The boat turns slowly

[SD Realtor]

Responsible govt oversight eh… Like maybe with the Madoff case?

You mean that same govt that gets lobbied by all of these same firms that got bailed out?

Yeah that system works really well.

Like CAR has said all along, simply make people put large downpayments down, perhaps 30% or more and you would be amazed how many problems would go away. Additionally you would be amazed at the affordability factor.

What would be really nice though is all of that beauracracy would be wiped out.

I think more govt officials would be sad that they would have nothing to regulate and thus be out of jobs. The govt wouldn’t have to watch out for people because that 30% would immediately filter out those who should not buy anyway.

Unfortunately that solution is to simple, makes to much sense and would eliminate plenty of govt jobs so it is unpalatable.

[socrattt]

Interesting topic we have here. Brian sees government intervention as a good thing as he looks at things from a “today” standpoint rather than taking a took at the long term effect.

A stimulus may have been needed to fend off a potential collapse in 2008, but continued intervention can cause dramatic long term issues, which I believe are now right around the corner. The FED purchased mortgage back securities to push rates down, the banks kept inventory from flooding the markets and our government incentivized just about every bank to stay afloat.

At the end of the day the evidence is staggering. Some coastal areas that are lacking inventory are seeing 2005, 2006 prices. The banks are not only making money on their distressed property, but in some cases their subsidies make them more than the actual loan balance. The FDIC is involved in the payback process to many, but those funds will be short lived.

Does intervention help? Short term, most definitely, but the long term is my concern. The next 6-12 months will be a telling time for this country and San Diego. I believe America is on the verge of some very big changes and that we have some very large financial issues brewing. I didn’t believe America had the ability to control the markets as they did, but at some point free markets will dominate and a collapse is inevitable. We can only hope that the government will somehow detach itself from the housing market and realize that the housing market has to fix itself. Housing Bubble 2.0 is being created as we speak, the only question is how will it burst??

[socrattt]

Interesting topic we have here. Brian sees government intervention as a good thing as he looks at things from a “today” standpoint rather than taking a took at the long term effect.

A stimulus may have been needed to fend off a potential collapse in 2008, but continued intervention can cause dramatic long term issues, which I believe are now right around the corner. The FED purchased mortgage back securities to push rates down, the banks kept inventory from flooding the markets and our government incentivized just about every bank to stay afloat.

At the end of the day the evidence is staggering. Some coastal areas that are lacking inventory are seeing 2005, 2006 prices. The banks are not only making money on their distressed property, but in some cases their subsidies make them more than the actual loan balance. The FDIC is involved in the payback process to many, but those funds will be short lived.

Does intervention help? Short term, most definitely, but the long term is my concern. The next 6-12 months will be a telling time for this country and San Diego. I believe America is on the verge of some very big changes and that we have some very large financial issues brewing. I didn’t believe America had the ability to control the markets as they did, but at some point free markets will dominate and a collapse is inevitable. We can only hope that the government will somehow detach itself from the housing market and realize that the housing market has to fix itself. Housing Bubble 2.0 is being created as we speak, the only question is how will it burst??

[socrattt]

Interesting topic we have here. Brian sees government intervention as a good thing as he looks at things from a “today” standpoint rather than taking a took at the long term effect.

A stimulus may have been needed to fend off a potential collapse in 2008, but continued intervention can cause dramatic long term issues, which I believe are now right around the corner. The FED purchased mortgage back securities to push rates down, the banks kept inventory from flooding the markets and our government incentivized just about every bank to stay afloat.

At the end of the day the evidence is staggering. Some coastal areas that are lacking inventory are seeing 2005, 2006 prices. The banks are not only making money on their distressed property, but in some cases their subsidies make them more than the actual loan balance. The FDIC is involved in the payback process to many, but those funds will be short lived.

Does intervention help? Short term, most definitely, but the long term is my concern. The next 6-12 months will be a telling time for this country and San Diego. I believe America is on the verge of some very big changes and that we have some very large financial issues brewing. I didn’t believe America had the ability to control the markets as they did, but at some point free markets will dominate and a collapse is inevitable. We can only hope that the government will somehow detach itself from the housing market and realize that the housing market has to fix itself. Housing Bubble 2.0 is being created as we speak, the only question is how will it burst??

[socrattt]

Interesting topic we have here. Brian sees government intervention as a good thing as he looks at things from a “today” standpoint rather than taking a took at the long term effect.

A stimulus may have been needed to fend off a potential collapse in 2008, but continued intervention can cause dramatic long term issues, which I believe are now right around the corner. The FED purchased mortgage back securities to push rates down, the banks kept inventory from flooding the markets and our government incentivized just about every bank to stay afloat.

