[temeculaguy]

I don’t watch much of her show, mostly because of her haircut. I did catch one piece of an episode and she talked a woman who was in debt out of buying a $2,000 handbag. So she’s not perfect, but she grilled the caller, found out the woman was a financial wreck, then told her after the credit cards were paid off, then and only then should she concern herself with luxury items. Made sense to me, and that woman would never listen to, read or watch 99% of the people most piggs read. That woman would never, ever be told anything if it wasn’t for Suzie. If it’s the only way to get to some people, I guess it’s better than them watching another episode of the Kardashians.

I am serious about her haircut, normally I’m joking but I’m dead serious. I’m a “glass is completely full” guy when it comes to most women. My friends love playing the “TG will find apositive attribute” game. Fat, short, old, doesn’t matter, there’s something beautiful and sexy on most every woman on the planet. The big ones are usually busty, the short ones usually have nice backsides, and those a little older, who didn’t kinda have a thing for Mrs. Robinson. But the ultra thin ones or the Suzie Orman/Dorothy Hammil haircuts. My head usually drops and I say “Why, dear god Why?” and everyone laughs. But it’s true. When I find the the fashion magazine editor who insists on poisoning women’s minds, making them think that men like women to have the body of a 9 year old boy and the haircut to match….I am literally going to beat him within an inch of his life.

Equalizer, thank you for the props and the spirit lift which was timed perfectly. Unlike Outofmojo, I followed Bron’s advice and immediately returned to my sucky life, today being one of the worst days in recent memory. You softened the blow, so walter needs to chill out a bit on the spelling errors, since he has his moments, even more than most.

As one of the few unmarried piggs, I can tell you that Suzie and equlizer’s sentiments are true as far as bling not being “in.” 5 years ago, it was a totally different world in singleville. But din’t one of those books say that the Geek shall inherit the earth, or was that another typo?

[temeculaguy]

I don’t watch much of her show, mostly because of her haircut. I did catch one piece of an episode and she talked a woman who was in debt out of buying a $2,000 handbag. So she’s not perfect, but she grilled the caller, found out the woman was a financial wreck, then told her after the credit cards were paid off, then and only then should she concern herself with luxury items. Made sense to me, and that woman would never listen to, read or watch 99% of the people most piggs read. That woman would never, ever be told anything if it wasn’t for Suzie. If it’s the only way to get to some people, I guess it’s better than them watching another episode of the Kardashians.

I am serious about her haircut, normally I’m joking but I’m dead serious. I’m a “glass is completely full” guy when it comes to most women. My friends love playing the “TG will find apositive attribute” game. Fat, short, old, doesn’t matter, there’s something beautiful and sexy on most every woman on the planet. The big ones are usually busty, the short ones usually have nice backsides, and those a little older, who didn’t kinda have a thing for Mrs. Robinson. But the ultra thin ones or the Suzie Orman/Dorothy Hammil haircuts. My head usually drops and I say “Why, dear god Why?” and everyone laughs. But it’s true. When I find the the fashion magazine editor who insists on poisoning women’s minds, making them think that men like women to have the body of a 9 year old boy and the haircut to match….I am literally going to beat him within an inch of his life.

Equalizer, thank you for the props and the spirit lift which was timed perfectly. Unlike Outofmojo, I followed Bron’s advice and immediately returned to my sucky life, today being one of the worst days in recent memory. You softened the blow, so walter needs to chill out a bit on the spelling errors, since he has his moments, even more than most.

As one of the few unmarried piggs, I can tell you that Suzie and equlizer’s sentiments are true as far as bling not being “in.” 5 years ago, it was a totally different world in singleville. But din’t one of those books say that the Geek shall inherit the earth, or was that another typo?

[temeculaguy]

I don’t watch much of her show, mostly because of her haircut. I did catch one piece of an episode and she talked a woman who was in debt out of buying a $2,000 handbag. So she’s not perfect, but she grilled the caller, found out the woman was a financial wreck, then told her after the credit cards were paid off, then and only then should she concern herself with luxury items. Made sense to me, and that woman would never listen to, read or watch 99% of the people most piggs read. That woman would never, ever be told anything if it wasn’t for Suzie. If it’s the only way to get to some people, I guess it’s better than them watching another episode of the Kardashians.

