[Rich Toscano]

[quote=FlyerInHi]I took Harvey’s comment to be in the context of a discussion/negotiation where people of different ideologies can come to something productive.
[/quote]

Here’s the entire quote:

[quote=harvey][quote=FlyerInHi]Is it fair to say that liberals want police reform and conservatives want the status quo ante all the cameras? I think generally, yes.[/quote]

The point was that there really are no liberals and there are no conservatives. Only shades of grey with no delimiters.

Of course some people self-identify into these groups and they are free to do that. If one wants to call themselves a liberal or conservative I’m not going to dispute the label they give themselves.

Political debate can be worthwhile when we focus on issues and candidates.

Making generalizations about arbitrarily-defined groups is counter productive.[/quote]

There’s no mention of negotiating. It seems pretty clear to me that he is talking about YOUR tendency to “make generalizations about arbitrarily-defined groups.”

I could go back just through this thread alone and find multiple instances of you doing that. I could find many hundreds if I went through your past posts. I once banned you from the site for doing it so relentlessly, despite my repeated requests to stop.

So your response demonstrates a lack of self-awareness of almost bearishgurl-like proportions.

I wonder if it would be possible to get you two into some kind of infinite loop…

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Haha.. That’s funny. Harvey is right, focusing on issues and productively engaging with other parties is very appropriate when at the negotiation table. That’s going high and when others go low. Very admirable.
[/quote]

Except that’s not what he said. Here’s what he said:

[quote=harvey]Political debate can be worthwhile when we focus on issues and candidates.

Making generalizations about arbitrarily-defined groups is counter productive.[/quote]

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=njtosd]
I think it probably works as well as other dichotomies, such as extrovert/introvert feeling/thinking or the other Myers Briggs categories. [/quote]

I don’t agree with that because, taking introvert vs extrovert for example, it’s just a linear spectrum between two extremes regarding one issue.

“Conservative” vs. “liberal” means a million different things, depending on what issue you are talking about… that’s why it’s useless to argue based on “teams” as seems to be peoples’ general tendency. Each issue should be debated on its own merits, not what two (just two, for a million issues!!) teams think about it.

I think the Scientific American article is cool and the thing about innate tendencies sure seems plausible. But I do not agree that “liberal” vs “conservative” is anything like a single topic, linear spectrum such as “introvert” vs. “extrovert.”

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=harvey]The media wants us to associate the issue with the party with the group.

That arrangement is better for marketing.

Nobody would watch the “healthcare issues” channel or the “national security costs and risks” channel.

But many watch the “conservative” channel and many of the rest watch the “liberal” channel.[/quote]

It’s better for marketing, and dovetails very nicely with the strong human tendency towards tribalism.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=harvey]
Political debate can be worthwhile when we focus on issues and candidates.

Making generalizations about arbitrarily-defined groups is counter productive.[/quote]

I agree.
[/quote]

You cannot be serious…

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=sdgrrl]
If the home price drops 20% we wouldn’t be happy, but this is long term so I think over years the value will go up and hopefully you do too. Really hope you do too.
[/quote]

Sure, everything (at least, non-bubble things) goes up over a sufficiently long time frame… the question is how much.

I guess if I were to boil it down, I’d say, if you find a place you love and lock in a long-term monthly payment you can afford, buying right now can be a perfectly sensible thing. But it should be about that, locking in a reasonable price on a good long-term place — not about appreciation potential, because valuations pose a headwind against appreciation.

That’s my view anyway, fwiw…

[Rich Toscano]

I type fast too, BG, and yet I am somehow able to keep from writing thousands of words on every thread.

As for the rest of your reply, it is pretty much a (long) list of statements that aren’t really relevant to what I wrote. Not much more needs to be said…

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=bearishgurl]For whatever reason, flu, your animosity and bitterness (currently towards me) has been shining on high beam around here in recent weeks. I thinks its well past time that you block me so you aren’t bothered by my posts … especially during the business day when you are supposedly “working.” You’ve turned into the “Champion Thread Polluter” extraordinaire.[/quote]

Don’t worry bg, you’re still the reigning champ!

Well, I was going to just leave it at that, but it feels too snarky to just make a comment like that without explaining the grievance behind it.

Speaking not as the site owner here, but just an observer — a guy who reads the comments. I’m hard pressed to find any significant thread where you have not written epic length posts, a good proportion of which fall into one (or more!) of the following categories:

– barely relevant
– even less relevant than that
– not even understandable, really
– wild speculation presented as fact

And I’ll admit to some personal bias here, but it doesn’t help that so many of your novel-length comments these days are impassioned defenses of that goose-stepping canned ham who you inexplicably think would be a good president.

