Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
XBoxBoy
ParticipantAs far as the high end goes….
I believe there was a small spring bounce ( a slight rise in the number of pendings) but this is typical. Unlike the low end, the high end has not had a lack of inventory. Quite the opposite. If you look at this web page, the number of sfr’s in La Jolla has steadily grown all spring.
http://www.sdlookup.com/Market-92037-La_Jolla
There were 238 at the beginning of February, and there are now 302 which is down a couple from a week ago. Most of this weeks decline is not houses going pending, simply houses being taken off the market. (Maybe they’ll be back next spring)
What I think we have seen, and will continue to see in the 1M+ market is quite simply a stand off between sellers and buyers. Sellers believe their areas are special, they are immune, meanwhile buyers are fewer and those that are out there want a price that matches today’s market.
Sales numbers are still way below levels of a couple of years ago. Some people are getting very good deals, but occasionally there is a sale that just make you shake your head and wonder why anyone would buy at 2005 prices or higher in today’s market.
ParticipantAs far as the high end goes….
I believe there was a small spring bounce ( a slight rise in the number of pendings) but this is typical. Unlike the low end, the high end has not had a lack of inventory. Quite the opposite. If you look at this web page, the number of sfr’s in La Jolla has steadily grown all spring.
http://www.sdlookup.com/Market-92037-La_Jolla
There were 238 at the beginning of February, and there are now 302 which is down a couple from a week ago. Most of this weeks decline is not houses going pending, simply houses being taken off the market. (Maybe they’ll be back next spring)
What I think we have seen, and will continue to see in the 1M+ market is quite simply a stand off between sellers and buyers. Sellers believe their areas are special, they are immune, meanwhile buyers are fewer and those that are out there want a price that matches today’s market.
Sales numbers are still way below levels of a couple of years ago. Some people are getting very good deals, but occasionally there is a sale that just make you shake your head and wonder why anyone would buy at 2005 prices or higher in today’s market.
July 24, 2009 at 1:36 PM in reply to: Intentional defaulting, not subprime mortgage is the problem #436270Participant[quote=briansd1]I do agree with you. I accept reality and move on. But I still recognize the truth. We should not ignore the inequalities in our society. The least we could do it be conscious of them. We may not have power to do anything about it but we should be aware of what’s going on. [/quote]
To me the most important thing we can do is to keep speaking up. Only when people continue to speak up does the truth get passed on. If you remain silent, the truth gets buried by the Orwellian groupthink put forward by those taking advantage of the situation.
[quote=briansd1]Letting the banks collapse would collapse the economy also. So that was not an option. [/quote]
I keep hearing this, but I’m not at all convinced. We were told the same thing about GM and Crysler. But now they are both going through bankruptcy and the world isn’t coming to an end. I’m sure it would have been tough to put these large banks through bankruptcy, but it’s been tough, and continues to be expensive to keep them afloat with taxpayer dollars. The FDIC has taken over many banks and bankruptcy courts have processed many bankruptcies over the years.
Yes the scale would be larger, and the government might have needed to be proactive in trying to sort things out quickly, but I don’t see any evidence that it couldn’t have been done.
What I do see is a lot of Goldmanites and former Goldmanites and people that work for/with Goldmanites saying “Oh no it couldn’t be done. It would be the end of the world. If you don’t see that then you must be uninformed and stupid.” Sorry, I just don’t see that as a convincing argument. But who knows, maybe I am uninformed and stupid. Wouldn’t be the first time.
XBoxBoy
July 24, 2009 at 1:36 PM in reply to: Intentional defaulting, not subprime mortgage is the problem #436476Participant[quote=briansd1]I do agree with you. I accept reality and move on. But I still recognize the truth. We should not ignore the inequalities in our society. The least we could do it be conscious of them. We may not have power to do anything about it but we should be aware of what’s going on. [/quote]
To me the most important thing we can do is to keep speaking up. Only when people continue to speak up does the truth get passed on. If you remain silent, the truth gets buried by the Orwellian groupthink put forward by those taking advantage of the situation.