I am serious about her haircut, normally I’m joking but I’m dead serious. I’m a “glass is completely full” guy when it comes to most women. My friends love playing the “TG will find apositive attribute” game. Fat, short, old, doesn’t matter, there’s something beautiful and sexy on most every woman on the planet. The big ones are usually busty, the short ones usually have nice backsides, and those a little older, who didn’t kinda have a thing for Mrs. Robinson. But the ultra thin ones or the Suzie Orman/Dorothy Hammil haircuts. My head usually drops and I say “Why, dear god Why?” and everyone laughs. But it’s true. When I find the the fashion magazine editor who insists on poisoning women’s minds, making them think that men like women to have the body of a 9 year old boy and the haircut to match….I am literally going to beat him within an inch of his life.

Equalizer, thank you for the props and the spirit lift which was timed perfectly. Unlike Outofmojo, I followed Bron’s advice and immediately returned to my sucky life, today being one of the worst days in recent memory. You softened the blow, so walter needs to chill out a bit on the spelling errors, since he has his moments, even more than most.

As one of the few unmarried piggs, I can tell you that Suzie and equlizer’s sentiments are true as far as bling not being “in.” 5 years ago, it was a totally different world in singleville. But din’t one of those books say that the Geek shall inherit the earth, or was that another typo?

[temeculaguy]

I don’t watch much of her show, mostly because of her haircut. I did catch one piece of an episode and she talked a woman who was in debt out of buying a $2,000 handbag. So she’s not perfect, but she grilled the caller, found out the woman was a financial wreck, then told her after the credit cards were paid off, then and only then should she concern herself with luxury items. Made sense to me, and that woman would never listen to, read or watch 99% of the people most piggs read. That woman would never, ever be told anything if it wasn’t for Suzie. If it’s the only way to get to some people, I guess it’s better than them watching another episode of the Kardashians.

I am serious about her haircut, normally I’m joking but I’m dead serious. I’m a “glass is completely full” guy when it comes to most women. My friends love playing the “TG will find apositive attribute” game. Fat, short, old, doesn’t matter, there’s something beautiful and sexy on most every woman on the planet. The big ones are usually busty, the short ones usually have nice backsides, and those a little older, who didn’t kinda have a thing for Mrs. Robinson. But the ultra thin ones or the Suzie Orman/Dorothy Hammil haircuts. My head usually drops and I say “Why, dear god Why?” and everyone laughs. But it’s true. When I find the the fashion magazine editor who insists on poisoning women’s minds, making them think that men like women to have the body of a 9 year old boy and the haircut to match….I am literally going to beat him within an inch of his life.

Equalizer, thank you for the props and the spirit lift which was timed perfectly. Unlike Outofmojo, I followed Bron’s advice and immediately returned to my sucky life, today being one of the worst days in recent memory. You softened the blow, so walter needs to chill out a bit on the spelling errors, since he has his moments, even more than most.

As one of the few unmarried piggs, I can tell you that Suzie and equlizer’s sentiments are true as far as bling not being “in.” 5 years ago, it was a totally different world in singleville. But din’t one of those books say that the Geek shall inherit the earth, or was that another typo?

[temeculaguy]

threadkiller-thanks, but I prefer my role as color commentator. If you haven’t already figured it out, I’m all style, minimal substance and Rich is 5 times smarter than I am, I know my place.

rich-not to make this a lovefest, but you are more shilleresque than you probably realize. You don’t make the data bend to fit your paradigm or to prove a point. You are also smart enough to know that you can’t predict the future, just increase your odds. Stay classy and consistent, especially when I challenge your assertion that there is no oil bubble a few pargraphs from now.

BG-I used manahatan as an extreme example. There’s NYC and the midwest, everything else is on a sliding scale in between the two. Zoning plays a role too in that scale. Did you know that the city of poway is essentially built out and you cant knock down a house and build three condos there, like you can in San Diego. Even my own beloved Temecula is near build out. Zoning is what Shiller refers to as “land restricted.” It throws off the formula, much of So cal is strictly zoned, hence the silly prices and also why sdrealtor sees what he sees, not much land left for anyone to do what they please.

Now to the rest and a mild oil threadjack. I have only seen a few things with true clarity. Ford stock when it was $2 a share, The Wire as the greatest televion show of all time, and Oil’s days are numbered. Maybe it’s not a bubble this year, but that party is so over, as is how the world works. I like our position for what I see as the next true revoloution.

