[Rich Toscano]

Just got back from vacation. More of the same in the mkt lately but I will get an update up soon, I hope.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=mixxalot]Don’t get me wrong they deserve to be treated fairly like everyone else but not given special attention.[/quote]

Special attention like getting shot?

Please don’t post garbage like this on my site, it embarrasses everyone involved.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=utcsox]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Donald_Trump_presidential_campaign_endorsements,_2016

Here is the national list include some of the best and brightest Republicans office holders: Paul Ryan, Nikki Haley, Greg Abbott, Scott Walker and much more.[/quote]

Nice! That plus flu’s spreadsheet pretty much does it…

[Rich Toscano]

This is a good idea, to make such a list. I think you’re not the only one wondering this. Bill aka Calculated Risk wrote a blog post discussing the potential aftermath of supporting Trump, in which he said:

[quote]I believe we are seeing a Litmus Test moment right now, especially for Republicans. I believe, in a few years, whether someone supported Trump or not will make a difference in how people are perceived. This will make or break some political careers.[/quote]

Even before reading that post I had been thinking the same thing. To me, Trump personifies the worst aspects of our political discourse and of our culture as a whole. If someone endorses Trump, that implies to me either that they are putting partisan politics way above the public good, or that they are hopelessly misguided. I’m not sure which is worse, but it doesn’t really matter — I will never, ever vote for any politician who endorses Trump.

Based on this thread and CR’s post, others feel that way too. I would think a lot of people do, but obviously I’m not that great at predicting what other people will think, as I never would have thought a monster like him could get nearly this far.

However, I do know that it would be cool to have a resource where you could enter a politician’s or business person’s name and see if they endorsed Trump, and to what degree (reluctant vs. enthusiastic). If CR is right, maybe that will make an impact in the future, and maybe even make some good come out of this cluster-f of an election.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=FlyerInHi]BG, just what are your bearish about? Certainly not housing![/quote]

Haha, I was wondering the same thing!

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=bearishgurl]Perhaps it means that you are/were meant to be a forever-renter in SD.[/quote]

I literally have not heard that argument since 2005.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Leave aside the period before, the Fed acted beautifully after 2008.[/quote]

You could have said the same thing in 2005 — and many did. Until the Fed has successfully normalized policy*, it’s too early to declare victory.

* – BTW – That’s the hard part.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=The-Shoveler]Wage inflation stagnates the whole economy stagnates.[/quote]

Fortunately wage growth is improving, after having been stagnant for several years:

https://www.frbatlanta.org/chcs/wage-growth-tracker?panel=1

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=FlyerInHi]What makes you think that today’s rates are artificially low? What is artificial and real?

Money is just a human created means of exchange in commerce. There should be no reason for money to automatically make money on money, such as when rates are high.

Maybe we are just smarter in managing the money supply?[/quote]

I don’t really think your money supply thing explains it. That might explain low inflation, but it doesn’t explain why real rates are negative. (I actually think the whole premise is questionable, but even if we allow it, it doesn’t explain the negative real rates).

Let’s avoid the word “artificial” — that has a lot of implications. What we can say is that rates are very, very low. Lower than inflation, which has never historically lasted, and with good reason.

I suppose it’s possible that rates stay this low, but I think that people who are depending on that (unprecedented) outcome are taking a huge risk. There’s a difference between allowing for it, and depending on it… and many (maybe most) investors seem to be doing the latter as far as I can tell.

[Rich Toscano]

Thanks OP, glad to see Grantham and GMO getting some attention here. They are as good as it gets when it comes to identifying and analyzing bubbles. FYI – you have to register to access their stuff but it’s free and well worth the small effort.

My own version of the graph looks a little different as, unlike US-wide prices, SD prices have been a lot more volatile.

So the US-wide overvaluation is more unusual than the SD level of valuation, for what that’s worth.

All due respect to Grantham (who is literally my investing hero — btw I got to meet him once, it was awesome </fanboy raving>) — I don’t see it so much as an echo bubble, as just a response to low rates. Rates are extremely low and even at these price levels, buying can pencil out. So it’s more like high housing prices are a rational response to (irrationally?) high bond prices.

But that’s just my feeling on it. When in doubt, listen to Grantham.

(Fortunately, the question of whether the “bubble” label fits or not is not all that important –and I’m sure my man JG would agree with that. The important issue is that housing is expensive, whatever the reason may be, and prospective risk/returns should be evaluated accordingly).

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=utcsox]It’s easy to run different scenarios using NY Times rent vs. buy calculator.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/upshot/buy-rent-calculator.html%5B/quote%5D

+1 on the NY Times thinger.

Can’t speak to the specific properties you are looking at, OP, but generally speaking in SD it is most definitely not 2x as expensive to buy as to rent, once you consider everything (including the all important mortgage interest deduction). In fact the monthly nut ratio is not far from the lowest ever, per the second graph here: http://piggington.com/shambling_towards_affordability_midyear_2015

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=svelte]This starts playing in my head every time I see this thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hH15UhALQw%5B/quote%5D

Yes! A Rush reference on piggington… my life is now complete! 😉

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=Consideringoptions]Thanks for your feedback. Conservative is fine (we lived in central ca for several years) as long as conservative isn’t code for racist. From the feedback I’ve gotten here, most Temecula residents (temeculans?) have no issues with interracial couples.

Edit: And I keep messing up posting. This was in reply to flyerinhi regarding Temecula being conservative.[/quote]

Hi Consideringoptions – It sounds like you want to include the post you are replying to, like I did above? If so, you can hit “quote” instead of “reply” when you are responding to a post.

Rich

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=carli]
…most everything bearishgurl is stating is completely inaccurate, false and made up in her own mind with no apparent basis in fact whatsoever.
[/quote]

I don’t know about you guys, but I’m thinking we have a contender for a new website slogan.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=zk]
…I’m hoping to hear something reasonable…
[/quote]

Best of luck.

[Author]

Posts