Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
U.S. Housing Recovery Gaining Momentum  
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12715 posts, RR: 25
Posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2398 times:

Are you seeing this in your area? Seems like the "bottom feeder" prices are gone in my area.

Not particularly good timing for the Romney campaign, but I'm sure they're happy about it too, no?

Quote:

A jump in sales of previously occupied homes and further gains in home construction suggest the U.S. housing recovery is gaining momentum.

Sales of previously occupied homes rose 7.8 percent in August from July to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 4.82 million, the National Association of Realtors said Wednesday. That's the highest level since May 2010, when sales were aided by a federal home-buying tax credit.

At the same time, builders broke ground on 2.3 percent more homes and apartments in August than July. The Commerce Department said the annual rate of construction rose to a seasonally adjusted 750,000. The increase was driven the best rate of single-family home construction since April 2010.

The pair of reports comes amid other signs of steady progress in the housing market after years of stagnation. New-home sales are up, builder confidence is at its highest level in more than six years and increases in home prices appear to be sustainable.

Ref: http://news.yahoo.com/us-home-sales-...e-may-2010-140225603--finance.html


Inspiration, move me brightly!
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4900 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2378 times:

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
but I'm sure they're happy about it too, no?

Altruism has no place in politics...


User currently offlinezckls04 From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 1415 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2374 times:

I bought in March, and the market was dead. Hardly anything was coming on the market and those on the market weren't selling. Now everything has picked up, with most houses for sale in my area getting multiple offers above asking price. Very glad I bought when I did as I'd no longer be able to afford the place I'm in.


If you're not sure whether to use a piece of punctuation, it's best not to.
User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4900 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2367 times:

Consequence : Alas, another nail in the coffin for a certain contender....

User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21485 posts, RR: 53
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2362 times:

Quoting comorin (Reply 1):
Altruism has no place in politics...

...unless you're capable of distinuishing between campaign tactics and substantial policies.

Assumed you even have any actual policies beyond populist talk on the campaign trail.


User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4900 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2352 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 4):

You know, Klaus, in the world of business you set a goal and do anything needed to get there. This includes going on long lunches with people you detest, or playing golf with riff-raff. So if you are a businessman whose only goal is to become CEO of a country, you do the needful to get there. If you are a turnaround specialist, you are obviously going to view the US as a scalpel-worthy sick enterprise. And you don't tell anyone what you plan to do.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21485 posts, RR: 53
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2340 times:

Quoting comorin (Reply 5):
You know, Klaus, in the world of business you set a goal and do anything needed to get there.

Being the head of a national government is in several critical ways fundamentally different from being the CEO of a corporation.

That Romney clearly has no clue about that distinction is part of why he has effectively destroyed his campaign, and I'm not just talking about his infamous (and totally false) "47%" remark.

Hilarious footnote: In one of his primary debates Romney had quipped to Gingrich that Gingrich's plan to eliminate the capital gains tax would effectively have meant that he, Romney, would not have paid any tax in recent years.

Translation: Romney has apparently by his own statement not paid any income tax himself – so he is apparently himself part of the group which he so harshly dismissed. Which would be an excellent reason why he's steadfastly refusing to present his tax returns. Together with other statements there are various peculiar discrepancies in this entire complex.

If his apparent total ignorance about social matters was the only thing it would be one thing – but defense, foreign policy and other fields have shown him completely and utterly clueless as well. All issues which a CEO doesn't have to deal with, but which are crucial to being President of the USA.

The more I learn about Romney, the more I'm shaking my head.


User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8969 posts, RR: 39
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2317 times:

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
Not particularly good timing for the Romney campaign, but I'm sure they're happy about it too, no?

I don't like Romney. In fact, I think it may be better if Obama wins again. But, eventually housing was gonna hit bottom and this does not mean economic troubles are over anyway, so I don't think this is too much a concern for him.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 6):
Hilarious footnote: In one of his primary debates Romney had quipped to Gingrich that Gingrich's plan to eliminate the capital gains tax would effectively have meant that he, Romney, would not have paid any tax in recent years.

