Re: Re: Re: Re: About time..
 

I'm not misinformed, Jim. The reason home sales are up are because the interest rate is so low. People with jobs are buying houses they weren't able to afford, previously.. because of the rates. You have an opinion and find figures that you think support your claims. They don't, but you think it sounds good, I guess.

They're refinancing to take advantage of the better rate, not to get the equity out(though some do get some of the equity in the process). Consumer confidence hasn't been real great for awhile but as I said, its getting better. It appears we live in the same country but two completely different worlds.



Mortgage rates have already started to climb. I just explained why homes are selling.

Now I'm getting a headache. You seem to be talking in circles. The fact of the matter is that bankruptcy is at an all time high. Although unemployment is going down, its the lower paid jobs that are on the rise.


I'm not looking for sympathy, just making a point. I didn't blame it directly on the president, the economy yes. It appears you are blaming it on the president though.
Circles I tell ya. So you are agreeing with something I already stated? I realize it fluctuates, that's the nature of the beast. While I have some in a 401k, most of my investment is in a real estate property.


I don't consider it being pessimistic or optimistic, I call it being realistic. Hey, if we didn't realize the problems that we have we would never progress.

You're right, life is a series of choices and nothing is for certain(except death and taxes). I choose the road to security. Even the secure road has its risk. Why are you still preaching about the tax rate?

LOL! Catchy tune.


If they did, they were the minority.


Heeh, it can be very frustrating having a discussion with you. let me give you a quote from the president..

"These are the basic ideas that guide my tax policy: lower income taxes for all, with the greatest help for those most in need. Everyone who pays income taxes benefits — while the highest percentage tax cuts go to the lowest income Americans. I believe this is a formula for continuing the prosperity we've enjoyed, but also expanding it in ways we have yet to discover. It is an economics of inclusion. It is the agenda of a government that knows its limits and shows its heart."

Now, who benefits from the tax cuts the most?

I'm wondering if you work for the president, I know you are a supporter. You seem to be so much a supporter that you'll even contradict him, to support him. You speak with a forked tongue, white man. Heeh.:)

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: About time..
 

Originally posted by RBatson :

Quote:

I'm not misinformed, Jim. The reason home sales are up are because the interest rate is so low. People with jobs are buying houses they weren't able to afford, previously.. because of the rates. You have an opinion and find figures that you think support your claims. They don't, but you think it sounds good, I guess.

The sales figures are what they are, Rick, whether they agree with my opinion or not so please don't deny reality here because it doesn't jibe with your opinion. Mortgage rates are low, home sales are up and that's because people can afford to buy homes and qualify for mortgages, undrcutting your premise that interest rates are low because no one is buying. See how that works? Let's be honest here.

Quote:

They're refinancing to take advantage of the better rate, not to get the equity out (though some do get some of the equity in the process). Consumer confidence hasn't been real great for awhile but as I said, its getting better. It appears we live in the same country but two completely different worlds.

As I said, you can't deny home sales and the fact remians that you're choosing to see everything financial in a negative light, probably due to your own financial setbacks recently. Everyone isn't having the same experience, Rick.

Quote:

Mortgage rates have already started to climb. I just explained why homes are selling.

As I've already shown, the facts prove you wrong and the rates are rising, a tiny bit, from 40-year lows, so the result is minor in the cost of a home.

Quote:

Now I'm getting a headache. You seem to be talking in circles. The fact of the matter is that bankruptcy is at an all time high. Although unemployment is going down, its the lower paid jobs that are on the rise.

I simply stipulated that - of course - unemployment is high and the local economy is poor in SOME areas of the country. It usually is - somewhere. You can't expect every state to be economically flush all the time. I'm attempting to be factual and you act as if I'm confusing you. Let's get real, shall we?

Bankruptcies are rising, partly due to high credit card debt among other things but if - as you claim - new jobs are mostly low-end, how is it that the median income in America keeps rising every year? That should really give you a headache! Fact is that most jobs pay well and the 'low paying new jobs' myth is a creation of Democrat politicians trying 'talk the economy down' in 2004, as they did in 1992. "The worst economy in 50 years"...according to Bill Clinton. It wasn't even close, then or now and politicians trying to make it appear so seem to have a willing audience in folks like you who think that because they have financial setbacks the whole country is going broke. Nonsense. The numbers prove that a lie.

Quote:

I'm not looking for sympathy, just making a point. I didn't blame it directly on the president, the economy yes. It appears you are blaming it on the president though.