The advancements are exploding, the answer is going to end up being a combination of sun, land, and technology. Guess what, The U.S. has a fantastic set up moving forward. Watch this video

http://www.jouleunlimited.com/video/story.html

They took the next step, 15k acres for real production, $20 a barrell for diesel (incentives included, of course), totally green and carbon nuetral. A year from now, it goes into the fuel tanks of our trucks on the road. In ten years, we not only stop importing oil, we export it. Europe and most of asia cant even make it, you need deserts and wasteland, we’ve got plenty. The fun part, this isnt even the best company, there are san diego companies ahead of them. Probably none actually win, but they build off each other and its moving fast. In 1993 I had a 14400 baud modem and it took a minute to load the yahoo page, but i thought that was the future, now I think this is. Before I leave this planet, I will read some blog or some news story about humanitarian aid to Saudi Arabia, because nobody needs the only thing they have. I will also read about germany and japan being dependant on us and copying our technology once again, fuel freedom helps us more than anyone because its our achilles heel and we are uniquely positioned geographically to take advantage of the next wave. My grandkids haven’t even been born and they are already fatigued by my stories about how the U.S. was brought to her knees back in my day. I can hear it now “Grandpa, what is oil?” I know this to be true, what is blury is if there will be a raven haired beauty that will bring me a glass of wine, kiss me lovingly on the cheek as she hands me a glass and tells me not to scare the children and to save some of that passion for later when we are alone, one can only hope.

[temeculaguy]

threadkiller-thanks, but I prefer my role as color commentator. If you haven’t already figured it out, I’m all style, minimal substance and Rich is 5 times smarter than I am, I know my place.

rich-not to make this a lovefest, but you are more shilleresque than you probably realize. You don’t make the data bend to fit your paradigm or to prove a point. You are also smart enough to know that you can’t predict the future, just increase your odds. Stay classy and consistent, especially when I challenge your assertion that there is no oil bubble a few pargraphs from now.

BG-I used manahatan as an extreme example. There’s NYC and the midwest, everything else is on a sliding scale in between the two. Zoning plays a role too in that scale. Did you know that the city of poway is essentially built out and you cant knock down a house and build three condos there, like you can in San Diego. Even my own beloved Temecula is near build out. Zoning is what Shiller refers to as “land restricted.” It throws off the formula, much of So cal is strictly zoned, hence the silly prices and also why sdrealtor sees what he sees, not much land left for anyone to do what they please.

Now to the rest and a mild oil threadjack. I have only seen a few things with true clarity. Ford stock when it was $2 a share, The Wire as the greatest televion show of all time, and Oil’s days are numbered. Maybe it’s not a bubble this year, but that party is so over, as is how the world works. I like our position for what I see as the next true revoloution.

The advancements are exploding, the answer is going to end up being a combination of sun, land, and technology. Guess what, The U.S. has a fantastic set up moving forward. Watch this video

http://www.jouleunlimited.com/video/story.html

They took the next step, 15k acres for real production, $20 a barrell for diesel (incentives included, of course), totally green and carbon nuetral. A year from now, it goes into the fuel tanks of our trucks on the road. In ten years, we not only stop importing oil, we export it. Europe and most of asia cant even make it, you need deserts and wasteland, we’ve got plenty. The fun part, this isnt even the best company, there are san diego companies ahead of them. Probably none actually win, but they build off each other and its moving fast. In 1993 I had a 14400 baud modem and it took a minute to load the yahoo page, but i thought that was the future, now I think this is. Before I leave this planet, I will read some blog or some news story about humanitarian aid to Saudi Arabia, because nobody needs the only thing they have. I will also read about germany and japan being dependant on us and copying our technology once again, fuel freedom helps us more than anyone because its our achilles heel and we are uniquely positioned geographically to take advantage of the next wave. My grandkids haven’t even been born and they are already fatigued by my stories about how the U.S. was brought to her knees back in my day. I can hear it now “Grandpa, what is oil?” I know this to be true, what is blury is if there will be a raven haired beauty that will bring me a glass of wine, kiss me lovingly on the cheek as she hands me a glass and tells me not to scare the children and to save some of that passion for later when we are alone, one can only hope.

[temeculaguy]

threadkiller-thanks, but I prefer my role as color commentator. If you haven’t already figured it out, I’m all style, minimal substance and Rich is 5 times smarter than I am, I know my place.

rich-not to make this a lovefest, but you are more shilleresque than you probably realize. You don’t make the data bend to fit your paradigm or to prove a point. You are also smart enough to know that you can’t predict the future, just increase your odds. Stay classy and consistent, especially when I challenge your assertion that there is no oil bubble a few pargraphs from now.

BG-I used manahatan as an extreme example. There’s NYC and the midwest, everything else is on a sliding scale in between the two. Zoning plays a role too in that scale. Did you know that the city of poway is essentially built out and you cant knock down a house and build three condos there, like you can in San Diego. Even my own beloved Temecula is near build out. Zoning is what Shiller refers to as “land restricted.” It throws off the formula, much of So cal is strictly zoned, hence the silly prices and also why sdrealtor sees what he sees, not much land left for anyone to do what they please.