Translation: Romney has apparently by his own statement not paid any income tax himself – so he is apparently himself part of the group which he so harshly dismissed. Which would be an excellent reason why he's steadfastly refusing to present his tax returns. Together with other statements there are various peculiar discrepancies in this entire complex.

Your use of the word "himself" makes your statement technically accurate. But if Romney's companies pay income taxes then that's substantively the same as Romney paying income taxes.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7752 posts, RR: 18
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2313 times:

I checked some statistics released recently by a certain bank (I won't name)

But all of the increases in housing sales, etc, were occurring in Red States, like Texas and Arizona.


Your move, blue states still in enormous debt and with myriads of issues.
When y'all decide to come to AZ and visit, leave your 1%er politics and your "progress" behind in Cali because we have our own progress!  



我思うゆえに我あり。(Jap. 'I think, therefore I am.')
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12715 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2313 times:

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 2):

I bought in March, and the market was dead. Hardly anything was coming on the market and those on the market weren't selling. Now everything has picked up, with most houses for sale in my area getting multiple offers above asking price. Very glad I bought when I did as I'd no longer be able to afford the place I'm in.

It's amazing how fast this stuff can turn around.

Note that the report says "builders broke ground on 2.3 percent more homes and apartments in August than July" so it seems they are firing up to fill demand.

It'd be very good if the housing sector was helping the economy instead of dragging it down.

All the folks I knew that were in danger of losing their houses over the last few years already have lost their houses and new buyers are in those homes.

Maybe we are past that wave of pending foreclosures?

I certainly am not seeing bankruptcy sales here anything like we saw a few years ago.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinezckls04 From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 1415 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2295 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 8):
I checked some statistics released recently by a certain bank (I won't name)

Why on earth not? You should always cite statistics like that.

I'd like to see how the recovery correlates with the length of the foreclosure process; I bet it's a strong inverse relationship.



If you're not sure whether to use a piece of punctuation, it's best not to.
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6724 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2250 times:

I wish our housing market was more like in the US (albeit with houses made of concrete). Here when the economy is good prices crop up, when there is a crisis they continue to go up ! People invest their money in real estate, without even bothering to rent it, the value increase alone makes it worth it.

Meanwhile millions can't find a place to live, I had to go back to my parents' home because with an average salary I could only rent a minuscule studio, not worth spending my money on.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12715 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days ago) and read 2236 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 11):
Here when the economy is good prices crop up, when there is a crisis they continue to go up ! People invest their money in real estate, without even bothering to rent it, the value increase alone makes it worth it.

Sounds like it's ripe for a collapse. It might be wise to invest in companies that make money when a collapse happens, like real estate services companies that are hired by banks to stabilize properties that get foreclosed on.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 month 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2208 times:

Point 1: Unemployment (Including those that have given up and are living on a couch someplace) is at 15% and has not shown any indication of declining. That hurts the buyers' market. Home ownership continues to plummet.



Point 2: There are still millions of empty homes which constitute excess inventory, far above historical average rates.



And that does not include about 5 million delinquent and foreclosed mortgages where the home is not on the market.

Point 3: Yes, housing starts increased, but from an extremely low base.



I just don't see any significant recovery any time soon. I think prices can still come further down.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2190 times:

What I don't get (and every side is guilty of this) is when something is steadily declining and the first instant it "levels off" or goes up a bit the side makes a big(ish) deal about it. I'm glad there was a gain, but I think we should be cautious and make sure this is a trend and not a one-time event


Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12715 posts, RR: 25
Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 month 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2160 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 13):
Unemployment (Including those that have given up and are living on a couch someplace) is at 15% and has not shown any indication of declining.

It's definitely an issue, although the measurement of unemployment is difficult, and some temporary distortions like ongoing extension of unemployment benefits is distorting the historical trendlines.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 13):
Home ownership continues to plummet.