Nonsense. You're inferring - along with John Kerry, I might add, that President Bush is somehow responsible for any economic downturns and I'm opposing both that faulty premise and the lie that the economy is bad and people are going broke, or the 21st century version of going broke.

Quote:

Circles I tell ya. So you are agreeing with something I already stated?

Oh boy. I stipulated that the U.S. economy HAS been in a downturn for the past three years but you claim that today - right now - it's still performing poorly. I very much disagreed with that and have shown it to be a mistaken premise with no real basis in fact. That's my point here.

Quote:

I realize it fluctuates, that's the nature of the beast. While I have some in a 401k, most of my investment is in a real estate property.

At least you're realistic but if real estste is losing value for you it's poorly invested. The market is booming and values are way up from a few years ago, at least in the northeast.

Quote:

I don't consider it being pessimistic or optimistic, I call it being realistic. Hey, if we didn't realize the problems that we have we would never progress.

Recognizing 'problems' is prudent but manufacturing them is foolish and unrealistic. The sharp guys see so-called 'problems' as potential opportunities.

Quote:

You're right, life is a series of choices and nothing is for certain(except death and taxes). I choose the road to security. Even the secure road has its risk. Why are you still preaching about the tax rate?

Because myths about the 'rich' not paying their 'fair share' in taxes die hard and need to be shown for the fallacy and manufactured class envy they are really based on.

Quote:

LOL! Catchy tune.

Er, O.K.

Quote:

If they did, they were the minority.

Perhaps. I don't have a head-count.

Quote:

Heeh, it can be very frustrating having a discussion with you. let me give you a quote from the president.. "These are the basic ideas that guide my tax policy: lower income taxes for all, with the greatest help for those most in need. Everyone who pays income taxes benefits — while the highest percentage tax cuts go to the lowest income Americans. I believe this is a formula for continuing the prosperity we've enjoyed, but also expanding it in ways we have yet to discover. It is an economics of inclusion. It is the agenda of a government that knows its limits and shows its heart." Now, who benefits from the tax cuts the most?

You really need to stay away from those left-wing websites Rick, they'll rot your mind. The lowest-income Americans pay NO, repeat: NO income taxes at all. That meshes with President Bush's objectives. The top 10% of U.S. taxpayers get bigger cuts if you look at it one way, less another. Statistics are deceiving, as you should know. In fact, the top taxpayers now pay a higher percentage of their incomes in taxes then they did even ten years ago. I don't have the links handy but it's a fact. What bugs me is that folks like you (and liberal Democrats, always) are never, ever satisfied. No matter how much the wealthy pay it's never 'enough' - and that is just wrong. It stifiles investment and growth and some folks just can't see it because they simply envy the rich and want to see them 'punished' with ever-higher taxes. That smacks of socialism, as they practice it in europe and elsewhere. Obscene tax rates, little private investment, government smothering of most industry and stagnent economies meaning everyone gets less in government services every year. A mess that we don't need to emulate here in America, Rick.

Quote:

I'm wondering if you work for the president, I know you are a supporter. You seem to be so much a supporter that you'll even contradict him, to support him. You speak with a forked tongue, white man. Heeh.:)

I don't work for the president or the Republicans. I'm a patriotic and concerned American citizen, like you. I like and support President Bush, yes, but I disagree with him on some major issues, such as immigration 'reform'. Still, on the whole, I think he's done a good job under difficult conditions with a rabid and hostile media at his heels since Day One. I usually make sense, which frustrates some liberals here and annoys those who dislike my politics and/or my religion. Too bad for them, isn't it?

You're worth responding too Rick and I try to remain civil when I do but as I frustrate you, the feeling is sometimes mutual. Still, you're posts are a good paltform for me to correct some myths and explain a few facts. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to do so but I won't keep this exchange going very much longer as I have little time to spend here and this just eats it up.

Carry on. :)

Mr 5.0- I am overjoyed to see that someone in California of all places shares my political views.

I also disagree with Bush's immigration policies.

I wish I could put my thoughts into words as convincingly and as sharply as you do.

Run for office, I'll vote for you:D

Mr 5 0, your spewing off figures and some stuff you call facts. All I want is some resources on where you get your figures and facts from. State them cause for all I know you can be making all this up.

James:cool:

Ask and ye shall receive
 

(April 27, 2004) -- Existing single-family home sales rose strongly in March to the second-highest level on record, according to the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®.

Existing-home sales increased 5.7 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate* of 6.48 million units in March from an upwardly revised pace of 6.13 million units in February. Last month's sales activity was 12.7 percent above the 5.75 million unit level in March 2003; the record is 6.68 million in September 2003.

