be implemented at a strategic time for election and appointment purposes and probably with bipartisan support and big fan fare as a necessary evil or maybe not

[Arraya]

[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Well it depends on their perceived need and if the banks are sufficiently protected. Geithner did come out with his “white paper” after two years in the making – stating the NEED for higher down payments and interest rates. Now, obviously, if this was done it would be implemented at a strategic time for election and appointment purposes and probably with bipartisan support and big fan fare as a necessary evil or maybe not

[Author]

Posts