Now to the rest and a mild oil threadjack. I have only seen a few things with true clarity. Ford stock when it was $2 a share, The Wire as the greatest televion show of all time, and Oil’s days are numbered. Maybe it’s not a bubble this year, but that party is so over, as is how the world works. I like our position for what I see as the next true revoloution.

The advancements are exploding, the answer is going to end up being a combination of sun, land, and technology. Guess what, The U.S. has a fantastic set up moving forward. Watch this video

http://www.jouleunlimited.com/video/story.html

They took the next step, 15k acres for real production, $20 a barrell for diesel (incentives included, of course), totally green and carbon nuetral. A year from now, it goes into the fuel tanks of our trucks on the road. In ten years, we not only stop importing oil, we export it. Europe and most of asia cant even make it, you need deserts and wasteland, we’ve got plenty. The fun part, this isnt even the best company, there are san diego companies ahead of them. Probably none actually win, but they build off each other and its moving fast. In 1993 I had a 14400 baud modem and it took a minute to load the yahoo page, but i thought that was the future, now I think this is. Before I leave this planet, I will read some blog or some news story about humanitarian aid to Saudi Arabia, because nobody needs the only thing they have. I will also read about germany and japan being dependant on us and copying our technology once again, fuel freedom helps us more than anyone because its our achilles heel and we are uniquely positioned geographically to take advantage of the next wave. My grandkids haven’t even been born and they are already fatigued by my stories about how the U.S. was brought to her knees back in my day. I can hear it now “Grandpa, what is oil?” I know this to be true, what is blury is if there will be a raven haired beauty that will bring me a glass of wine, kiss me lovingly on the cheek as she hands me a glass and tells me not to scare the children and to save some of that passion for later when we are alone, one can only hope.

[temeculaguy]

threadkiller-thanks, but I prefer my role as color commentator. If you haven’t already figured it out, I’m all style, minimal substance and Rich is 5 times smarter than I am, I know my place.

rich-not to make this a lovefest, but you are more shilleresque than you probably realize. You don’t make the data bend to fit your paradigm or to prove a point. You are also smart enough to know that you can’t predict the future, just increase your odds. Stay classy and consistent, especially when I challenge your assertion that there is no oil bubble a few pargraphs from now.

BG-I used manahatan as an extreme example. There’s NYC and the midwest, everything else is on a sliding scale in between the two. Zoning plays a role too in that scale. Did you know that the city of poway is essentially built out and you cant knock down a house and build three condos there, like you can in San Diego. Even my own beloved Temecula is near build out. Zoning is what Shiller refers to as “land restricted.” It throws off the formula, much of So cal is strictly zoned, hence the silly prices and also why sdrealtor sees what he sees, not much land left for anyone to do what they please.

Now to the rest and a mild oil threadjack. I have only seen a few things with true clarity. Ford stock when it was $2 a share, The Wire as the greatest televion show of all time, and Oil’s days are numbered. Maybe it’s not a bubble this year, but that party is so over, as is how the world works. I like our position for what I see as the next true revoloution.

The advancements are exploding, the answer is going to end up being a combination of sun, land, and technology. Guess what, The U.S. has a fantastic set up moving forward. Watch this video

http://www.jouleunlimited.com/video/story.html

They took the next step, 15k acres for real production, $20 a barrell for diesel (incentives included, of course), totally green and carbon nuetral. A year from now, it goes into the fuel tanks of our trucks on the road. In ten years, we not only stop importing oil, we export it. Europe and most of asia cant even make it, you need deserts and wasteland, we’ve got plenty. The fun part, this isnt even the best company, there are san diego companies ahead of them. Probably none actually win, but they build off each other and its moving fast. In 1993 I had a 14400 baud modem and it took a minute to load the yahoo page, but i thought that was the future, now I think this is. Before I leave this planet, I will read some blog or some news story about humanitarian aid to Saudi Arabia, because nobody needs the only thing they have. I will also read about germany and japan being dependant on us and copying our technology once again, fuel freedom helps us more than anyone because its our achilles heel and we are uniquely positioned geographically to take advantage of the next wave. My grandkids haven’t even been born and they are already fatigued by my stories about how the U.S. was brought to her knees back in my day. I can hear it now “Grandpa, what is oil?” I know this to be true, what is blury is if there will be a raven haired beauty that will bring me a glass of wine, kiss me lovingly on the cheek as she hands me a glass and tells me not to scare the children and to save some of that passion for later when we are alone, one can only hope.