[quote=briansd1]Letting the banks collapse would collapse the economy also. So that was not an option. [/quote]
I keep hearing this, but I’m not at all convinced. We were told the same thing about GM and Crysler. But now they are both going through bankruptcy and the world isn’t coming to an end. I’m sure it would have been tough to put these large banks through bankruptcy, but it’s been tough, and continues to be expensive to keep them afloat with taxpayer dollars. The FDIC has taken over many banks and bankruptcy courts have processed many bankruptcies over the years.
Yes the scale would be larger, and the government might have needed to be proactive in trying to sort things out quickly, but I don’t see any evidence that it couldn’t have been done.
What I do see is a lot of Goldmanites and former Goldmanites and people that work for/with Goldmanites saying “Oh no it couldn’t be done. It would be the end of the world. If you don’t see that then you must be uninformed and stupid.” Sorry, I just don’t see that as a convincing argument. But who knows, maybe I am uninformed and stupid. Wouldn’t be the first time.
XBoxBoy
July 24, 2009 at 1:36 PM in reply to: Intentional defaulting, not subprime mortgage is the problem #436794Participant[quote=briansd1]I do agree with you. I accept reality and move on. But I still recognize the truth. We should not ignore the inequalities in our society. The least we could do it be conscious of them. We may not have power to do anything about it but we should be aware of what’s going on. [/quote]
To me the most important thing we can do is to keep speaking up. Only when people continue to speak up does the truth get passed on. If you remain silent, the truth gets buried by the Orwellian groupthink put forward by those taking advantage of the situation.
[quote=briansd1]Letting the banks collapse would collapse the economy also. So that was not an option. [/quote]
I keep hearing this, but I’m not at all convinced. We were told the same thing about GM and Crysler. But now they are both going through bankruptcy and the world isn’t coming to an end. I’m sure it would have been tough to put these large banks through bankruptcy, but it’s been tough, and continues to be expensive to keep them afloat with taxpayer dollars. The FDIC has taken over many banks and bankruptcy courts have processed many bankruptcies over the years.
Yes the scale would be larger, and the government might have needed to be proactive in trying to sort things out quickly, but I don’t see any evidence that it couldn’t have been done.
What I do see is a lot of Goldmanites and former Goldmanites and people that work for/with Goldmanites saying “Oh no it couldn’t be done. It would be the end of the world. If you don’t see that then you must be uninformed and stupid.” Sorry, I just don’t see that as a convincing argument. But who knows, maybe I am uninformed and stupid. Wouldn’t be the first time.
XBoxBoy
July 24, 2009 at 1:36 PM in reply to: Intentional defaulting, not subprime mortgage is the problem #436867Participant[quote=briansd1]I do agree with you. I accept reality and move on. But I still recognize the truth. We should not ignore the inequalities in our society. The least we could do it be conscious of them. We may not have power to do anything about it but we should be aware of what’s going on. [/quote]
To me the most important thing we can do is to keep speaking up. Only when people continue to speak up does the truth get passed on. If you remain silent, the truth gets buried by the Orwellian groupthink put forward by those taking advantage of the situation.
[quote=briansd1]Letting the banks collapse would collapse the economy also. So that was not an option. [/quote]
I keep hearing this, but I’m not at all convinced. We were told the same thing about GM and Crysler. But now they are both going through bankruptcy and the world isn’t coming to an end. I’m sure it would have been tough to put these large banks through bankruptcy, but it’s been tough, and continues to be expensive to keep them afloat with taxpayer dollars. The FDIC has taken over many banks and bankruptcy courts have processed many bankruptcies over the years.
Yes the scale would be larger, and the government might have needed to be proactive in trying to sort things out quickly, but I don’t see any evidence that it couldn’t have been done.
What I do see is a lot of Goldmanites and former Goldmanites and people that work for/with Goldmanites saying “Oh no it couldn’t be done. It would be the end of the world. If you don’t see that then you must be uninformed and stupid.” Sorry, I just don’t see that as a convincing argument. But who knows, maybe I am uninformed and stupid. Wouldn’t be the first time.