The fact that you are picking such a huge timeline distorts the result.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 13):
There are still millions of empty homes which constitute excess inventory, far above historical average rates.

Even though the last part of your curve is getting flat, and your graph isn't clear enough to tell me when the last sample was taken?

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 13):
And that does not include about 5 million delinquent and foreclosed mortgages where the home is not on the market.

That's data I didn't have. As above, all I have is my personal sense that those around me at risk have already lost their homes and those homes are already resold.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 13):
I just don't see any significant recovery any time soon. I think prices can still come further down.

Even though I'm criticising some of the info, it is very helpful to get the big picture, so thanks for posting it.


Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 14):
What I don't get (and every side is guilty of this) is when something is steadily declining and the first instant it "levels off" or goes up a bit the side makes a big(ish) deal about it.

Because a lot of money gets made or lost based on the change from declining to being flat or going up.

It seems to me that the markets have been become over-sensitive to the second derivative (rate of rate of change) vs the first (rate of change).



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinezckls04 From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 1415 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (2 years 1 month 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2143 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 13):
Point 1: Unemployment (Including those that have given up and are living on a couch someplace) is at 15% and has not shown any indication of declining. That hurts the buyers' market. Home ownership continues to plummet.

A huge part of the upswing in that curve is due to sub-prime lending though, which most people (I think) agree was a bad thing. I would argue that at least some of the downswing is a (no doubt temporary) return to more responsible lending practices.

Ditto the large inventory; those houses which were sold to people who couldn't afford them are now back on the market. Places like Phoenix and Vegas (and parts of California e.g. Sacramento) that underwent enormous expansion due to enormous numbers of new builds are not recovering greatly, and probably never will; fundamentally the market for those houses wasn't there among people who could afford what the developers wanted.

Near me however, that bubble never really happened. The inventory has always been limited, and unqualified buyers were always the least attractive to sellers, all other things being equal. Thus the housing market is definitely rebounding in my area, despite the national average telling a different story.

If you consider the situation in 2004-2008 to be a "healthy" housing market, then yes, it's true that the market has plummeted and is nowhere near back to its height. However I think that's not the case- the banks are just not being as careless with their lending practices right now. How long that will continue I'm not sure, but for now seeing home ownership decline on your graph indicates a return to stability rather than an unsustainable plummet.



If you're not sure whether to use a piece of punctuation, it's best not to.
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11418 posts, RR: 52
Reply 17, posted (2 years 1 month 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2139 times:

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
Are you seeing this in your area? Seems like the "bottom feeder" prices are gone in my area.

Yes, it is definitely happening near me. I'm not overwater yet, but the units in my building are being snatched up pretty quickly. My house value has returned to 90% of what I owe, from an amazing 60% of what I owe just a couple years ago.

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
Not particularly good timing for the Romney campaign, but I'm sure they're happy about it too, no?

Given how many homes they own, of course they're happy!



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 18, posted (2 years 1 month 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2132 times:

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 16):
A huge part of the upswing in that curve is due to sub-prime lending though, which most people (I think) agree was a bad thing. I would argue that at least some of the downswing is a (no doubt temporary) return to more responsible lending practices.

Not sure about that. The government is begging (demanding) banks lend more mortgages to whoever asks, and the Sub-Prime Mortgage Bond market is growing rapidly once again. As long as there are ARM mortgages out there, I think we are headed for the same disaster again.

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 16):
If you consider the situation in 2004-2008 to be a "healthy" housing market, then yes, it's true that the market has plummeted and is nowhere near back to its height.

I'd say the last time the market was healthy was mid-early 1990s, before CRA was given big teeth and started exploding the market.

Let's not forget that Obama himself was part of the whole sub-prime thing.

http://communities.washingtontimes.c...ama-created-subprime-loans-lawyer/

Barack Obama used his status as a legal hired gun to sue Citibank to force them to give loans to poor minorities in Chicago.

In other words, he sued a bank into creating subprime mortgages.




Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11418 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (2 years 1 month 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2115 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 18):
Let's not forget that Obama himself was part of the whole sub-prime thing.

http://communities.washingtontimes.c...ama-created-subprime-loans-lawyer/

Barack Obama used his status as a legal hired gun to sue Citibank to force them to give loans to poor minorities in Chicago.

In other words, he sued a bank into creating subprime mortgages.

Citing Communities.Washingtontimes.com is like citing a poster on airliners.net. Or an iReport. Or FoxNewsNation.

That is not journalism, but rather a private citizen. Someone with time on his hands who wanted to write something and get published in a conservative rag.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinezckls04 From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 1415 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (2 years 1 month 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2099 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 18):
I'd say the last time the market was healthy was mid-early 1990s, before CRA was given big teeth and started exploding the market.

Except CRA started in the seventies, and really had nothing to do with the sub-prime crisis. It makes a good clarion call, but in reality the majority of the junk loans were not issued by institutions subject to CRA, but by private-label non-bank lenders. CRA loans formed a minority of the loans and were less likely to default than those not subject to CRA.

Of course, Fannie and Freddie eventually got in on the act in an attempt to win back market share, but their mistake had nothing to do with CRA, and everything to do with being too stupid and greedy to see the bubble before it burst.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 18):
Barack Obama used his status as a legal hired gun to sue Citibank to force them to give loans to poor minorities in Chicago.

The suit (which Obama had only a minor involvement in) said that Citibank discriminated in not giving loans to minority-dominated neighborhoods, income and credit etc aside. That has nothing to do with "the whole sub-prime thing" unless you believe that minorities are inherently less likely to pay their mortgage than non-minorities, assuming equal income and credit (a position known as racism). I've no idea about the merits of otherwise of the case, but it's clear from that that Citibank was in no way forced to lend to anybody as a result of that suit.



If you're not sure whether to use a piece of punctuation, it's best not to.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 21, posted (2 years 1 month 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2095 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
Citing Communities.Washingtontimes.com is like citing a poster on airliners.net. Or an iReport. Or FoxNewsNation.

That is not journalism, but rather a private citizen. Someone with time on his hands who wanted to write something and get published in a conservative rag.

LOL, don't tell me this is new to you. The story came out years ago. Of course it is overstated - Obama himself was just a junior attorney in the lawsuit, billing 138 hours of work on it. But the case was one of the key events (along with CRA as revised by Clinton) that forced banks to remove the protections and restrictions on lending to potentially risky customers - the root cause of the 2008 meltdown.

So yes, he was involved - peripherally - and on the wrong side.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinezckls04 From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 1415 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (2 years 1 month 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2085 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 21):
the root cause of the 2008 meltdown.

   False, as per above. Neither that case nor CRA were the root cause of the meltdown.



If you're not sure whether to use a piece of punctuation, it's best not to.
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4670 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (2 years 1 month 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2078 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 21):
But the case was one of the key events (along with CRA as revised by Clinton) that forced banks to remove the protections and restrictions on lending to potentially risky customers - the root cause of the 2008 meltdown.

This doesn't pass the smell test. It also doesn't explain why such locations as Arizona, California, Florida, and Nevada were among the hardest hit states. THe problem wasn't with CRA, it was with Banks being able to sell of derivatives of loans they percieved to be good values. THe locations all seemed to occur in high destination spec markets, and not in "poor" neighborhoods.

The housing markey is beginning to stabilize and improve. Anyone that has gone and checked Apartment rentals and rates vs home ownership loans in the majority of states will realize we are only about a year away from a very strong reversal. Especially with rates as low as they currently are.

For the record I bought and sold a house this summer. The market in Raleigh is very busy.
Whether it will be the kick to get the economy going, or the edge of a cliff from which to fall should europe fail remains to be seen, but when 2 bedroom apartments are going for the rate of a mortgate on a 2500 square foot house, there isn't much keeping the market down.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinepu From Sweden, joined Dec 2011, 724 posts, RR: 14
Reply 24, posted (2 years 1 month 21 hours ago) and read 2045 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 21):

But the case was one of the key events (along with CRA as revised by Clinton) that forced banks to remove the protections and restrictions on lending to potentially risky customers - the root cause of the 2008 meltdown.