[temeculaguy]

threadkiller-thanks, but I prefer my role as color commentator. If you haven’t already figured it out, I’m all style, minimal substance and Rich is 5 times smarter than I am, I know my place.

rich-not to make this a lovefest, but you are more shilleresque than you probably realize. You don’t make the data bend to fit your paradigm or to prove a point. You are also smart enough to know that you can’t predict the future, just increase your odds. Stay classy and consistent, especially when I challenge your assertion that there is no oil bubble a few pargraphs from now.

BG-I used manahatan as an extreme example. There’s NYC and the midwest, everything else is on a sliding scale in between the two. Zoning plays a role too in that scale. Did you know that the city of poway is essentially built out and you cant knock down a house and build three condos there, like you can in San Diego. Even my own beloved Temecula is near build out. Zoning is what Shiller refers to as “land restricted.” It throws off the formula, much of So cal is strictly zoned, hence the silly prices and also why sdrealtor sees what he sees, not much land left for anyone to do what they please.

Now to the rest and a mild oil threadjack. I have only seen a few things with true clarity. Ford stock when it was $2 a share, The Wire as the greatest televion show of all time, and Oil’s days are numbered. Maybe it’s not a bubble this year, but that party is so over, as is how the world works. I like our position for what I see as the next true revoloution.

The advancements are exploding, the answer is going to end up being a combination of sun, land, and technology. Guess what, The U.S. has a fantastic set up moving forward. Watch this video

http://www.jouleunlimited.com/video/story.html

They took the next step, 15k acres for real production, $20 a barrell for diesel (incentives included, of course), totally green and carbon nuetral. A year from now, it goes into the fuel tanks of our trucks on the road. In ten years, we not only stop importing oil, we export it. Europe and most of asia cant even make it, you need deserts and wasteland, we’ve got plenty. The fun part, this isnt even the best company, there are san diego companies ahead of them. Probably none actually win, but they build off each other and its moving fast. In 1993 I had a 14400 baud modem and it took a minute to load the yahoo page, but i thought that was the future, now I think this is. Before I leave this planet, I will read some blog or some news story about humanitarian aid to Saudi Arabia, because nobody needs the only thing they have. I will also read about germany and japan being dependant on us and copying our technology once again, fuel freedom helps us more than anyone because its our achilles heel and we are uniquely positioned geographically to take advantage of the next wave. My grandkids haven’t even been born and they are already fatigued by my stories about how the U.S. was brought to her knees back in my day. I can hear it now “Grandpa, what is oil?” I know this to be true, what is blury is if there will be a raven haired beauty that will bring me a glass of wine, kiss me lovingly on the cheek as she hands me a glass and tells me not to scare the children and to save some of that passion for later when we are alone, one can only hope.

[temeculaguy]

Shiller is to economic geeks what Dylan is to music fans. Most of us know who he is, but for those that don’t, he’s a Yale professor, listed as one of the top 100 most influential economists in the world, and he is “Shiller” of the Case-Shiller index. Do not confuse him with Peter Schiff, Mr. Mortgage, or any of the other yahoos who try to make predictions to gain fame and fortune. He is the kind of guy that a president or a Bernanke will call for an opinion.

I’ve followed his interviews and his lectures over the years and he began editing himself after he created Case-Shiller. If you don’t know Case-Shiller, the readers digest version it that it is a way to place bets on the future of real estate prices without having to buy actual real estate. And it’s legal betting, AKA, the stock market.

If he prognosticates too much anymore, it’s a potential SEC violation and even if it isn’t, it’s unethical, and very un-Shiller-like to do so. Sometimes he speaks in what sounds like riddles, but usually he says that anything is possible, but the odds are things will follow certain economic principles. When interviewed, the typical bobblehead reporter will ask him if it is possible real estate will go down for whatever amount of years, and Shiller will say “yes.” They usually cut there and use that soundbyte. The media does the same thing to Roubini, they love their soundbytes. But if you watch him explain, if it’s unedited, he will go on to say that all scenarios are possible, but the likley scenario is that real estate will track inflation, except for land restricted areas. Unfortunately that isnt very exciting, so in come the editors. In laymans terms, if inflation is running at 5% and housing is rising at 25%, expect future declines. The opposite is true as well. With beach property, islands, built out places like Manhattan, this formula doesnt apply. That’s a very simplified way of looking at it, but the guy is usually right, and usually he’s one of the first. I like the guy and my simplified interpretation of his theory. Everytime I try to make sense of anything, I start with the way Shiller thinks, not with what he says in his (now carefully edited) interviews. The other guy I read regularly, because he stays true to his core beliefs, is our own Rich Toscano. Different people, but same sensible consistency.