At the end of the day the evidence is staggering. Some coastal areas that are lacking inventory are seeing 2005, 2006 prices. The banks are not only making money on their distressed property, but in some cases their subsidies make them more than the actual loan balance. The FDIC is involved in the payback process to many, but those funds will be short lived.

Does intervention help? Short term, most definitely, but the long term is my concern. The next 6-12 months will be a telling time for this country and San Diego. I believe America is on the verge of some very big changes and that we have some very large financial issues brewing. I didn’t believe America had the ability to control the markets as they did, but at some point free markets will dominate and a collapse is inevitable. We can only hope that the government will somehow detach itself from the housing market and realize that the housing market has to fix itself. Housing Bubble 2.0 is being created as we speak, the only question is how will it burst??

[socrattt]

Interesting topic we have here. Brian sees government intervention as a good thing as he looks at things from a “today” standpoint rather than taking a took at the long term effect.

A stimulus may have been needed to fend off a potential collapse in 2008, but continued intervention can cause dramatic long term issues, which I believe are now right around the corner. The FED purchased mortgage back securities to push rates down, the banks kept inventory from flooding the markets and our government incentivized just about every bank to stay afloat.

At the end of the day the evidence is staggering. Some coastal areas that are lacking inventory are seeing 2005, 2006 prices. The banks are not only making money on their distressed property, but in some cases their subsidies make them more than the actual loan balance. The FDIC is involved in the payback process to many, but those funds will be short lived.

Does intervention help? Short term, most definitely, but the long term is my concern. The next 6-12 months will be a telling time for this country and San Diego. I believe America is on the verge of some very big changes and that we have some very large financial issues brewing. I didn’t believe America had the ability to control the markets as they did, but at some point free markets will dominate and a collapse is inevitable. We can only hope that the government will somehow detach itself from the housing market and realize that the housing market has to fix itself. Housing Bubble 2.0 is being created as we speak, the only question is how will it burst??

[gandalf]

That’s not really a practical answer. Government has an essential role to play. Markets do not regulate themself. This is well-understood in economics.

Responsible regulation of the financial, housing and credit markets in the last decade would have largely prevented the housing bubble and economic meltdown, which would have alleviated the need for these horrible bailouts.

Regulation of offshore drilling would have prevented the Gulf Oil spill. Mining regulations would have shuttered Massey before that disaster took place. Drinkable water running through your pipes, police/fire, streets and roads, safe food, the electricity that powers your computer — any number of social ‘goods’ are supported, directly and indirectly, through government.

For my part, I think the answer has more to do with curbing the influence money plays in electing officials, regulating ‘lobbying’. I’m not sure what the exact approach would be. Complicated question.

For starters, I think corporations should be stripped of ‘personhood’, and should not be allowed to donate/fund/launder money to campaigns or causes. And I’m disgusted with the Supreme Court’s recent decision restricting the ability to regulate political contributions (so called ‘free speech’).

[gandalf]

That’s not really a practical answer. Government has an essential role to play. Markets do not regulate themself. This is well-understood in economics.

Responsible regulation of the financial, housing and credit markets in the last decade would have largely prevented the housing bubble and economic meltdown, which would have alleviated the need for these horrible bailouts.

Regulation of offshore drilling would have prevented the Gulf Oil spill. Mining regulations would have shuttered Massey before that disaster took place. Drinkable water running through your pipes, police/fire, streets and roads, safe food, the electricity that powers your computer — any number of social ‘goods’ are supported, directly and indirectly, through government.

For my part, I think the answer has more to do with curbing the influence money plays in electing officials, regulating ‘lobbying’. I’m not sure what the exact approach would be. Complicated question.

For starters, I think corporations should be stripped of ‘personhood’, and should not be allowed to donate/fund/launder money to campaigns or causes. And I’m disgusted with the Supreme Court’s recent decision restricting the ability to regulate political contributions (so called ‘free speech’).

[gandalf]

That’s not really a practical answer. Government has an essential role to play. Markets do not regulate themself. This is well-understood in economics.

Responsible regulation of the financial, housing and credit markets in the last decade would have largely prevented the housing bubble and economic meltdown, which would have alleviated the need for these horrible bailouts.

Regulation of offshore drilling would have prevented the Gulf Oil spill. Mining regulations would have shuttered Massey before that disaster took place. Drinkable water running through your pipes, police/fire, streets and roads, safe food, the electricity that powers your computer — any number of social ‘goods’ are supported, directly and indirectly, through government.

For my part, I think the answer has more to do with curbing the influence money plays in electing officials, regulating ‘lobbying’. I’m not sure what the exact approach would be. Complicated question.

For starters, I think corporations should be stripped of ‘personhood’, and should not be allowed to donate/fund/launder money to campaigns or causes. And I’m disgusted with the Supreme Court’s recent decision restricting the ability to regulate political contributions (so called ‘free speech’).

