Login
Subscribe
Recent Comments
- Sylvia Walker on Irvine Housing by the Numbers - May 2012 Update
- Casual Observer on Irvine Housing by the Numbers - May 2012 Update
- Astute As It Comes on Open House Review: 35 Bella Rosa
- Sylvia Walker on Open House Review: 35 Bella Rosa
- Darin on Open House Review: 35 Bella Rosa
- Sylvia Walker on Investors Are Busy in Irvine's Low-End Housing Market
- Casual Observer on Investors Are Busy in Irvine's Low-End Housing Market
- irvine_home_owner on Tustin, but Irvine Schools
- cynthia curran on Mendocino and Saragota in Stonegate and the Irvine Development Map (Winter 2012)
- irvine_home_owner on Woodbury Open House Review: 75 Fanlight
Recent Posts
- Closed Sales from 5/10/2012-5/16/2012
- Open House Review: 52 Secret Garden
- Irvine Housing by the Numbers - May 2012 Update
- Paired Living with Privacy in Woodbridge
- Beige Ruth Sisters
- Closed Sales from 5/3/2012 to 5/9/2012
- Open House Review: 35 Bella Rosa
- Investors Are Busy in Irvine’s Low-End Housing Market
- Artist in Residence: Turtle Rock Glen Townhome
- Tustin, but Irvine Schools
Categories
Archives
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- Rest of archives
Browse Homes
Irvine Homes
- Airport Area Homes
- El Camino Real Homes
- Northpark Homes
- Northwood Homes
- Oak Creek Homes
- Orangetree Homes
- Portola Springs Homes
- Quaill Hill Homes
- Rancho San Joaquin Homes
- Turtle Ridge Homes
- Turtle Rock Homes
- University Park
- University Town Center Homes
- West Irvine Homes
- Westpark Homes
- Woodbridge Homes
- Woodbury Homes
Newport Beach Homes
- Newport Coast Homes
- Crystal Cove Homes
- Corona Del Mar / Spyglass
- East Bluff / Harbor View Homes
- Lower Newport Bay / Balboa Island
- Balboa Peninsula Homes
- West Bay / Santa Ana Heights
- West Newport / Lido Homes
Other Cities
- Aliso Viejo Homes
- Anaheim Hills Homes
- Brea Homes
- Costa Mesa Homes
- Coto de Caza Homes
- Dana Point Homes
- Huntington Beach Homes
- Ladera Ranch Homes
- Laguna Beach Homes
- Laguna Hills Homes
- Laguna Niguel Homes
- Lake Forest Homes
- Mission Viejo Homes
- Orange Homes
- Rancho Santa Margarita Homes
- San Clemente Homes
- San Juan Capistrano Homes
- Santa Ana Homes
- Tustin Homes
- Villa Park Homes
- Yorba Linda Homes
Contact
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Foreclosures
Housing
- Talk Irvine
- IHB Forum Archive
- OC Housing News
- Coto Housing Blog
- Housing Kaboom
- Patrick.net
- Housing Chronicles
- Housing Doom
- Dr. Housing Bubble
- Manhattan Beach Confidential
- Burbed
- SoCal RE Bubble Crash
- Professor Piggington
- Real C'ville
- Westside Bubble
- Bubble Meter
- Portland Housing Blog
- Sacramento Land(ing)
- OC Register Blog
Econ/Finance/Other
- Calculated Risk
- The Big Picture
- Economist's View
- Mish's Blog
- Matrix
- Bakers' Stock
- ML-Implode
- Eschaton
- Best Mortgage Rates
- Crackerjack Finance
Latest REOs
- $439,900 :: 61 Olivehurst, Irvine CA, 92602
- $889,900 :: 14 Upland, Irvine CA, 92602
- $429,900 :: 56 Great Lawn, Irvine CA, 92620
- $465,000 :: 212 Garden Gate Ln, Irvine CA, 92620
- $329,000 :: 1006 Terra Bella, Irvine CA, 92602
- $199,000 :: 3125 Watermarke Pl, Irvine CA, 92612
- $579,900 :: 8 Star Thistle, Irvine CA, 92604
- $458,500 :: 3 Ultimo Dr, Irvine CA, 92620
- $398,900 :: 191 Lockford, Irvine CA, 92602
- $729,900 :: 36 Capobella, Irvine CA, 92614
From the “What is going on here!” Department:
The Supreme Court removes important limits on campaign finance
Friday, January 22, 2010
FOR MORE THAN a century, Congress has recognized the danger of letting corporations use their wealth to wield undue influence in political campaigns. The Supreme Court had upheld these efforts. But Thursday, making a mockery of some justices’ pretensions to judicial restraint, the Supreme Court unnecessarily and wrongly ruled 5 to 4 that the constitutional guarantee of free speech means that corporations can spend unlimited sums to help elect favored candidates or defeat those they oppose. This, as the dissenting justices wrote, “threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the nation.”
