Posted on 08/22/2006 8:16:02 AM PDT by ex-Texan
2006 $500,000 2007 $650,000 2008 $845,000 2009 $1,098,500 2010 $1,428,050 2011 $1,856,465 2012 $2,413,405 2013 $3,137,426 2014 $4,078,654 2015 $5,302,250 2016 $6,892,925 2017 $8,960,802 2018 $11,649,043 2019 $15,143,755 2020 $19,686,882
LOL, LOL, LOL !!
"It is never a bad time to buy a home if it is where you plan to live. Real Estate ALWAYS increases in value (Love Canal excluded) over time even though it has it's peaks and valleys."
I'll bet the residents of Tokyo would be glad to hear that they will recover the >50% drop in the value of their real estate.
It will be their grandchildren that see a return to the previous highs.
( No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo!)
It was the ARM's in combination with no income verification, 100% financing, and max out seller contribution loans that will do this bubble in.
( No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo!)
The argument on the interest rates has gone on for over a century and how many family failures such and such an interest rate at time period, it would generate. Indeed in the 1950s loans over 10 years were consider immoral since a young family would be in mortgage debt for all the early childhood years.
Similar discussions rose around the 30 year loans and now we are talking about interest only loans in which young families are not encouraged at all to get out of debt.
The next stop in this process is loans on which your children and grandchildren have to pay off or never pay off. This is already underway in Japan.
Right now, I know of two families severely impacted by interest only loans. Their unhappy prospect is to have to leave their homes with a hanging debt over their heads that make their prospects of getting another mortgage in doubt.
So I do think the morality of these mortgages should be discussed or else are you against free speach?
5 this year versus 3 last year is also a 67% increase. Percentage is only meaningful when compared to a base number to provide scale.
You might be surprized to see what those brick houses in SE are going for now in areas that you wouldn't have driven through 3-4 years ago. Trinidad in NE is the same. what you might have seen sell for 30K 4 years ago sells for 300k (at least did until this spring). DC is not a good example for what you are trying to say. Baltimore is.
( No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo!)
Be that as it may, they have the home to LIVE in. Besides, I said the property would increase over time and not what the time span would be. That said, Tokyo is an extreme exception as you know, or should know.
I don't think "morality" comes into it. I won't flame you or use sarcasm, but Fan's point is pretty clear -- I could hurt myself by taking the wrong job, buying the wrong car, marrying the wrong woman, etc. When does the g. get to make these decisions for me? If Joe wants to sell me a mortgage, and I (not being in a nuthouse or anything) want to buy the mortgage, being that I own myself (not government, or my friends, or my neighbors who have a majority vote against me) what would be immoral is for somebody else to come along and claim ownership of a portion of me, and tell me, like my father did when I was nine, "No." Also, my children and grandchildren will never "have" to pay off any of my debts. They may be left with zero inheritance because of my stupidity, but nobody will ever tap them on the shouder and say, "Your father owed me ten bucks, now go to the bank and drain your account to pay me."
Yes, but there is certainly NO GUARANTEE of that. I believe I saw in the Post a while back that, in real dollars, DC's poorest neighborhoods peaked in price in the 1870!!! That's 130 years of decline. I then KNOW I saw in the local (Loudoun County) real estate rag, that said prices peaked during WWII. Either way, that's easily a lifetime of declining home prices.
DC IS a good example of what I'm saying. There are still PLENTY of parts of DC where once very desirable homes are worth less than the value of the crack dust that could be vacuumed from between the floorboards.
Oh! You nailed me there, I must admit. :)
Another one of the "on fire" markets that was crying for a correction.
Last time I checked the V.A. foreclosure list for the state of California there were exactly ZERO foreclosures avaliable in the entire state of California. ZERO. A 67% increase would give you, let me think, wait for it, yeah, ZERO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.