XBoxBoy
July 24, 2009 at 1:36 PM in reply to: Intentional defaulting, not subprime mortgage is the problem #437034Participant[quote=briansd1]I do agree with you. I accept reality and move on. But I still recognize the truth. We should not ignore the inequalities in our society. The least we could do it be conscious of them. We may not have power to do anything about it but we should be aware of what’s going on. [/quote]
To me the most important thing we can do is to keep speaking up. Only when people continue to speak up does the truth get passed on. If you remain silent, the truth gets buried by the Orwellian groupthink put forward by those taking advantage of the situation.
[quote=briansd1]Letting the banks collapse would collapse the economy also. So that was not an option. [/quote]
I keep hearing this, but I’m not at all convinced. We were told the same thing about GM and Crysler. But now they are both going through bankruptcy and the world isn’t coming to an end. I’m sure it would have been tough to put these large banks through bankruptcy, but it’s been tough, and continues to be expensive to keep them afloat with taxpayer dollars. The FDIC has taken over many banks and bankruptcy courts have processed many bankruptcies over the years.
Yes the scale would be larger, and the government might have needed to be proactive in trying to sort things out quickly, but I don’t see any evidence that it couldn’t have been done.
What I do see is a lot of Goldmanites and former Goldmanites and people that work for/with Goldmanites saying “Oh no it couldn’t be done. It would be the end of the world. If you don’t see that then you must be uninformed and stupid.” Sorry, I just don’t see that as a convincing argument. But who knows, maybe I am uninformed and stupid. Wouldn’t be the first time.
XBoxBoy
July 24, 2009 at 10:37 AM in reply to: Intentional defaulting, not subprime mortgage is the problem #436135Participant[quote=davelj]
I’ll grant you that Goldman hasn’t suffered as much as it should. But they are an exception.
[/quote]Dave,
First let me say that I totally understand that many banks, people that worked at banks and people that invested in banks have and are suffering due to this financial crisis. I totally get your point in that regard, and I’m very glad to hear you say that many of those people will not make the same mistakes again.
But then there’s the issue of Goldman Sachs. (And I suspect there are a couple of other big guys that are riding their wave)
When I see how many Goldman Sachs alum have government jobs, and how Goldman has been made whole on virtually every one of its risky bets I can’t help but be outraged. So I think it’s critical that we all stay away from lumping all banks into one category.
Clearly, most banks are playing by the rules, and doing their best to stay in business. But I find it extremely hard to agree that Goldman Sachs is playing by the rules. Quite the contrary from everything I can see they have been ruthless in their raping the taxpayer, and the fact that so many alums are in the government aiding and abetting this is astonishing.
To me, perp walks are long over due.
July 24, 2009 at 10:37 AM in reply to: Intentional defaulting, not subprime mortgage is the problem #436342Participant[quote=davelj]
I’ll grant you that Goldman hasn’t suffered as much as it should. But they are an exception.
[/quote]Dave,
First let me say that I totally understand that many banks, people that worked at banks and people that invested in banks have and are suffering due to this financial crisis. I totally get your point in that regard, and I’m very glad to hear you say that many of those people will not make the same mistakes again.
But then there’s the issue of Goldman Sachs. (And I suspect there are a couple of other big guys that are riding their wave)
When I see how many Goldman Sachs alum have government jobs, and how Goldman has been made whole on virtually every one of its risky bets I can’t help but be outraged. So I think it’s critical that we all stay away from lumping all banks into one category.
Clearly, most banks are playing by the rules, and doing their best to stay in business. But I find it extremely hard to agree that Goldman Sachs is playing by the rules. Quite the contrary from everything I can see they have been ruthless in their raping the taxpayer, and the fact that so many alums are in the government aiding and abetting this is astonishing.
To me, perp walks are long over due.
July 24, 2009 at 10:37 AM in reply to: Intentional defaulting, not subprime mortgage is the problem #436661Participant[quote=davelj]
I’ll grant you that Goldman hasn’t suffered as much as it should. But they are an exception.
[/quote]Dave,
First let me say that I totally understand that many banks, people that worked at banks and people that invested in banks have and are suffering due to this financial crisis. I totally get your point in that regard, and I’m very glad to hear you say that many of those people will not make the same mistakes again.
But then there’s the issue of Goldman Sachs. (And I suspect there are a couple of other big guys that are riding their wave)
When I see how many Goldman Sachs alum have government jobs, and how Goldman has been made whole on virtually every one of its risky bets I can’t help but be outraged. So I think it’s critical that we all stay away from lumping all banks into one category.