The trick are all the other variables when trying to determine the value of a single house and it’s current fair value and estimated future value. Sizes of houses have changed, some areas that were once far flung suburbs have grown up and have gained autonomy (ie. carlsbad/encinitas) so it get really hard to compare median priced 1970’s home purchase in encinitas, factor inflation since then and come to an estimated value for today. The water gets muddy, because the houses are bigger now, much bigger, and encinitas isn’t the same as it was 40 years ago.

I watched the interview, pay close attention to how he responds whe he say things like “That could happen, I’m nt predicting it, but it could happen.”

So when I say the title of this thread, and the key word, “could,” in Shiller speak, that means it’s not likely.

The only thing i took away from that interview, is that Shiller thinks gold and oil are in bubbles, he used them as bubble examples, no “could” or “possible” used with that statement. He’s usually about a year ahead on these things, gold and oil, your 12 month clock is now ticking.

[temeculaguy]

Shiller is to economic geeks what Dylan is to music fans. Most of us know who he is, but for those that don’t, he’s a Yale professor, listed as one of the top 100 most influential economists in the world, and he is “Shiller” of the Case-Shiller index. Do not confuse him with Peter Schiff, Mr. Mortgage, or any of the other yahoos who try to make predictions to gain fame and fortune. He is the kind of guy that a president or a Bernanke will call for an opinion.

I’ve followed his interviews and his lectures over the years and he began editing himself after he created Case-Shiller. If you don’t know Case-Shiller, the readers digest version it that it is a way to place bets on the future of real estate prices without having to buy actual real estate. And it’s legal betting, AKA, the stock market.

If he prognosticates too much anymore, it’s a potential SEC violation and even if it isn’t, it’s unethical, and very un-Shiller-like to do so. Sometimes he speaks in what sounds like riddles, but usually he says that anything is possible, but the odds are things will follow certain economic principles. When interviewed, the typical bobblehead reporter will ask him if it is possible real estate will go down for whatever amount of years, and Shiller will say “yes.” They usually cut there and use that soundbyte. The media does the same thing to Roubini, they love their soundbytes. But if you watch him explain, if it’s unedited, he will go on to say that all scenarios are possible, but the likley scenario is that real estate will track inflation, except for land restricted areas. Unfortunately that isnt very exciting, so in come the editors. In laymans terms, if inflation is running at 5% and housing is rising at 25%, expect future declines. The opposite is true as well. With beach property, islands, built out places like Manhattan, this formula doesnt apply. That’s a very simplified way of looking at it, but the guy is usually right, and usually he’s one of the first. I like the guy and my simplified interpretation of his theory. Everytime I try to make sense of anything, I start with the way Shiller thinks, not with what he says in his (now carefully edited) interviews. The other guy I read regularly, because he stays true to his core beliefs, is our own Rich Toscano. Different people, but same sensible consistency.

The trick are all the other variables when trying to determine the value of a single house and it’s current fair value and estimated future value. Sizes of houses have changed, some areas that were once far flung suburbs have grown up and have gained autonomy (ie. carlsbad/encinitas) so it get really hard to compare median priced 1970’s home purchase in encinitas, factor inflation since then and come to an estimated value for today. The water gets muddy, because the houses are bigger now, much bigger, and encinitas isn’t the same as it was 40 years ago.

I watched the interview, pay close attention to how he responds whe he say things like “That could happen, I’m nt predicting it, but it could happen.”

So when I say the title of this thread, and the key word, “could,” in Shiller speak, that means it’s not likely.

The only thing i took away from that interview, is that Shiller thinks gold and oil are in bubbles, he used them as bubble examples, no “could” or “possible” used with that statement. He’s usually about a year ahead on these things, gold and oil, your 12 month clock is now ticking.

[temeculaguy]

Shiller is to economic geeks what Dylan is to music fans. Most of us know who he is, but for those that don’t, he’s a Yale professor, listed as one of the top 100 most influential economists in the world, and he is “Shiller” of the Case-Shiller index. Do not confuse him with Peter Schiff, Mr. Mortgage, or any of the other yahoos who try to make predictions to gain fame and fortune. He is the kind of guy that a president or a Bernanke will call for an opinion.