[gandalf]

That’s not really a practical answer. Government has an essential role to play. Markets do not regulate themself. This is well-understood in economics.

Responsible regulation of the financial, housing and credit markets in the last decade would have largely prevented the housing bubble and economic meltdown, which would have alleviated the need for these horrible bailouts.

Regulation of offshore drilling would have prevented the Gulf Oil spill. Mining regulations would have shuttered Massey before that disaster took place. Drinkable water running through your pipes, police/fire, streets and roads, safe food, the electricity that powers your computer — any number of social ‘goods’ are supported, directly and indirectly, through government.

For my part, I think the answer has more to do with curbing the influence money plays in electing officials, regulating ‘lobbying’. I’m not sure what the exact approach would be. Complicated question.

For starters, I think corporations should be stripped of ‘personhood’, and should not be allowed to donate/fund/launder money to campaigns or causes. And I’m disgusted with the Supreme Court’s recent decision restricting the ability to regulate political contributions (so called ‘free speech’).

[gandalf]

That’s not really a practical answer. Government has an essential role to play. Markets do not regulate themself. This is well-understood in economics.

Responsible regulation of the financial, housing and credit markets in the last decade would have largely prevented the housing bubble and economic meltdown, which would have alleviated the need for these horrible bailouts.

Regulation of offshore drilling would have prevented the Gulf Oil spill. Mining regulations would have shuttered Massey before that disaster took place. Drinkable water running through your pipes, police/fire, streets and roads, safe food, the electricity that powers your computer — any number of social ‘goods’ are supported, directly and indirectly, through government.

For my part, I think the answer has more to do with curbing the influence money plays in electing officials, regulating ‘lobbying’. I’m not sure what the exact approach would be. Complicated question.

For starters, I think corporations should be stripped of ‘personhood’, and should not be allowed to donate/fund/launder money to campaigns or causes. And I’m disgusted with the Supreme Court’s recent decision restricting the ability to regulate political contributions (so called ‘free speech’).

[jpinpb]

[quote=sdrealtor]Sorry but I’m with Brian on this as I have to disagree with all this government should stay out of everything nonsense. The government should to watch out for us on many things and allowing this is not giving up being a responsible adult. While there are many things best left to free markets, there are also many things that the government should not trust to free markets.[/quote]

The government created this situation way back and their continued interference continues to exacerbate the problem, IMO. The government has indirectly regulated this market for a very long time. Nevertheless, all their meddling is only succeeding in dragging this out. I’ve seen some places come down in price that a year ago were attempting to sell at a much higher price. I’ve been seeing places listed 2 years ago that are finally being sold for considerably less than peak.

[jpinpb]

[quote=sdrealtor]Sorry but I’m with Brian on this as I have to disagree with all this government should stay out of everything nonsense. The government should to watch out for us on many things and allowing this is not giving up being a responsible adult. While there are many things best left to free markets, there are also many things that the government should not trust to free markets.[/quote]

The government created this situation way back and their continued interference continues to exacerbate the problem, IMO. The government has indirectly regulated this market for a very long time. Nevertheless, all their meddling is only succeeding in dragging this out. I’ve seen some places come down in price that a year ago were attempting to sell at a much higher price. I’ve been seeing places listed 2 years ago that are finally being sold for considerably less than peak.

[jpinpb]

[quote=sdrealtor]Sorry but I’m with Brian on this as I have to disagree with all this government should stay out of everything nonsense. The government should to watch out for us on many things and allowing this is not giving up being a responsible adult. While there are many things best left to free markets, there are also many things that the government should not trust to free markets.[/quote]

The government created this situation way back and their continued interference continues to exacerbate the problem, IMO. The government has indirectly regulated this market for a very long time. Nevertheless, all their meddling is only succeeding in dragging this out. I’ve seen some places come down in price that a year ago were attempting to sell at a much higher price. I’ve been seeing places listed 2 years ago that are finally being sold for considerably less than peak.

[jpinpb]

[quote=sdrealtor]Sorry but I’m with Brian on this as I have to disagree with all this government should stay out of everything nonsense. The government should to watch out for us on many things and allowing this is not giving up being a responsible adult. While there are many things best left to free markets, there are also many things that the government should not trust to free markets.[/quote]

The government created this situation way back and their continued interference continues to exacerbate the problem, IMO. The government has indirectly regulated this market for a very long time. Nevertheless, all their meddling is only succeeding in dragging this out. I’ve seen some places come down in price that a year ago were attempting to sell at a much higher price. I’ve been seeing places listed 2 years ago that are finally being sold for considerably less than peak.

[Author]

Posts