Of course “free speech” has absolutely nothing to do with campaign contributions and they all know it.
Well, the argument is that speech costs money-TV ads aren’t free.
Then don’t allow them to run TV ads - force the sheeple to get out and do their own independent research on the differing platforms and give independent candidates a fair chance.
They have been electing presidents longer than TV has been around.
I think that more importantly, corporations are accorded the same rights as “persons” under the law. So any incorporated body can “say” whatever it wants, because it has free speech rights.
Same status gives corporations rights against real people in court cases, tax law, etc.
Does that mean they get to vote also?
Has the National Association of REALTORS(R) issued a press release yet praising the high court’s decision?
Well, Well, Well ... look at this, bipartisanship at its best.
Senate Dems Not Sure They Can Get Enough Votes to Reconfirm Bernanke
January 21, 2010 9:50 PM
Amidst the voter anger at Wall Street and Washington, D.C., ABC News has learned that the Senate Democratic leadership isn’t sure there are enough votes to re-confirm Ben Bernanke for another term as chairman of the Federal Reserve.
Bernanke’s term expires on Jan. 31.
The White House did not respond to many requests for comment.
“The American people are disgusted with the greed and recklessness of Wall Street,” Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said in an interview with The Associated Press last month. “People are asking, ‘Why didn’t the Fed intervene at the appropriate time to stop the casino-type activities of large financial companies?’”
Sanders, Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., and Sen. David Vitter, R-La., have all put holds on Bernanke’s nomination, requiring 60 votes to proceed to a vote.
Voter anger is of heightened concern to members of Congress given the surprise victory of Sen.-elect Scott Brown, R-Mass., who rode a tide of voter discontent and economic anxiety to an upset victory in a special election earlier this week.
One would think that something has to eventually give. Of course even if they do get rid of him, they will likely appoint someone else from the same club who will keep the autopilot switch in the “ON” position.
Obama is looking like more of a failure each day. His party; sacked from Massachusetts and he runs out promising to create jobs for everybody.
WTF?
I have just about had it up to here with all this nonsense from a politician behaving as though his role is to create job opportunities for us peasants to go and wank ourselves with.
Obama has failed to curtail government spending which has gone completely out of control.
Obama has let all of his Wall Street brethren off the hook for destroying the economy. Nobody is going to jail except for Madoff who was only busted because he stole from other rich people. Goldman Sachs gets a free pass for selling subprime MBS to its customers while secretly placing bets on its own behalf that those securities would fail.
Obama continues to conduct war in the middle east; getting us tactically situated for a nice defensive invasion of Iran in the next decade or two while simultaneously conditioning the people to believe in the old “Weapons Of Mass Destruction” canard.
You notice how you are hearing less and less Bush hatred these days and more and more “Obama Disappointment”.
Obama will need to do a little more than promise jobs. I suggest he help restore some confidence to the market and string up a Wall Street executive or two.
When you become so cynical you give up ... I’ve been there before. With that said, I’ve got 2 kids, I’m mad as hell, and I want real change now.
I’m gonna pen both my senators a letter today at lunch, imploring them to vote no on Bernanke. I suspect I’m not only one to do so. The heat is turning up.
Let’s see how he’d re-invent himself.
Obama 2.0, Pre-released.
although Bernanke will just be replaced by another Bernanke clone, it still sends a message to Wall Street. Thus, stocks are starting to tank now.
I rather cynically believe that Wall St. can control the market and the recent market declines is Wall Street’s way of saying to the peasant masses who have recently been stirring,“Now, now, we are ALL in this together! See? When you pester us we will pester your 401K’s, so you must be nice!”
Hopefully, we have the gull to say, “Have at it! Your going to jail!”
