Powayseller almost stays away BUT!

[powayseller]

sdr, I will have all this data on my website, including the months supply, and percent change year over year. A realtor told me that inventory decreases in the fall, and sometimes it’s in Agust, some years Sept, some years Oct. It varies, so just because in the last 2 years it decreased in October, doesn’t mean it always decreases in October. Again, months supply is still rising, so inventory can fall all it wants; as long as sales keep falling MORE, then months inventory will keep rising. We have a very incomplete picture when we look at inventory. The better picture is presented by “months supply”. That is what I’ll be using…

[VCJIM]

I would agree that months of inventory is the truest indicator of the motion of the market, but I would point out that a pure inventory number is also useful; I think it is *perhaps* a better indicator of general public market psychology. If the inventory keeps rapidly rising, clearly people think it’s a great time to sell and throw their house on the pile. That it has stabilized / declined indicates to me that the general public no longer think they can easily sell their house for a great price.

[sdduuuude]

VCJIM – yes, but when inventory decreases, you don’t know if it is people taking the houses off the market because they don’t really need to sell then or people buying buying houses.

So you don’t know if you are seeing the results of buyer psychology or seller psychology.

I really wish we’d move this thread to the main topic.

[Anonymous]

I have nothing personal against sdrealtor but I think this post is indicative of the lack of genuine interest in this board when real estate is not declining fast enough. I mean when real estate goes up again, who will come here?

When the real estate and equity markets were obviously declining, everyone was beating their chests about how smart they were in calling these developments. Every discussion was about how everyone and their mother only owned euros, oil, CDs, treasuries and gold. Every poster had a somehwat godlike penchant for choosing the winning asset class in any given situation. Now, inventory is falling off, residential prices are remaining somewhat steady, oil has fallen, gold has fallen, and the stock market is rallying (with large capitalization and dividend paying stocks leading might I add) and everyone who had a lot ot brag about needs to find something else to do with their time. This inevitably leads to petty sniping. Clearly what we need is more visible signs that real estate is dead and that gold is the only safe investment so that people on this board will have something to talk about.

[Anonymous]

Hey, JES, you can’t move! We need rational, ex-military, religious folks to offset the overabundance of fruits and nuts here! Don’t abandon ship, man!

[Bugs]

Assuming this end of the cycle follows the same patterns as the last two, we can expect most of the movement in prices to come in bursts, followed by longer periods of relative stability. It worked that way when the markets were increasing, too. I find nothing strange about a reduction in listings and sales volume at the end of a summer selling season that started late and ended early. Frankly, I would have been surprised if the summer selling season had lasted longer this year.

I’d anticipate a relatively stable market during the Fall, followed by some more big pricing declines after the n
New Year. I see no signs of a reversal of this trend nor reason to think any of the fundamentals are going to do anything but get weaker. However, I do think different sellers will come to their senses at different times. Lucky for us.

[PerryChase]

As evidenced by the latest national headlines, there are plenty of “fruits and nuts” in the holier-than-thou crowd. The difference is that they’re all in denial or in the closet.

[PerryChase]

malfred, if you’ve read sdrealtor’s post for a while, you’d realize that he’s really a real estate bull in a bear outfit. I think that it comes with the job of being a Realtor.

powayseller has done a great job educating us about real estate. She’s written to the press; and for all I know, perhaps some of the reporters writing the real-estate related stories are lurkers on this site.

powayseller also did a superb job of advocating selling, renting and not buying. Her advocacy pales in comparison to the marketing power of the real estate industry that’s telling everyone that “it’s always a good time to buy.”

[Anonymous]

Aw, PC, not all Republicans are holier than thou types (i.e., churchgoers); Arnold sure ain’t a big churchgoing guy, or else he’d be against abortion and embryonic stem cell research. And, there are lots of good churchgoers in the DemoRat party, e.g., Southern Blacks.

Mr. Foley, while a Republican, was certainly not a churchgoing guy.

I’m the Republican precinct representative in my La Jolla neighborhood. On Saturday, I do my ‘get out the vote’ walk to Republicans in my neighborhood. I hardly see any of them on the road to church at 8:30 a.m. on Sundays.

Hey, maybe that explains why we’ve got a big, big bubble here in La Jolla (remember the chart, low churchgoing correlates with big bubble).

[zk]

jg,

Perry Chase didn’t say anything about Republicans or Democrats. He said, “there are plenty of “fruits and nuts” in the holier-than-thou crowd.”

“Arnold sure ain’t a big churchgoing guy, or else he’d be against abortion and embryonic stem cell research.”

Answer me this, jg,

Why are churchgoers against embryonic stem cell research? You’re preventing embryos that are going to be discarded from being used to save human lives.

