Happy 4th of July! I hope you are enjoying this wonderful holiday weekend.
I was featured this week at the Irvine Homes Blog (Blogger: Irvine housing market nowhere near bottom). I will expand on some of those questions in posts next week.
I had business at the Orange County Courthouse this week, and I got to witness some foreclosure auctions taking place. It is a fascinating process. I hope to go back with a video camera and capture some of the proceedings to display here.
It is a little strange when you walk up to the courthouse and you see this group of people huddled around an auctioneer. There are people walking in and out of the courthouse on other business, and the auction takes on a street-performer atmosphere, an unusual sideshow distraction.
I did hear from some experienced auction buyers that some of the professional players have pulled back from their activities recently. Apparently, we are not the only ones paying attention to the news of shadow inventory and ARM resets and recasts. The professionals know they are buying and selling in a declining market, and there is much fear that they will be caught holding inventory in a quick and merciless drop.
{book4}
While you are watching those Chinese fireworks, think of the glow that your new house is giving you…(from the LATimes:)
Reporting from Los Angeles and Wuhan, China — The final years of the U.S. housing boom and a disastrous series of Gulf Coast hurricanes created a golden opportunity for Chinese drywall manufacturers. With domestic suppliers unable to keep up with demand, imports of Chinese drywall to the U.S. jumped 17-fold in 2006 from the year before.
[…]
Health concerns are raised over the imported building material. Some drywall made with radioactive phosphogypsum, a waste byproduct, was shipped to the U.S. by at least four Chinese-based firms.
[…]
“I don’t know exactly how much phosphogypsum we use, but in total we process several hundred tons of all kinds of gypsum every year,” he said. “We can get raw materials for our products at very low prices because they are mainly industrial waste.”
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-drywall4-2009jul04,0,5662497.story
[…]
Miami-based Lennar is rebuilding their home, but the company has been sued by other homeowners, and it in turn has filed lawsuits against manufacturers and sellers of drywall.
Lennar is a major builder in California, which the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission says is one of 13 states where residents believe their health symptoms or damage to metals in their homes are linked to Chinese drywall.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-drywallside4-2009jul04,0,1536168.story
There was at least one US manufacturer who used
wallboard with sulfur in it. But I don’t think
anyone but the Chinese thought it was ok to
send out stuff that was radioactive.
Why are we still buying from China?
Fear not. Trans fats from McDonalds french fries when combined with supersized Pepsi protects you against cancer from radioactive Chinese gypsium.
What isotope and at what level?
I read about a bad smell from some drywall but have not personally smelled bad lots. Should we bring a Geiger counter while house hunting? Radium also comes from the ground in many area but needs special collection methods to detect it.
One building that I worked in was also used for the Manhattan Project. The whole building was “radioactive.” Turned out to be the natural radioactivity from the granite (in the walls). Now, think of granite counter tops. Are they dangerous, for most I don’t think so. Who knows, the radioactivity might kill the bacteria in the kitchen :] Drywall may pose more risk because a powder is formed after installation and remodeling.
I think the smelly stuff has sulfur in it.
Hydrogen sulfide?
But it has caused health concerns.
I hate Borat.
Sulfer? that’s actually a Chinese fart (or a lot of Chinese farts) trapped in gypsium.
Did I fail to mention that the real estate trailing a flatulent Chinese walking roundabout is never in high demand, and therefore not Prime? Fundamental values apply therein.
We usta have foreclosure sales out on the
steps, but now we got civilized and they are
in a room. I liked it outside.
Some of ours are going to online sales.
LA Times, today:
“Another Wave of Foreclosures”
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-foreclosure4-2009jul04,0,5145254.story
welcome back liz!
Hi, No Vas.
===============================================
The Real Threat to the American Dream: the Coming of the Second Major Crisis of the 21st Century;
================================================
Audience, this is MUST READ material if you want to have a much grander perspective than simply market-timing a home purchase:
The excerpt below is directly from Dr. Doom’s (Nouriel Roubini’s) website. As some of you know, Dr. Roubini foretold of the global credit crisis and its 12-step path when he was chided by world economists. He is an excellent source for Truthful Economic Analysis, and has the credentials and consistent trackrecord to back it. He does not Market-Time, nor is he invested in currency or equities, and hence earns my sincere respect, and belief that he is a disinterested and qualified analyst.