They just announced on CNBC that Bernanke’s nomination did not have the votes in the senate. Donald Kohn is looking like he may become the next Fed Chairman.
Oh My, One month you’re Time “Person of the Year”, the next month your ass is thrown out!
Up Next, Timothy Geithner. Get out now!
The fed is supposed to be aploitical, in reality it really doesnt matter who fed is..the administration will make the major decisions for them. The treasury will still support HAMP (it should have been called hump, because that is what it does to the home owners, banks and buyers waiting for prices to get to reasonable levels), MBS purchase and the rest of the crap.
It really boils my blood when i read that former officials (e.g. the bald ex goldman sachs guy who started TARP during bush’s reign) are running billion dollar hedge funds have have made record profits mostly due to tarp and the bailout…atleast now i know who benefitted from their decisions.
And Lawrence Summers needs to join Geithner.
We need Paul Volcker back.
I recall the WS bailouts started with Paulson. Bernanke inherited and had to deal with Greenspan’s creation. However, I guess many voters are in the mood of “throw them all out”.
Ben Bernanke should be held accountable for the simple fact that I (and many other RE bears) knew this Ponzi scheme would hurt America deeply, and he denied a bubble existed up until the grill of the train was in his face. He is a bubble machine ... he has caused great harm to tax payers ... he has enriched Wall Street.
I’m really no fan of his but I was impressed with his bag of tricks, nonetheless. I did want home prices to drop to the historical normal levels but he did help keep them high with his ZIRP. I do also agree with someone else’s comments here that “Making Home Affordable” is realy “make homes cost more”. However, it’s hard to know what Bernanke really believed; but for him to admit publicly that there was a bubble, it would have caused many people to blame him for starting the housing crash. The fact is that it all started and peaked under Greenspan. This is not to ignore W.S.‘s “pass the buck” role in creating the housing bubble and all this mess.
Paulson,
You are a clear thinker. I look forward to more of your astute observations. Welcome to the IHB.
As AZDavid says, who can they get to replace him who won’t have the same problems? And moreover, who WON’T be an expert in Depression economics? Can you imagine where we’d be if we’d continued to have Greenspan for the last 4 years?
I think Bernanke’s getting the can for his inaction under GWB more than for his actions under BO. But public anger is not easily analyzed.
Treasury Weighs Fixes to Foreclosures Program
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/business/economy/22modify.html?hp
“The Treasury has resisted calls to push lenders to write off loan balances, concerned that such a course would either threaten the health of banks by forcing them to swallow billions of dollars in write-offs or cost taxpayers additional money.”
We all know this is all about the banking system, and we all know who is going to pay for it.
Anyone who is pushing for balance write-offs is just engaging in cheap Populism; trying to score some easy political points.
They obviously know that banks cannot just start reducing principals because it will do nothing but induce every debtor in the country to quit his job and stop paying the mortgage.
You know those irritating television ads that they all start bombarding us with at election time? Be ready for “Candidate Dick didn’t help homeowners by reducing principals like I wanted him to! Vote for me!”
That’s what all this principal reduction MUMBO JUMBO is all about.
It has nothing to do with the debtors and everything to do with the banks. It’s simply a bonus that politicians can say they are helping people out while they push the banks into solvency.
If they have to they will manipulate the markets into a double dip to scare the masses for the desired government subsidies to make the banks solvent.
When I say “they” I am talking about the global banking cartel run by the central banks.
I doubt there is much need to manipulate the market, more like allow them to function without intervention. That should be more than enough to inspire that second dip.
I really hope there will be no tax payer-funded principal write-offs. But I suspect the Treasury will modify HAMP in a way that will discourage people from purposefully leaving their jobs to get a principal reduction. For example, the Treasury could include a provision that only people who experienced an income reduction event during a specific time period (e.g., 2007 to mid-2009) will qualify for the principal reduction; whereas people who lost income after the cut-off won’t be eligable for the principal write down. This way, the Treasury will hope people will not purposefully leave their jobs to get the modification.
We know the banking cartel will be saved from collapsing via a government program. The only question is how the money will be funneled to the banks from the tax payers to make up for the bad debt. The rule you proposed seems like a reasonable guess.
The easiest way would be an accounting gimmick that allowed the banks to write down principle but still claim that value on their books for capital requirement and loss mitigation purposes.