I’ve followed his interviews and his lectures over the years and he began editing himself after he created Case-Shiller. If you don’t know Case-Shiller, the readers digest version it that it is a way to place bets on the future of real estate prices without having to buy actual real estate. And it’s legal betting, AKA, the stock market.

If he prognosticates too much anymore, it’s a potential SEC violation and even if it isn’t, it’s unethical, and very un-Shiller-like to do so. Sometimes he speaks in what sounds like riddles, but usually he says that anything is possible, but the odds are things will follow certain economic principles. When interviewed, the typical bobblehead reporter will ask him if it is possible real estate will go down for whatever amount of years, and Shiller will say “yes.” They usually cut there and use that soundbyte. The media does the same thing to Roubini, they love their soundbytes. But if you watch him explain, if it’s unedited, he will go on to say that all scenarios are possible, but the likley scenario is that real estate will track inflation, except for land restricted areas. Unfortunately that isnt very exciting, so in come the editors. In laymans terms, if inflation is running at 5% and housing is rising at 25%, expect future declines. The opposite is true as well. With beach property, islands, built out places like Manhattan, this formula doesnt apply. That’s a very simplified way of looking at it, but the guy is usually right, and usually he’s one of the first. I like the guy and my simplified interpretation of his theory. Everytime I try to make sense of anything, I start with the way Shiller thinks, not with what he says in his (now carefully edited) interviews. The other guy I read regularly, because he stays true to his core beliefs, is our own Rich Toscano. Different people, but same sensible consistency.

The trick are all the other variables when trying to determine the value of a single house and it’s current fair value and estimated future value. Sizes of houses have changed, some areas that were once far flung suburbs have grown up and have gained autonomy (ie. carlsbad/encinitas) so it get really hard to compare median priced 1970’s home purchase in encinitas, factor inflation since then and come to an estimated value for today. The water gets muddy, because the houses are bigger now, much bigger, and encinitas isn’t the same as it was 40 years ago.

I watched the interview, pay close attention to how he responds whe he say things like “That could happen, I’m nt predicting it, but it could happen.”

So when I say the title of this thread, and the key word, “could,” in Shiller speak, that means it’s not likely.

The only thing i took away from that interview, is that Shiller thinks gold and oil are in bubbles, he used them as bubble examples, no “could” or “possible” used with that statement. He’s usually about a year ahead on these things, gold and oil, your 12 month clock is now ticking.

[temeculaguy]

Shiller is to economic geeks what Dylan is to music fans. Most of us know who he is, but for those that don’t, he’s a Yale professor, listed as one of the top 100 most influential economists in the world, and he is “Shiller” of the Case-Shiller index. Do not confuse him with Peter Schiff, Mr. Mortgage, or any of the other yahoos who try to make predictions to gain fame and fortune. He is the kind of guy that a president or a Bernanke will call for an opinion.

I’ve followed his interviews and his lectures over the years and he began editing himself after he created Case-Shiller. If you don’t know Case-Shiller, the readers digest version it that it is a way to place bets on the future of real estate prices without having to buy actual real estate. And it’s legal betting, AKA, the stock market.

If he prognosticates too much anymore, it’s a potential SEC violation and even if it isn’t, it’s unethical, and very un-Shiller-like to do so. Sometimes he speaks in what sounds like riddles, but usually he says that anything is possible, but the odds are things will follow certain economic principles. When interviewed, the typical bobblehead reporter will ask him if it is possible real estate will go down for whatever amount of years, and Shiller will say “yes.” They usually cut there and use that soundbyte. The media does the same thing to Roubini, they love their soundbytes. But if you watch him explain, if it’s unedited, he will go on to say that all scenarios are possible, but the likley scenario is that real estate will track inflation, except for land restricted areas. Unfortunately that isnt very exciting, so in come the editors. In laymans terms, if inflation is running at 5% and housing is rising at 25%, expect future declines. The opposite is true as well. With beach property, islands, built out places like Manhattan, this formula doesnt apply. That’s a very simplified way of looking at it, but the guy is usually right, and usually he’s one of the first. I like the guy and my simplified interpretation of his theory. Everytime I try to make sense of anything, I start with the way Shiller thinks, not with what he says in his (now carefully edited) interviews. The other guy I read regularly, because he stays true to his core beliefs, is our own Rich Toscano. Different people, but same sensible consistency.