The implications of the below to your financial decisions is much more immense than trying to outperform the “Housing Market” by a few percent by market-timing:
“THE 19th century was dominated by the British Empire, the 20th century by the United States. We may now be entering the Asian century, dominated by a rising China and its currency. While the dollar status as the major reserve currency will not vanish overnight, we can no longer take it for granted. Sooner than we think, the dollar may be challenged by other currencies, most likely the Chinese renminbi. This would have serious costs for America, as our ability to finance our budget and trade deficits cheaply would disappear.
Traditionally, empires that hold the global reserve currency are also net foreign creditors and net lenders. The British Empire declined and the pound lost its status as the main global reserve currency when Britain became a net debtor and a net borrower in World War II. Today, the United States is in a similar position. It is running huge budget and trade deficits, and is relying on the kindness of restless foreign creditors who are starting to feel uneasy about accumulating even more dollar assets. The resulting downfall of the dollar may be only a matter of time.”
This excerpt holds very serious premonitions from Dr. Doom.
What do you think will be consequence for American “real” assets? IMHO, banks just won’t lend to the average Joe Shmoe.
They may not increase loan rates significantly, since they can manipulate the GSE market by buying GSE debt, as they have been doing.
Buying long-term GSE debt is a back-door way of inflating (devaluing) the currency; the world doesn’t care much when the Feb buys GSE mortgages, it minds quite a bit when it buys Treasuries (that’s called “printing money” from thin air, literally). Isn’t buying GSE debt (that is, loans that are under-water or defaulted) equivalent to building castles in the sky (printing mortgage contracts and inventing mortgage-backed assets)? You “betcha” it is. It ultimately yields the same net effect – increase in money supply (thanks to those who foreclose).
You see how the writeoff is paid by us twice? Once through a hike in taxes to cover the bailouts to the banks, and once again through increased inflation and cost of goods resulting from the increased money supply. The Jonses are truly the real winners of this game.
How will this affect home prices? Places where banks are reluctant to lend, banks will be even more reluctant to lend. That may include the speculative high-end market that bought at peak prices. The low-end market with high turnover, I can’t imagine banks rushing to make a killing there either. The least fortunate are always the first to pay the consequences of high inflation, they just have little or no monthly budget for the impending gas&food;&rent; hikes due to inflation. The mid-range non-speculative market, well, let me consult my crystall ball. But I wonder if that’s the market that is bringing foreign capital to the US, something VERY beneficial to the US predicament of balancing foreign capital outflow (long-term treasury and GSE debt being dumped by Sovereign Wealth Funds (China/Japan/Russia/Gulf…). It’s heavily to the US/Fed’s interest to keep that bubble or whatcha-call-it, going.
What’s my prediction for the housing market in that light? Overall, places where foreign capital and cash inflow occur will hold value better than sub-prime (low-end) or high-end areas. But don’t expect to make a killing out there anymore… once US loses reserve status, ALL OUR LIFESTYLES WILL CONSIDERABLY CHANGE.
In sum: if you’re going to buy, buy small and efficient; let the Jonses live large. Don’t expect homes to go up fast, expect the banks to keep tight leashes on the Jonses (foreclosing on them readily) and thereby prevent further losses.
In sum there are 2 possibilities:
1. The deflation of the US Debt Bubble will continue to devastate assets for at least a decade. Deflation in all assets including the human kind: jobs/incomes.
or
2. Miraculously US Debt expands, and only those with access to Option Arms and HELOCS can buy food….. everyone else will be priced out of eating….by some act of god the new debt bubble is sustainable, people who have access to HELOCs won’t need jobs and it will be a good thing because there won’t be any jobs.
hehe… if US does have Japan-like fate and housing deflates over a decade or more, then perhaps we may be able to rent a parking spot for $2000/month, just like in Japan’s prime locations.
That’s what happens when interests are kept close to 0 for over a decade, which the Fed may just have to do, as long it possibly can, to produce inflation.
One big difference between the US and Japan is population increase. The US is growing. Japan is shrinking.
where is the population growth coming from? is it from the Stanford Lawyers who are unsure of whether it’s a good idea to bring a child into this world…. or is it coming from another segment?