Yes, that sounds ideal (in a sad way). But can you think of such a gimmick? Or will it have to be invented?
I can’t imagine an even vaguely honest way for a bank to say to its creditors, “I lost all that money I owe you and can’t ever hope to pay you back, but I’m solvent.” But then maybe honesty is not the best policy here.
How about a 100 year non recourse zero coupon bond for the principal reduction. That should do the trick. The key for the banks is being able to fake their solvency and income statements to continue to operate.
I agree that it is time for public figures to stop talking about principal reductions. The surest manner to get more active consideration of principal reduction is to end HAMP entirely, announce to the world that Fannie/Freddie are shutdown and have the Fed immediately end their purchases of MBS. There would be an almost immediate reconsideration on the part of lenders of what to do with their loans if they were truly convinced that no more OPM was going to be available to do anything about the quality of their loan portfolios. This won’t happen because the need to “DO SOMETHING” is the default position of nearly any public official.
IR ...
I hope you’re not getting mad because we’re posting all these news stories, but this week has been very eventful.
Cheers ... they may actually throw Bernanke out! Yeah!
Not at all. The purpose of the astute observations is to discuss pertinent news as well as post-specific items. As long as it relates to real estate, and these developments may have impact, I am fine with the direction of the discussion.
The keyword here is ‘may’. Don’t be too sure until it’s all said and done.
But let’s say if Benny boy is not reconfirmed. Who is gonna take his place? Another GS gopher? Same old, same old?
I ain’t gonna cheer until I see stalemate in congress (1/2 one party, 1/2 the other….both accusing each other and let the market be free….free from being propped up by govt intervention).
Well it looks like Benny is toast. Just announced on CNBC, Barbara Boxer, will vote NO on Bernanke. Is it a coincidence that she’s up election?
The liberals are teaming up with the conservatives in the senate, to kill Bernanke’s nomination. I suspect Benny will remove his name from consideration sometime this weekend ... possibly today.
I’m voting her out of office in Nov anyway….just cause she’s been in office since 1992 and I want fresh blood.
Like I said: I ain’t cheering until they elect someone who will NOT intervene in this market.
Let me provide an example:
1. ZIRP? Gone…give me the minimum 3%.
2. Mark-to-fantasy (well, this is FASB rule, not Fed)...get rid of it.
BTW, Geithner (another GS gopher) is still in it….too bad so sad. Get rid of him.
I’m Tired!
http://www.examiner.com/x-3678-Baltimore-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m3d3-Im-Tired
“I’m tired of being told that I have to pay more taxes to “keep people in their homes.” Sure, if they lost their jobs or got sick, I’m willing to help. But if they bought McMansions at three times the price of our paid-off, $250,000 condo, on one-third of my salary, then let the leftwing Congresscritters who passed Fannie and Freddie and the Community Reinvestment Act that created the bubble help them—with their own money.”
Another Dittohead mad at the wrong thing.
I am all for being tired of money being spent to “keep people in their homes” but why, in his giant list of grievances, he makes not one mention of Government policy that induced it?
He is painting it as some kind of liberal-America problem; especially when it comes to minorities.
Really?
President George W. Bush announced, in his 2002 State of the Union address, that he would work with Congress this year to achieve “broader homeownership, especially among minorities.”
How can this be? Is GWB some kind of stealth liberal?
Like the typical “join a political groupthink herd” armchair critic - he looks at the problem from the perspective of “the other side must have caused this” and fails to objectively observe.
If you read the entire manifesto it is basically just a laundry list of the usual “liberal” straw dogs you here kicked around on any episode of the Rush Limbaugh show.
here = hear (for the spelling police)
Dave, you just figured out that GWB is a (not so) stealthy liberal? National prescription coverage mandate, national public education rules, massive gov’t spending increases? He tried to cross over and look where it got him, reviled by both sides of the aisle.
Liberals don’t start wars for no reason. If you think Bush is a liberal, you need to lay off the medical MJ.
seriously? liberals have never gone to war? really? FDR? (and Truman). or liberals only drop A-bombs on civilians during the “right” wars?
engaging in warfare has nothing to do with liberal/conservative.
What Geotpf said “....wars for no reason”. He did not say they would not start any war period.
Breaking NEWS! The recession is over! Start the parade!