.
Bad legislation should be repealed and the Republicans controlled the House, Senate and White House from 2001-2007. The Republicans are sure advertising their potential ability to repeal Obamacare. BY NOT REPEALING the CRA the Republican controlled government in power for six years either:
.
.......A. Agreed the CRA was good (or popular) legislation while they were in power and hence did not repeal it, OR,
.......B. Were asleep at the wheel, (perhaps preoccupied with pointless foreign wars) & let bad legislation stay on the books
....
....
EITHER WAY, if the CRA is the "root cause" of the 2008 meltdown, the Republicans are just as negligent, if not more so, than the CRA's original sponsors since they, the Republicans, had 6 years to repeal it as its alleged negative effects were becoming more and more obvious in the economy.


Pu


25 jet-lagged : I bought my home just over a year ago, and based on rather steady sales around the neighborhood I estimate that it's worth 5% more now than it was the
26 Post contains links Dreadnought : I don't think repealing CRA was necessarily required, and it's very probable that repealing it would not have stopped the crash. Think of the progres
27 zckls04 : Except that, as I stated above, CRA, Fannie and Freddie had little to do with the genesis of the mortgage crisis. CRA loans are, and always have been,
28 Flighty : Of course. The "bankster" mythology holds that something illegal / immoral happened. Actually it was just a speculation boom by ordinary families. An
29 Dreadnought : We should add the FHA. The FHA introduced the concept of federally insured mortgages - something that encouraged the secondary market to trade them.
30 pu : Dreadnought, what you just said is more persuasive than blaming so much on the CRA. YES, when mortgages started to get traded around (eventually even
31 Dreadnought : I'll grant that it is simplistic - but frankly most people's eyes glaze over when you start interlacing the different elements: 1) CRA introduced mec
32 pu : My reading of the CRA is that it had ZERO effect on credit requirements. In fact it mandated prudent lending. As far as I can tell it was mainly abou
33 pu : Tell me, what happened to the institutions known as "Savings and Loans"???? ...It seems like they regulated themselves so well that a big round of DE
34 pu : The CRA applied to banks only. The bulk of the subprime lending that caused so much trouble were made by the likes of Countrywide and other mortgage-
35 ltbewr : The recovery from a national view is probably distorted by some markets that never 'bubbled' and had far more stable employment rates (that is, faced
36 Dreadnought : The GOP had simple majorities, but never had a supermajority necessary to override Democratic blocking. Not to mention Democratic screams of "racism"
37 flipdewaf : I was under the impression that the problem wasn't the actual mortgages themselves but the way they were packaged when traded so that the actual risk
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Housing Crash Part 2 On It's Way? posted Thu Feb 18 2010 09:09:19 by ea772lr
Solar Cycle 24 Now Gaining Strength posted Sat Feb 6 2010 08:06:05 by AverageUser
Will America Suffer A "Jobless" Recovery Crisis? posted Mon Jul 6 2009 19:13:44 by StasisLAX
Israel Plans 73,300 Housing Units In The West Bank posted Mon Mar 2 2009 10:13:04 by Mortyman
HDD Data Recovery Questions posted Mon Jan 26 2009 19:21:14 by A332
US Housing Prices: Bottoming Out? posted Wed Dec 24 2008 11:35:26 by Revelation
US Financial Meltdown And The US Dollar Gaining? posted Fri Oct 10 2008 11:38:16 by Wardialer
US Housing Crisis - Could Become A Disaster posted Fri Aug 8 2008 07:41:13 by BristolFlyer
Ron Paul Gaining Traction...fundraising Record posted Tue Nov 6 2007 10:42:40 by Slider
Windows XP Recovery Advice Needed posted Mon Jun 11 2007 15:31:33 by Matt D