Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 1, 2010 at 4:24 PM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #534378April 1, 2010 at 4:24 PM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #534835
patientrenter
ParticipantGeneral prices in the US, as measured by the CPI , have increased 38% from their (average) 1996 values through February 2010.
If homes in San Diego were to match their 1996 lows adjusted for inflation, they would be 38% more expensive in dollars than they were then. So clearly we have not touched the previous low point adjusted for inflation.
April 1, 2010 at 4:24 PM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #534933ParticipantGeneral prices in the US, as measured by the CPI , have increased 38% from their (average) 1996 values through February 2010.
If homes in San Diego were to match their 1996 lows adjusted for inflation, they would be 38% more expensive in dollars than they were then. So clearly we have not touched the previous low point adjusted for inflation.
April 1, 2010 at 4:24 PM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #535197ParticipantGeneral prices in the US, as measured by the CPI , have increased 38% from their (average) 1996 values through February 2010.
If homes in San Diego were to match their 1996 lows adjusted for inflation, they would be 38% more expensive in dollars than they were then. So clearly we have not touched the previous low point adjusted for inflation.
April 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM in reply to: Strategies for protecting stock options/stock plan granted shares #534242ParticipantI don’t know if my company restricts me from betting against the company, whether it’s a hedge of my compensation or not. But I couldn’t seriously defend it in front of my company’s CEO, so I wouldn’t do it.
April 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM in reply to: Strategies for protecting stock options/stock plan granted shares #534373ParticipantI don’t know if my company restricts me from betting against the company, whether it’s a hedge of my compensation or not. But I couldn’t seriously defend it in front of my company’s CEO, so I wouldn’t do it.
April 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM in reply to: Strategies for protecting stock options/stock plan granted shares #534830ParticipantI don’t know if my company restricts me from betting against the company, whether it’s a hedge of my compensation or not. But I couldn’t seriously defend it in front of my company’s CEO, so I wouldn’t do it.
April 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM in reply to: Strategies for protecting stock options/stock plan granted shares #534928ParticipantI don’t know if my company restricts me from betting against the company, whether it’s a hedge of my compensation or not. But I couldn’t seriously defend it in front of my company’s CEO, so I wouldn’t do it.
April 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM in reply to: Strategies for protecting stock options/stock plan granted shares #535193ParticipantI don’t know if my company restricts me from betting against the company, whether it’s a hedge of my compensation or not. But I couldn’t seriously defend it in front of my company’s CEO, so I wouldn’t do it.
March 11, 2010 at 8:08 PM in reply to: California Receives $700 Million in Federal Housing Aid #524797Participant[quote=justsayin1964]…You are correct if you are speaking to people who purchased above thier means.[/quote]
I can’t afford a Ferrari. I have enough money to buy one, but I can’t afford it. It sounds like what I mean when I say “can’t afford” is the same as what you mean when you say “above one’s means”.
I have more sympathy for someone who bought at the top of the market using only their own money than people who did the same thing using only other people’s money. But buying a home for more than 3x income at the height of the largest RE bubble in recorded history is worse than dumb in my books – it is irresponsible.
March 11, 2010 at 8:08 PM in reply to: California Receives $700 Million in Federal Housing Aid #524931Participant[quote=justsayin1964]…You are correct if you are speaking to people who purchased above thier means.[/quote]
I can’t afford a Ferrari. I have enough money to buy one, but I can’t afford it. It sounds like what I mean when I say “can’t afford” is the same as what you mean when you say “above one’s means”.
I have more sympathy for someone who bought at the top of the market using only their own money than people who did the same thing using only other people’s money. But buying a home for more than 3x income at the height of the largest RE bubble in recorded history is worse than dumb in my books – it is irresponsible.
March 11, 2010 at 8:08 PM in reply to: California Receives $700 Million in Federal Housing Aid #525374Participant[quote=justsayin1964]…You are correct if you are speaking to people who purchased above thier means.[/quote]
I can’t afford a Ferrari. I have enough money to buy one, but I can’t afford it. It sounds like what I mean when I say “can’t afford” is the same as what you mean when you say “above one’s means”.
I have more sympathy for someone who bought at the top of the market using only their own money than people who did the same thing using only other people’s money. But buying a home for more than 3x income at the height of the largest RE bubble in recorded history is worse than dumb in my books – it is irresponsible.
March 11, 2010 at 8:08 PM in reply to: California Receives $700 Million in Federal Housing Aid #525471Participant[quote=justsayin1964]…You are correct if you are speaking to people who purchased above thier means.[/quote]
I can’t afford a Ferrari. I have enough money to buy one, but I can’t afford it. It sounds like what I mean when I say “can’t afford” is the same as what you mean when you say “above one’s means”.
I have more sympathy for someone who bought at the top of the market using only their own money than people who did the same thing using only other people’s money. But buying a home for more than 3x income at the height of the largest RE bubble in recorded history is worse than dumb in my books – it is irresponsible.
March 11, 2010 at 8:08 PM in reply to: California Receives $700 Million in Federal Housing Aid #525728Participant[quote=justsayin1964]…You are correct if you are speaking to people who purchased above thier means.[/quote]
I can’t afford a Ferrari. I have enough money to buy one, but I can’t afford it. It sounds like what I mean when I say “can’t afford” is the same as what you mean when you say “above one’s means”.
I have more sympathy for someone who bought at the top of the market using only their own money than people who did the same thing using only other people’s money. But buying a home for more than 3x income at the height of the largest RE bubble in recorded history is worse than dumb in my books – it is irresponsible.
March 11, 2010 at 7:23 PM in reply to: California Receives $700 Million in Federal Housing Aid #524916Participant[quote=justsayin1964]…..how do you know that some of the people caught up in all this mess weren’t prudent? I know people who put thier savings into a home thinking that they would be priced out of the market….[/quote]
Promising to pay more money for a place to live than you can afford to pay is not responsible. Period.
-
AuthorPosts