So, when you actually accuse someone else of being a Champion(!) Thread Polluter… boy, I just can’t sit back and watch that without saying something.

To end on a positive note, I do appreciate that you usually keep things polite and positive, and you are a good citizen in following the “no political threadjacks” rule. But with that said, if you think “Thread Pollution” is a problem… you should take a look at your own posts and consider how you might be contributing to it.

[Rich Toscano]

Hi sdgrrl – Sorry to be so late to the party here. I don’t have much to add to the many excellent comments in the thread. Here are a couple thoughts that jump out (which have been expressed by others, but fwiw I agree):

– The bait-n-switch low listing price is cheesy but while it might annoy me, it wouldn’t really change whether I want to buy the property or not. What matters is the price you can get it at, and whether it’s worth it to you.

– The “as is” thing could be a deal breaker, or a complete non-issue… that entirely depends on the state of the house. So I echo everyone’s advice to have someone inspect the hell out of the place, and only then will you be able to evaluate this aspect (and the accompanying super weird “afraid of their own shadow” comment). I’ll be curious to hear what they turn up. BTW if you don’t know a good inspector, I really liked the guy who did my house, and have recommended him to others with good results: http://www.masterspecs.info

Overall there’s some unusual aspects to it but nothing that would kill the deal for me personally — pending, of course, the findings of the home inspection.

With that said, bear in mind that I don’t have anything resembling expertise in individual real estate transactions. So, just my two cents, for what it’s worth.

The thing I have more of a handle on is the overall market and specifically valuations. There, not much has changed since last year’s update. The net of it is, homes are quite expensive (though not bubble expensive), but rates are so low that if you are financing the bulk of your purchase, it can still make sense to buy, because you are locking in a pretty reasonable monthly nut. However, that only really helps you if you intend to hang on to the home for a long time. If you have to sell reasonably soon, then the change in price will matter more than monthly payment, and with valuations at these levels, that doesn’t really seem like a good risk vs. reward.

So tell me a bit more about your “intentions” towards the home. Do you envision staying there long-term? If home prices were to decline 20% (not a prediction, but an entirely plausible possibility based on current valuations), would you be ok, or would that screw up your plans somehow? Even if you do want to stay there, is there a chance you’d be forced to move by job changes etc? All that might help determine whether it makes sense to buy in general — this place, or otherwise.

Keep us posted on the place… if you get that far, I’m interested to hear how the inspection goes (mostly bc of the somewhat ominous “afraid of their own shadow” comment), and whether you are able to find out why it fell out of escrow.

Rich

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=bearishgurl]I watched this video… [snip]

Notice that the owner is single and the only one living there.
[/quote]

This is a perfect specimen of a BG post. Somewhat pedantically noting a minor detail, with added emphasis to stress the import of her keen observation.

Except, the video in question is titled “Small Portland prefab home stacks space to fit family of 3.” Sorry, I’ll translate that to BG-speak: “Small Portland prefab home stacks space to fit family of 3.” And said family of 3 is featured almost constantly throughout the video.

Simply perfect.

[Rich Toscano]

This is not exactly what you’re looking for, but the BLS has a San Diego CPI series that includes rent, which you can break out. It’s not the coast, though, but all of SD. Might give a ballpark though.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=gzz]
I am trying to think of a single bearish factor here, but I am at a loss. [/quote]

Valuations!

Pretty good list overall though. And the valuation thing is offset to a good degree by low rates. (On that note, though… if record low rates figure into your one year forecast, that implies that rates still have to be here next year).

Anyway, seems like a reasonable overview… I just had to bite on the one bearish factor… 😉

[Rich Toscano]

Hi jfel – Homes are definitely expensive but they really don’t compare to the mid-2000s bubble, and I don’t think there is anywhere near the risk of buying as there was back then.

There’s more in this article (from last year but the situation hasn’t changed a whole lot since then)…

Shambling Towards Affordability, Mid-Year 2015

… including the state of valuations and what those valuations imply about the future. Hopefully something in there of interest to you. You mentioned that some of the articles are too nerdy for you but if you have specific questions, post them here and I can try to clarify.

Rich

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=bearishgurl]I don’t believe in “bubbles”[/quote]

Classic… is that you, Greenspan?

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=poorgradstudent]
Sheesh. Millenials.[/quote]

Millenial! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA… (I wish).

[Author]

Posts