Clearly, most banks are playing by the rules, and doing their best to stay in business. But I find it extremely hard to agree that Goldman Sachs is playing by the rules. Quite the contrary from everything I can see they have been ruthless in their raping the taxpayer, and the fact that so many alums are in the government aiding and abetting this is astonishing.
To me, perp walks are long over due.
July 24, 2009 at 10:37 AM in reply to: Intentional defaulting, not subprime mortgage is the problem #436734Participant[quote=davelj]
I’ll grant you that Goldman hasn’t suffered as much as it should. But they are an exception.
[/quote]Dave,
First let me say that I totally understand that many banks, people that worked at banks and people that invested in banks have and are suffering due to this financial crisis. I totally get your point in that regard, and I’m very glad to hear you say that many of those people will not make the same mistakes again.
But then there’s the issue of Goldman Sachs. (And I suspect there are a couple of other big guys that are riding their wave)
When I see how many Goldman Sachs alum have government jobs, and how Goldman has been made whole on virtually every one of its risky bets I can’t help but be outraged. So I think it’s critical that we all stay away from lumping all banks into one category.
Clearly, most banks are playing by the rules, and doing their best to stay in business. But I find it extremely hard to agree that Goldman Sachs is playing by the rules. Quite the contrary from everything I can see they have been ruthless in their raping the taxpayer, and the fact that so many alums are in the government aiding and abetting this is astonishing.
To me, perp walks are long over due.
July 24, 2009 at 10:37 AM in reply to: Intentional defaulting, not subprime mortgage is the problem #436900Participant[quote=davelj]
I’ll grant you that Goldman hasn’t suffered as much as it should. But they are an exception.
[/quote]Dave,
First let me say that I totally understand that many banks, people that worked at banks and people that invested in banks have and are suffering due to this financial crisis. I totally get your point in that regard, and I’m very glad to hear you say that many of those people will not make the same mistakes again.
But then there’s the issue of Goldman Sachs. (And I suspect there are a couple of other big guys that are riding their wave)
When I see how many Goldman Sachs alum have government jobs, and how Goldman has been made whole on virtually every one of its risky bets I can’t help but be outraged. So I think it’s critical that we all stay away from lumping all banks into one category.
Clearly, most banks are playing by the rules, and doing their best to stay in business. But I find it extremely hard to agree that Goldman Sachs is playing by the rules. Quite the contrary from everything I can see they have been ruthless in their raping the taxpayer, and the fact that so many alums are in the government aiding and abetting this is astonishing.
To me, perp walks are long over due.
July 21, 2009 at 5:50 PM in reply to: california Budget deal, Kicking the can at counties and down the road #434993Participant[quote=patb]What’s Arnold going to do next year?[/quote]
Arnold will term-limit out in 2010 I think. Then he will go back to movies I suspect.
[quote=Arraya]That kind of can kicking would take coordinated responses from entities with differing interests and varying abilities.[/quote]
Maybe, but my point is that it’s really amazing how long these things can go on for. You think, “For sure people will wise up to this bs and stop playing along.” But they don’t. If they did, then China would have stopped buying our debt five years ago, housing would be already bottomed out and a normal recovery would be starting. Instead, the whole house of cards that is our economy is stumbling along still in gross imbalance.
Just my 2cents
XBoxBoy
July 21, 2009 at 5:50 PM in reply to: california Budget deal, Kicking the can at counties and down the road #435384Participant[quote=patb]What’s Arnold going to do next year?[/quote]
Arnold will term-limit out in 2010 I think. Then he will go back to movies I suspect.
[quote=Arraya]That kind of can kicking would take coordinated responses from entities with differing interests and varying abilities.[/quote]
Maybe, but my point is that it’s really amazing how long these things can go on for. You think, “For sure people will wise up to this bs and stop playing along.” But they don’t. If they did, then China would have stopped buying our debt five years ago, housing would be already bottomed out and a normal recovery would be starting. Instead, the whole house of cards that is our economy is stumbling along still in gross imbalance.
Just my 2cents
XBoxBoy
-
AuthorPosts