Also, you use the word “churchgoer” as though it means that one is supportive of god’s word. Surely you know that a mere profession of faith and goodness means nothing. Surely you know that there are millions of churchgoing, bible-thumping, holier-than-thou types who don’t even try to follow god’s word. I’m going to give you credit enough to assume that you know these things. So, maybe I’ve misunderstood what you’re saying. When you say, “Arnold sure ain’t a big churchgoing guy, or else he’d be against abortion and embryonic stem cell research,” do you mean to imply that if he were a big churchgoing guy that necessarily he’d do his best to live by god’s word and therefore be against those things? Or do you mean something else?

It’s been my experience that the sooner after I meet someone they profess their religious conviction, the more likely it is that they are bereft of moral charachter. I understand that plenty of churchgoers aren’t like that. But just being a bible-thumper isn’t any indication that a person is “good.” In fact, if I had a choice of leaving my daughter in the hands of a church full of people or an atheist club full of people, I’d pick the latter.

[carlislematthew]

In fact, if I had a choice of leaving my daughter in the hands of a church full of people or an atheist club full of people, I’d pick the latter.

Well, being an atheist myself, thanks for your confidence.

As we’re in the “off topic” section of the forum, I’ll throw my opinion into the ring.

Belief is a good thing, for some people; it allows those that cannot accept the randomness of their existence to make it through the day. Blind faith is a crutch that some people need and I’d never want to take it away from them.

Myself? Well, I don’t need a bible or the fear of hell to not do bad things – I pride myself on being a good citizen and contributing to society. However, I’m thankful that those lacking in similar moral fiber have a smattering of commandments and some religious fear and guilt to keep them in line. If it weren’t for religion we’d have anarchy, because most people would go insane without some kind of “higher” purpose and reason for their otherwise meaningless existence.

Opium for the masses? Sure. But keep it coming. You keep your opium, and I’ll keep on enjoying my life, contributing to the world, and being happy.

Good day.

[zk]

carlislematthew,

“I don’t need a bible or the fear of hell to not do bad things – I pride myself on being a good citizen and contributing to society.”

I feel exactly the same way, as do pretty much all the atheists I know.

“Blind faith is a crutch that some people need and I’d never want to take it away from them.”

I concur, up to a point. But what I would like to take away from them, if I could, is their usually unwarranted “holier-than-thou” attitude. Perhaps it’s a weakness of mine that their attitude bothers me so much. But bother me it does.

“However, I’m thankful that those lacking in similar moral fiber have a smattering of commandments and some religious fear and guilt to keep them in line.”

I suppose it’s better than nothing. It’s too bad it doesn’t work better. Part of the reason it doesn’t work better, in my opinion, is the idea that they’ll be forgiven, almost regardless of what they do. Whoever made up their religion really screwed that one up.

(A separate) part of the (bigger) problem comes from the fact that religious tenets aren’t subject to logic or reason. It’s god’s word, and therefore it doesn’t matter whether it’s good for society in real life or not. No matter how ridiculous it is, it’s considered true and right by the blindly faithful.

“If it weren’t for religion we’d have anarchy, because most people would go insane without some kind of “higher” purpose and reason for their otherwise meaningless existence.”

I’m not sure whether I agree with that or not. In most civilizations throughout history, religion has played a fairly large part. But what about the Soviet Union? A basically godless culture. A miserable one, to be sure, but I think that was more due to totalitarianism than to atheism. In any case, there wasn’t anarchy nor were there people going insane (that I know of).

“Opium for the masses? Sure. But keep it coming.”

I totally understand what you mean. And, being pragmatic, I must agree that for this world right now, it’s probably for the best, Islamic extremism notwithstanding. But I think that it would be possible to have a society where humans set the rules for the maximum benifit to society and to individuals. And I think that if we could get there, we’d be better off than we are today. I don’t know for sure, and I could easily be wrong, and I’ll never find out. But that’s my opinion.

[Anonymous]

rational and religious are mutually exclusive. The vast majority of the world’s greatest scientists are atheists.

[PerryChase]

zk, you expressed exactly what I feel about religion. I think I love you!

[carlislematthew]

I’m not sure whether I agree with that or not. In most civilizations throughout history, religion has played a fairly large part. But what about the Soviet Union? A basically godless culture. A miserable one, to be sure, but I think that was more due to totalitarianism than to atheism. In any case, there wasn’t anarchy nor were there people going insane (that I know of).

Godless yes, but they had BELIEF! I’m not a communism expert, but as far as I know they believed in the people, the state, the ideology. Unfortunately, none of the beliefs addressed what happened when they died. I think that’s the major part of the religion crutch – addressing the purpose of your existence (i.e. not random) and having somewhere nice to go when you die, even if your life totally sucked.

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30972

[Author]

Posts