The trick are all the other variables when trying to determine the value of a single house and it’s current fair value and estimated future value. Sizes of houses have changed, some areas that were once far flung suburbs have grown up and have gained autonomy (ie. carlsbad/encinitas) so it get really hard to compare median priced 1970’s home purchase in encinitas, factor inflation since then and come to an estimated value for today. The water gets muddy, because the houses are bigger now, much bigger, and encinitas isn’t the same as it was 40 years ago.

I watched the interview, pay close attention to how he responds whe he say things like “That could happen, I’m nt predicting it, but it could happen.”

So when I say the title of this thread, and the key word, “could,” in Shiller speak, that means it’s not likely.

The only thing i took away from that interview, is that Shiller thinks gold and oil are in bubbles, he used them as bubble examples, no “could” or “possible” used with that statement. He’s usually about a year ahead on these things, gold and oil, your 12 month clock is now ticking.

[temeculaguy]

Shiller is to economic geeks what Dylan is to music fans. Most of us know who he is, but for those that don’t, he’s a Yale professor, listed as one of the top 100 most influential economists in the world, and he is “Shiller” of the Case-Shiller index. Do not confuse him with Peter Schiff, Mr. Mortgage, or any of the other yahoos who try to make predictions to gain fame and fortune. He is the kind of guy that a president or a Bernanke will call for an opinion.

I’ve followed his interviews and his lectures over the years and he began editing himself after he created Case-Shiller. If you don’t know Case-Shiller, the readers digest version it that it is a way to place bets on the future of real estate prices without having to buy actual real estate. And it’s legal betting, AKA, the stock market.

If he prognosticates too much anymore, it’s a potential SEC violation and even if it isn’t, it’s unethical, and very un-Shiller-like to do so. Sometimes he speaks in what sounds like riddles, but usually he says that anything is possible, but the odds are things will follow certain economic principles. When interviewed, the typical bobblehead reporter will ask him if it is possible real estate will go down for whatever amount of years, and Shiller will say “yes.” They usually cut there and use that soundbyte. The media does the same thing to Roubini, they love their soundbytes. But if you watch him explain, if it’s unedited, he will go on to say that all scenarios are possible, but the likley scenario is that real estate will track inflation, except for land restricted areas. Unfortunately that isnt very exciting, so in come the editors. In laymans terms, if inflation is running at 5% and housing is rising at 25%, expect future declines. The opposite is true as well. With beach property, islands, built out places like Manhattan, this formula doesnt apply. That’s a very simplified way of looking at it, but the guy is usually right, and usually he’s one of the first. I like the guy and my simplified interpretation of his theory. Everytime I try to make sense of anything, I start with the way Shiller thinks, not with what he says in his (now carefully edited) interviews. The other guy I read regularly, because he stays true to his core beliefs, is our own Rich Toscano. Different people, but same sensible consistency.

The trick are all the other variables when trying to determine the value of a single house and it’s current fair value and estimated future value. Sizes of houses have changed, some areas that were once far flung suburbs have grown up and have gained autonomy (ie. carlsbad/encinitas) so it get really hard to compare median priced 1970’s home purchase in encinitas, factor inflation since then and come to an estimated value for today. The water gets muddy, because the houses are bigger now, much bigger, and encinitas isn’t the same as it was 40 years ago.

I watched the interview, pay close attention to how he responds whe he say things like “That could happen, I’m nt predicting it, but it could happen.”

So when I say the title of this thread, and the key word, “could,” in Shiller speak, that means it’s not likely.

The only thing i took away from that interview, is that Shiller thinks gold and oil are in bubbles, he used them as bubble examples, no “could” or “possible” used with that statement. He’s usually about a year ahead on these things, gold and oil, your 12 month clock is now ticking.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=sdduuuude]I like big LOTS and I cannot lie …[/quote]

Classic sduuuude,….even whiteboys got to shout

But back to the topic, when you have little kids, yards are great. When they are in that middle phase, pools are great. When they grow up, both are a pain and views are great. But if it’s a family neighbrhood where mostly families want to live, and if schools are one of the reason for higher values, it really hurts you to just have a view and no yard.

The area and the specific market dictates if it’s worth it, and in family suburbs, you’ll probably get your money back and then some. A downtown high rise where families with little kids are not the dominant demographic, view is more important.

So it’s a broad question that will have different answers by area, a big lot matters more in some markets and a view matters in others. Proximity to something might matter in others. in Poway, being six streets west might mean nothing, but at the beach it could double the price. Good rule of thumb, if you are shopping the area because of the schools, get a decent sized yard or you will regret it. You dont want the one house that most of the shoppers drwn to that neigborhood will instantly rule out for whatever reason. Plus you have little kids, you’ll use it.

[Author]

Posts