David Lereah, NAR's chief economist, said low interest rates get most of the credit for last month's performance, but he noted interest rates are now rising modestly. "The housing needs of a growing population timed nicely with historically low mortgage interest rates and a rebounding economy in March," Lereah says. "Although interest rates are rising modestly, an improving job market is creating a favorable backdrop for home sales, but at a somewhat slower pace in the months ahead."

According to Freddie Mac, the national average commitment rate for a 30-year, conventional, fixed-rate mortgage was 5.45 percent in March, the second lowest on record, down from 5.64 percent in February. It was 5.75 percent in March 2003; the record low is 5.23 percent set in June 2003.

The national median existing-home price was $174,100 in March, up 7.4 percent from March 2003 when the median price was $162,100. The median is a typical market price where half of the homes sell for more and half sell for less.

Source: www.realtor.org

***********************************************

Household Income

MOST RECENT STATISTIC: $42,409

PERIOD COVERED: 2002
Date Released: Sept. 2003
Next Release: Sept. 2004


2002 2001 2000 1999
Median 42,409 $42,228 $41,990 $40,696

1998
$38,855.

1-Yr. Change, nominal 0.4% 0.6% 3.2% 4.7% 5.0%

1-Yr. Change, real (1.1%) (2.2%) (0.2%) 2.5% 3.6%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

I thought I was finished..
 

Jim, do you realize your real estate source is supporting my argument? Homes sales are up because of the interest rates. The national median price of a home is up because those with jobs can afford more home than they could when the rates were high. I can't see what is so difficult to understand about that. I'll give you an example.. A $100k home loan at 8.5% is $768.91 a month, at 5.5% the same loan is $567.79 a month. So if you could afford $768.91 then the $100k you could afford at 8.5% now becomes a loan in the amount of $135,421.78 that you could afford at 5.5%. Alot of people have sold thier old homes and bought a nicer one, get it? That is the reason the national median home price is up.

Quote Jim- "This year, inflation may creep up and increase the mortagage interest rates a bit but to claim that the rates are low because no one can afford a home and then see home sales climbing beyond any previous numbers is to ignore reality, something you are free to do on your own, but don't try to sell it here."

I never said people who couldn't afford homes were buying homes, that doesn't make sense, none. What I said was.. People with jobs are buying houses they weren't able to afford, previously.. because of the rates.

The economy is slowly recovering, something else I already stated. Rates will follow, said that too.

I don't know where you get that I personally am starving or anything of that nature. I never said I was losing money on my 'investment' rental house, its actually doing quite well.. in rent and value (as is the house I live in). I don't know where you got that from. :confused: What I did say is that I have most of my money in a real estate property. What just went south up is my pension and health benefits. I am only accruing half towards retirement what I was a year ago. My deductibles, for health insurance, have doubled and some of the benefits were reduced. The insurance company is blaming the economy and our pension and health fund isn't the only one, there are many folks in America going through this... Just because it isn't happening to you doesn't mean it isn't happening. Hopefully as the economy turns around the pension and health bendfits will become what they were. Other than that, I'm doing better than ever.. even refinanced my house and am currently paying an obsenely low mortgage payment. All because I have a good job and good credit, in these hard times(that are beginning to get better). It does concern me when people are out of work, not only because I hate to hear about people losing their homes but also because ultimately, it could affect mine and yours and everyone elses.

Now, I am done with this because I can't see that this is going anywhere.. I did pick up something on the tax discussion, thanks. I think this just goes to prove that 2 people can be given the same facts and interpret them 2 completely different ways.. and that I'm right and you are wrong:D Seriously, I think you either assume too much or don't grasp all that you read before coming to a conclusion or possibly... I just don't get my message across clearly, perhaps.

Check out this link- http://www.suntimes.com/output/busin...in-rate28.html Be sure to read the very last Q&A. Looks like I'm right again...

BTW, I figured you would like this post and that, along with trying to wake this place up, is why I started it.

Quote Jim- "I won't keep this exchange going very much longer as I have little time to spend here and this just eats it up."

Who are you kidding??:rolleyes: :D

Re: I thought I was finished..
 

Originally posted by RBatson :

I'll cut to the chase here. Homes sales are booming which indicates a robust economy, not a weak one, as you've inferred. There is a ton of ignorance and misinformation regarding economics out there and while I'm no economist (neither are you) I fail to see the validity of some of your arguments.