The recovery continues Buy Now or Be Priced Out Forever
State Unemployment Climbs; Four States Reach Records
Unemployment rose in most states in December—even breaking records in a couple of states—a reversal from previous months when states showed improvement, according to government data released Friday.
The December data is a reversal from the previous month, when 36 states reported lower unemployment.
Earlier this month, the government reported that the national unemployment rate remained at 10 percent in December.
Irvine Renter:
Having looked into trustee sales and auctions in particular, I’m impressed by the number of genuine sales that never make it to auction. These generally show up as “flips” indicating that the flipper did get a screaming deal and immediately put it back on the market at a 15-20% markup. Unfortunately, people without connections - like those reading IHB - have no chance against these types of shenanigans.
I’ve seen more than one such instance locally. And these are single, not bulk, sales.
So - what’s the key to leveling the playing field and getting to bid on the properties which will never hit the courthouse steps?
There are four types of flips, IMHO:
1. People who buy houses at auction and simply resell them.
2. People who buy houses at auction, fix them up, and then resell them.
3. People who buy houses on the open market and simply resell them.
4. People who buy houses on the open market, fix them up, and then resell them.
Only type #3 is really a problem-and it’s probably the hardest to pull off. In #1’s case, the flipper adds no real value to the house, but it’s unclear whether or not the price the flipper sells for would be higher or lower than what the bank would sell it for as a REO (auction prices are frequently lower than REO list prices)-and it’ll probably get on the market quicker. #2 and #4 add value to the house by making repairs-many people don’t want the hassle of hiring contractors and the like, plus it’s much harder to get a loan on a house in poor condition.
Irvine Renter: Thanks for the itemization. My question wasn’t specific enough. The open market sales in your types #3 and #4 were at prices which I would have snapped up in a millisecond. These houses had for sale signs and I followed up obtaining the info available or was met with a recording telling me to leave a message and someone would get back to me. No one did.
The houses never went to auction; they did sell.
How can the playing field be leveled in this type of situation (assume the buyer has no intention of flipping)?
I know of no way to get a back-door short sale or special deal prior to auction. I don’t know that anyone does. I know how to get them at auction, but once they go there, the new owner is going to ask full resale value if they sell it and don’t keep it for themselves. The flips are certainly becoming more common, mostly because lenders are finally letting properties go at auction. The postponements are becoming rare lately.
Why are any of these types of activities a problem? If a buyer/seller can pull off #3, then objecting just sounds like sour grapes. If they cannot pull it off successfully, how is that my concern?
The concern is over the limited availability of information and opportunity. The blowoffs in the complaint are kind of like trying to reach your elected representative in vain, when a lobbyist can waltz right in.
The housing market looks really shady - if there’s enough perception of mass dishonesty among realtors and investors, individuals will be discouraged from buying.
Would that really be a bad thing?
The playing field is level. You gotta have guts and smarts.
You have the same information available to you as the folks who buy before the house goes to auction or is listed for sale. They buy information such as a foreclosure radar and they buy lists of 60 day lates and 90 day lates. Also, they have cash to buy. The banks deal with them on a short sale basis because they have cash. My father’s friend buys short sales that are not listed or for sale. He pays a lot for information and he RISKS his cash. He has guts, not an unfair advantage. And he has smarts. He never does a deal where he does not have the next buyer right there at the escrow company ready to close five minutes after he buys. What most people do not realize is the foreclosures and short sales are just part of supply and they sell based on demand. There is not special discount for buying a foreclosure or short sale. The discount is for buying with cash and taking risk. Very, very few home buyers buy with cash and even fewer are willing to take the risk entailed with a foreclosure. Flippers are paid for the risk they take and the people who complain about them are a bunch of whiners who are not willing to take that risk and expect somebody else to pay their way.
Bernake is an academic, he will probably go back to teaching, it is the others around him that need to go…
BTW..
http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/108639/the-bush-white-house-where-are-they-now
The Bush White House: Where Are They Now?
John Snow
As Treasury Secretary from 2003 to 2006, Snow had the good fortune of leaving the position before subprime defaults triggered an economic avalanche. He is now a director of Marathon Oil Corporation and chairman of Cerberus Capital Management, which invested billions in both Chrysler and GMAC just before the housing bubble stopped inflating. Snow also serves on Verizon’s Board of Directors.
