On 2 Sep 2004 08:24:39 -0700, (John E.
Jaku-Hing) wrote:

>
>Since professional singles and families are up to their necks in debt
>nationwide, the national housing bubble is not far fetched at all.
>This situation is a recycled version of what happened in the late
>20's. Simple as that. Playing around with analogies like debt ->
>financial instrument is very dangerous, especially when the majority
>of people in this country have mismanaged their debt by a large
>degree.

REPLY

We concur. Especially considering the illiquidity of real estate. When
real estate changes hands, the seller gets a chunk of money (his/her
equity). The buyer gets an obligation that spins thirty years into the
future.

That's great for an expanding bubble. But it spells disaster for a
contracting (or popping) bubble. Illiquidity works against speculators
in that case.

This has fueled lots of our success in cosmetic dentistry during the
years since the dot-com demise.

Dentists need to be aware of housing markets ....

JOEL

> Foreclosure is a lagging indicator because people try
>desperately to hold onto their houses for as long as possible, and
>since foreclosures takes many months to materialize, you will not see
>them occurring for another year or two, then come the bargain basement
>prices for beautiful, hardly used homes. I've saved for a day like
>this, and I'm finally going to cash in. I'm so excited!
>

>
>There are other costs that make the national housing bubble more
>imminent than ever before. Property taxes soaring, more natural
>disasters and insurance companies denying claims on them, the "big
>one" expected in California shortly. The whole bubble is also
>caused by people chasing down the next safe investment. Naively,
>they've come like lemmings to RE. My thought is that precious
>materials will be the next big thing. People will rationalize their
>home purchase by getting only what they need to minimize maintenance
>costs, and only purchase gold, silver, copper, etc. during the
>upcoming hyperinflation and subsequently extreme deflationary cycle.
>
>John E. Jaku.........................................HING! !!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>When housing prices collapse nationwide, don't forget to visit:
>www.hud.gov/homes/index.cfm
>
>"Stake a claim on someone else's broken dream"

>This has fueled lots of our success in cosmetic dentistry during the

>years since the dot-com demise.

What do you mean?

On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 13:35:29 -0500, wrote:

>
>What do you mean?

Someone buys a house in the 1970s or 1980s for $45,000. They pay down
their mortgage.

By 2002 they decide to sell out and move to a high-rise rental.

Whoa. The market brings them $250,000 or $300,000.

So where did this money come from?

FROM THE FUTURE earnings of the new homeowner.

Now that chunk of change may get into the dentists' pocket. People who
are cah-rich tend to spend it, especially when the stockbrokers dare
not show their faces just yet!

THIS accounts for much of BUSH'S wonderful recovery, not earned
income!



JOEL

"Joel M. Eichen" <> wrote in message
news:...

> On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 13:35:29 -0500, wrote:
>

>
> Someone buys a house in the 1970s or 1980s for $45,000. They pay down
> their mortgage.
>
> By 2002 they decide to sell out and move to a high-rise rental.
>
> Whoa. The market brings them $250,000 or $300,000.
>
> So where did this money come from?
>
> FROM THE FUTURE earnings of the new homeowner.

You seem to think you've had some sort of new and penetrating insight.
People have bought houses by taking out a mortgage for at least 100 years.
Any and every time someone buys anything with credit, the seller's profit
(assuming there is one) comes from the "future earnings" of the buyer. This
stuff is old (like a few thousand years) news.

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 20:53:20 -0400, "Lou" <>
wrote:

>You seem to think you've had some sort of new and penetrating insight.
>People have bought houses by taking out a mortgage for at least 100 years.
>Any and every time someone buys anything with credit, the seller's profit
>(assuming there is one) comes from the "future earnings" of the buyer. This
>stuff is old (like a few thousand years) news.

No, an increase of 100% or 200% in the cost of housing is a NEW thing.

Thanks to the dot-com mania and Tulipmania too.

JOEL

On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 17:54:13 -0400, Joel M. Eichen <> wrote:

>JOEL

.... Has never heard of inflation.

BTW a 30 yr. mortgage is a fools' game.
--

W_B

Take out the G'RBAGE

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 15:14:23 GMT, W_B <> wrote:

>On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 17:54:13 -0400, Joel M. Eichen <> wrote:
>

>
>... Has never heard of inflation.

INFLATION figured in ...... real estate always outpaces inflation!

>
>BTW a 30 yr. mortgage is a fools' game.

Who would the fool be and at what interest rate?


Joel

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 11:43:56 -0400, Joel M. Eichen
<> wrote:

>
>Who would the fool be and at what interest rate?
>
>
>Joel

Speculators never hold for 30 years ........

Unless its a downtown block!

On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 17:54:13 -0400, Joel M. Eichen <> wrote:

>JOEL

Would like Comrade Kerry to be in the WH.

Agree to disagree.
--

W_B

Take out the G'RBAGE

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 20:53:20 -0400, "Lou" <> wrote:

>
>"Joel M. Eichen" <> wrote in message

>
>You seem to think you've had some sort of new and penetrating insight.
>People have bought houses by taking out a mortgage for at least 100 years.
>Any and every time someone buys anything with credit, the seller's profit
>(assuming there is one) comes from the "future earnings" of the buyer. This
>stuff is old (like a few thousand years) news.
>

An astute observation.

JE could stand a few lessons of economics from you
--

W_B

Take out the G'RBAGE