Quote:

I never said people who couldn't afford homes were buying homes, that doesn't make sense, none. What I said was.. People with jobs are buying houses they weren't able to afford, previously.. because of the rates. The economy is slowly recovering, something else I already stated. Rates will follow, said that too.

You were attempting to portray a weak economy and putting some of the blame on the president, which I see as ridiculous - on both issues.

Quote:

I It does concern me when people are out of work, not only because I hate to hear about people losing their homes but also because ultimately, it could affect mine and yours and everyone elses.

That can happen anytime, to anyone. Life is a risk.

Quote:

Now, I am done with this because I can't see that this is going anywhere.. I did pick up something on the tax discussion, thanks. I think this just goes to prove that 2 people can be given the same facts and interpret them 2 completely different ways.. and that I'm right and you are wrong:D Seriously, I think you either assume too much or don't grasp all that you read before coming to a conclusion or possibly... I just don't get my message across clearly, perhaps.

I think that you see the U.S. economic 'glass' as half-empty while I see it as half-full. That I won't agree with you must rankle you, I understand, but I think you have a distorted idea of the U.S. economy and are ready to find problems where few really exist, then you call that 'being realistic' when it's really just being pessimistic. You don't like hearing that, I'm sure, so we go 'round and 'round with it. Nothing much changes here, does it? :)

Quote:

Check out this link. Be sure to read the very last Q&A. Looks like I'm right again...

Looks like what''s really happenning is that competition for new car sales is fierce - dozens and dozens of car companies are selling cars and there are only going to be so many buyers each year as cars last a lot longer now - and since the manufacturers can't afford to lower the price, they make the financing sweet to move cars - and only if you have a high credit score.

Quote:

BTW, I figured you would like this post and that, along with trying to wake this place up, is why I started it.

You clever boy, you.

As for spending time here: I can't. This thread did get my interest but I usually post other places and prefer those sites as the audience is much larger, if nothing else. I'll bite on a juicy topic but not always and not that often. I haven't posted this much here in many months. Thanks for the opportunity to kick it around but remember, Rick: on the internet, everyone is a genius and everyone is always right about everything. :)

While avoiding the need to finish my review of the Prescott core Pentium 4 vs Northwood C core Pentium 4, I shall address this.

As of March 2004, the Business Consumer Confidence Level is the highest it's been since March of 1989.

Individual consumer confidence rose sharply this month citing strong job market conditions and a positive outlook over the next 6 months.

Consumer Confidence Index

In regards to home sales, it's quite simple. People buy what they can afford. With interest rates being so low, they are able to get into a house with a price tag much higher than they would have. At the same time, the housing market has seen huge increases in the final sale prices of homes in the recent couple of years. The bottom line is that people are spending just as much as they would have, but more of them are buying homes.

While I share concerns over the economy in general, more specifically in the moving of good jobs moving overseas or out of the country. Putting the blame on the Bush administration is hardly fair or logical in regards to such accusations. The Clinton Administration left this time bomb sitting in the oval office for the next president.

The too often noted concept that the United States is so wealthy that we can directly enhance the 3rd world status of all poor nations is ludicrious. The United States has a population of about 300 million vs the Earth's population of 6 billion. Nearly 2.5 billion of that living in India and China, which are not exactly the wealthiest nations. It's like trying to cool a gallon of boiling water with a pint of 40* water.

In regards to taxes, the "rich" pay far more in taxes than the average citizen.

Related NCPA Report

Ever notice that your net pay increases little with your salary increases because it moves you up into another tax bracket? Maybe you notice that you only get about 1/2 of your annual bonus or profit sharing net of taxes? The "rich" pay that tax under normal circumstances. While there are definitely instances of blatent abuse of tax codes by some businesses and wealthy individuals, there are just as many by low and middle income workers who file "zero" tax returns IMHO. While the proposed tax cuts do favor "wealthy" individuals, the lower income bracket citizens also see a decrease in taxes.

There is most definitely a huge problem with the current pay structure in corporate America. Higher level executives are seeing pay levels that are completely unwarranted, and irresponsible. Steve Jobs is probably the most blatent abuser of corporate pay I've seen in recent years. The average major corporation's CEO makes 500x the base wage in the company. Japan is the next country in line for CEO pay based on the base worker's wage. It's 12x more. See a problem there? I do. That being said, I'm not entirely sure how to fix the problem in a free market, capitalist economy. Maybe if more American's actually paid attention to their investments and economic issues, this wouldn't have happened, but instead, they'd rather blather on about rehashed, inaccurate, politically motivated articles released by our obviously biased media corporations.