Hank Paulson
Paulson went from ordinary Treasury Secretary to Wall Street superhero in September of 2008, when he rapidly organized a massive bailout of the entire financial industry and spent the next several months fighting to prevent bankruptcies that could have sent investors rushing for the exits. Upon leaving Washington, he joined John Hopkins University’s Paul Nitze School of Advanced International Studies as a distinguished visiting scholar. He’s also a fellow at the university’s Bernard Schwartz Forum on Constructive Capitalism. In July, Paulson invested in and joined the advisory board of Coda Automotive, a start-up that will be releasing a line of fully electric sedans later this year. Coda itself is based in California, but the sedans will be manufactured in China. Since leaving office, Paulson has had several reporters seek answers about the events of September 2008, and specifically how his ties to Goldman Sachs, where he was once Chairman and CEO, may have played into decisions he made during the height of the crisis. But Paulson dodged most media requests by saying he was too busy writing his memoir, “On the Brink: Inside the Race to Stop the Collapse of the Global Financial System.” The book will be available February 1.
Excellent Data Digging As Always! Between Calculated Risk and The Big Picture a guy can make some serious $ with your insights. Like avoid buying high end Irvine for two more years. Thanks.
Charlie Rose which not enough people watch because he is on PBS did an excellent interview with Prince Alwaleed. I have known of the Prince for sometime because of his massive ownership stake in Citigroup. But most recently they purchased The Four Seasons Hotel brand along with Bill Gates. The interview is wide ranging from the Middle East, his investments, global change, China. Take a look. If you get bogged down with the Mid-East political talk Charlie draws him into, just skip ahead as there are some real insights here.
www.thegreatloanblog.com
Mr Jumbo Mortgage
Well, well, well, govt intervention got us into this bear bubble market, govt intervention is gonna get us back into what **SHOULD** have been a further drop in the market (stock, housing, whatever).
Deflation, here we go
This ought to please some people:
Goldman Sachs under investigation…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/3407767
Try investigating this as well:
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/01/guest-post-front-running-the-fed.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+NakedCapitalism+(naked+capitalism)
Frankly, I made a small killing (few grands only) selling futures against UST knowing full well that the Fed is going to continue with this QE bullcrap. Got out at the end of last year because of the fear that the Fed will **raise** rates. But the blazon front-running the Fed has got to take the cake on cheating.
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Ma.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said Friday that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be eliminated as they stand now. from Yahoo.com
More of the same double talk.
GS Investigation is will be another song and dance without teeth. Just a little embarrassment on knowing pushing toxic assets/CDO or prudent hedging.
I see no claw-backs on the ill gotten gains/bonus or real restitution. Maybe the class action lawyers will have GS pay restitutions with $500 off coupons to open a GS account and on your next trade to every person with a 401k or on unemployment. Of course the lawyers will get $150 cash per coupon instead of worthless coupons.
Didn’t we come out of the recession and the possibility for a double dip or W-shaped recovery lessen since Nov. and Dec. was the time to reinvest in the stock market.
http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/unemployment-rates/photo//100122/480/6907572251bd49dcb9681838cb6a248c//s:/ap/20100122/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_state_unemployment
“California lost 38,800 jobs, the most of any state. But its unemployment rate was unchanged at 12.4 percent, the fifth-highest in the nation. That’s because 107,000 people, or 0.6 percent of the state’s work force, gave up and stopped job-hunting.”
But the market will go up as long as the bank bailout continue. Any hint of reducing the bailout will cause the market to go down, so better increase the bank bailouts and free money for the carry trade.
Ok.. back to REAL ESTATE.
I knew we had a bubble when houses like this one were popping up in Irvine’s Moreno Valley.
Those areas in the inland foothills should have been built up with affordable family homes… Perhaps on the high side since Irvine has _always_ been on the high side, but those McMansions far East of the Santa Ana Fwy make absolutely no sense.
Those areas should have been built with 3 and 4 bedroom homes with 1800 to 2500 sq foot sized homes. Instead the builders saw the opportunity to make money (I can’t blame them btw) and started to build preposterous McMansions for people who could NOT afford them.
Just think, when the boss, who’s a conservative fiscal type, lives in an older, nice home in Turtle Rock or Corona del Mar, the employess all live in far larger, very ostentatious McMansions in Irvine’s Moreno Valley.
That, folks, is a bubble.