Continuing to examine and hold a lively discussion of the Northern Virginia Real Estate market.
Please post your local house search updates, MLS finds, on-topic ideas, and links here.
seeing some movements in the 1 MM+ homes in 22201(Lyon Village) and 22207. five went under contract in the last couple of days. two had price cuts. did the low mortgage rates play a role in these contracts?222012208 18TH ST N, 4,281 sf!!!, listed at $1,425,000, DOM 41610 DANVILLE ST N, 6,293 sf, listed at $1,275,000, DOM 79222074730 36TH ST N listed at $1,165,000 (was: $1,275,000), DOM 534055 27TH RD N, listed at $1,100,000 (was: $1,289,000), DOM 1034515 39TH ST N, listed at $1,068,800, DOM 7
Those prices are pretty shocking considering the age and size of those homes. I would have valued at 850k-1.1M, but then again, Im in 22205 so my perception is skewed.
Does anyone have a guess when we will see some major foreign companies go under?Wall St wasn't the only bunch of geniuses using the same basic playbook. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see this move beyond the US's borders even more than it already has.
"Wall St wasn't the only bunch of geniuses using the same basic playbook. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see this move beyond the US's borders even more than it already has."Agreed, but it looks like they maybe didnt buy as much as our garbage debt as we once thought. They made plenty of their own garbage though that they will have to deal with. My guess though is their govts will prop up these companies big time, a la Japan and the "lost decade" they are now finally emerging from.
I don't know that it would even have to be our debt. There was a housing bubble in Europe as well as the US. That and several foreign stock markets have been hit very hard as well. I guess the market today decided things are looking up, but I don't know about that.
I think I have finally formulated in my head where this whole mess is going. With the gov. ownership of F&F, bailout of AIG, and now banning of short-selling of financials, we're going back to the 30s. Except this time instead of the government buying up tons of food and then destroying it (and eventually paying farmers not to grow), thus artificially keeping food prices high while US citizens starved, they will/are buying up toxic mortgages, not foreclosing on people, and may even eventually start destroying housing stock to keep prices artificially high. Welcome to the USSA.
gte,Jeez, if you listen to BHs the government can do no right. First it makes homes TOO affordable by allowing mortgages for everybody to be sold ... and NOW, it makes homes NOT AFFORDABLE by supporting current values of homes. Which is it? Is the government out to make homes TOO affordable ... or not affordable enough?Anyone ever bother to look up the definition of paranoia?
Which is it? Is the government out to make homes TOO affordable ... or not affordable enough?The policy shifted when home prices changed direction.TOO affordable when home prices were going upandNOT affordable enough when home prices started going down.It's really the same policy -- keep home prices as high as possible.
Laaaaannncce! Welcome back! :-) Actually I suspect many here tend to be of the libertarian mold which yes, subscribes to the notion that the government tends to screw up anything it gets its hands on, so the less the better. I think the government is trapped. They want a slow decline in prices, not a rout. Circumstances have been lending more towards rout thus the interventions. Personally, while I deplore the government having to do this (not to say the least using my tax dollars to bail out companies whose executives plundered them for hundreds of millions of dollars) -- but the extra debt poses a definite risk to the dollar itself. I dislike this, but I've begun to consider what I'd do in an Argentina-style situation. The Fed has torn up the rulebook and is rewriting it as it goes. The fortunate thing is that it is being backed by most governments because they all realize a US implosion will take them all with it. But be firmly warned. We are in the fifth inning of a nine inning game with potential extra innings. Plan appropriately.
LANCE!!!! You're back. I thought you'd be foreclosed on by now . . . or just waiting to get foreclosed on :-).Trying to explain stuff to you is pretty much worthless . . . but I'll try to keep it short.1) In order to prevent a tough recession in '01 after the dot-com bubble, the Fed lowered the IR too low and kept them there.2) The gov. didn't force lenders to make stupid loans-they only encouraged it (Greenspan '02-ARMS are great).3) Easy money (read massive inflation & credit-thanks to the Fed) created a huge housing bubble.4) The eventual unwind of massive credit is happening now.5) In order to protect banks, the Fed is trying to stop the credit collapse.6) They will do this by inflating (through bail-outs, etc)7) Eventually-either through home price decline, destroying home stock, or inflating incomes, home prices will come back in line with incomes.8) The only way to reinflate homes is to have massive inflation8a) Inflating the currency a little bit doesn't work, b/c of the law of unintended consequences. Any new money produced will NOT go back into housing. It will find a home in any investment that is making money . . . the choices are Finance, Real Estate, Insurance, Stocks, Bonds, Commodities. Of those investments which ones show the most promise to make money in the next 3-5 years. Whichever one you answer is where most of the new money created will go. I say real estate is close to being the last one on the list.8b) In order to reflate housing all the other more promising sectors will rise 1st.8c) Unless of course the gov. directly intervenes in RE, through foreclosure moratoriums, etc.9) The net result of all of this is a lower standard of living.10) Eventually, the end game of our fiat currency will play out, it will either be hyperinflation, or default. When that end game occurs . . . is anyone's guess.11) This could have been avoided if the gov. had stayed out of the economy in '01 and let the market readjust naturally.I lived in Argentina for 2 years right before they defaulted (literally, I left 3 months before they defaulted). Let me tell you, it was not pretty. The end result was a mostly industrialized country cusp 1st world, was thrown back to the third world.lance the government that governs best is the government that governs least.The law of unintended consequences will bite the gov. hard. It has no profit margin and therefore no incentive or way of knowing what is best. Unless of course you believe gov. officials are all-powerful, all-knowing, and are better than "normal" people.
GTE said:"11) This could have been avoided if the gov. had stayed out of the economy in '01 and let the market readjust naturally.""lance the government that governs best is the government that governs least."And I don't disagree with you in the least. But perhaps now you (and other BHs) are starting to understand that the advice I was giving (which got mocked by you and others) was not based on what should be in a perfect world but what would be based on our past experiences ... and human nature itself.
??? lance, the advice you were giving me and others was to "buy now" before being priced out. To leverage myself to the hilt. In all these bank failures etc, the regular joe isn't getting bailed out . . . he is getting squeezed.Let's see for the record, if I had taken your advice in '06, I would be at least 15-20% in the hole on my house. I would have gotten an ARM or I/O as that's the only way I could have afforded a place. The loan would reset either next your or in 2010. My only hope at this point would be a) the bank doesn't foreclose b) massive inflation.If I followed my own advice, I would have saved at least 40% of my take home, invested in gold/silver, rented dirt cheap and waited. I would now be in the position to put down 20% plus have a 6-12 months reserve of cash, and prices would have come down 20+%.Hmmm . . . yeah looks like your advice really paid dividends.Buying assets in a highly inflationary environment is a good thing, you just don't want to overpay and you want highly LIQUID assets, and houses are not a highly liquid asset.
I don't know that all of us are libertarian. Some of us believe that appropriate regulation would have prevented some of the mess we are now experiencing. We know our economy is too complex to be "pure" anything. Had the govt. done its job at the right time, the market could have sorted out problems then and now.What seems most troubling is socializing of risk while letting a few profit when the gambling pays off--the hands off approach to letting lenders and bankers enrich themselves by making fraudulent or risky loans/investments, but then when these collapse, making innocent third parties pay the price.
Woo Hoo!Lance is back!Normal cycle!New Paradigm!90% of DC area is stagnant or climbing!The market has already bottomed! (2007)Buy now or be priced out forever! (2006)
Post a Comment
Subscribe in a reader