Nancy, Your making a case for not purchasing at this time with NR. Are you now a market timer? NR is calling for another drop in the housing prices.
The scare tactics of politicians is ALWAYS for a cause, an unstated agenda.
China wails and cries for a different reserve currency than USD, and yet it continues to peg to USD and maintain undervalued currency, giving it an unfair advantage to export more to the US than they import from us; that’s partially how they manage to stay so wealthy – they have $1.2 trillion currency reserve, highest of any country (US of course, has no reserves, we print USD when we wish, and we operate under debt, highest of any country in the world, but we’re the largest economy in the world).
Japan’s national debt is 200% their GDP (think of this as debt/income ratio). US and UK’s will soon be 100%. Europe slightly less. We’re not the worst debt/GDP ratio (Japan is). But we’re not the best either. Question is when will the ratio improve… and under recent Democratic administrations we’ve seen major improvements in the past.
Japan’s in much worse shape – their banks are practically zombie and getting in worse shape than before. They’ve been in deflation since the ’98 Asian crisis, with their 100-year mortgages and home prices deflating for more than a decade. Even Europe has more toxic debt (their banks leverage ratios were much greater than ours) than we do.
The major difference b.t. US and Japan is that their banks don’t write down debt… we are by bank laws required to do that (hence the massive bailouts to correct their balance sheets). In 90 days after a home goes into default, US banks must write the WHOLE loan off as a loss. IF AND ONLY IF they can sell it later, they show profit for the sale amount minus expenses. That approach cleans up bad banks quickly… and functioning banks are required for a healthy economy; functioning banks will lend, zombie banks will just sit on bad debt and wait for inflation to eat away their carryover debt load. Theoretically, banks should show excellent profit when they sell their inventory of foreclosed homes.
Don’t give up on our system – it’s still the world’s envy, and there is no currency with the liquidity of US dollars to replace it. The dollar will likely continue to play a major role even in a basket calculation such as SDRs which are being proposed as USD’s replacement for reserves.
******************
And the point is?
******************
When China asks for an alternative to USD as reserve currency, ask yourself who is MOST likely to lose from such a change? China.
China’s $1.3 trillion reserves will devalue. USD will devalue. China will have to unpeg from USD and float to a higher value, making its exports less competitive.
US middle class manufacturing jobs would return to the US. US consumerism of imported materials would be challenged when the USD devalues, imports would get more expensive. You’d more likely buy a Ford than a BMW, which is all good for the middle class. I reckon the main objection is that we would lose world power status over time… can’t afford to have a standing army when you can’t publish all the debt you wish. I wouldn’t lose sleep on that – can’t imagine foreign forces wanting to confront the famed Hill Billy (or Texas) Militia Men.
But is that going to happen? I reckon not. A country with our resources will always work behind the scenes to ensure it retains its unique status in the world. Question is if it will behave itself in a way that will extend its dominance or reap short-term rewards in exchange for long-term prospects.
***********************************************
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
***********************************************
Don’t wager a penny on news of end-of-the-world. It’s always a scheme for an ulterior agenda. Question is, what is that agenda.
Europe is really shrinking.
We are not growing without immigration, but
are much closed to the replacement 2.1 then they
are.
I finally got around to reviewing IR’s spreadsheet for home closings in Irvine, which clara has requested. What a pleasant surprise. I had heard banks not lending to self-employed people, and requiring 20% or higher downpayments, but the plethora of all-cash buyers was startiling, especially in recent months.
Many of the homes which were labeled with “no data” in the loan field I was aware had received full-cash offers, so the median/mean may be even greater than 38%/28% downpayment. This spreadsheet reinforces my observation that the new buyers are serious high-capital savers… having no qualms to risk capital equivalent to 100% of the price of the home. I can only imagine that this can improve the long-term financial fabric and stability of these neighborhoods.
The real question is: is this amount of cash purchase money sustainable?
I’m not entirely sold that the new buyers are ‘serious high capital savers’. Some, maybe. Most? I think thats called mommy and daddy helping out.
“The real question is: is this amount of cash purchase money sustainable?”
…. the follow-up question is what is the willingness to pay for the leftover cash wealthy buyers as those with cash get absorbed into the market… i think irvine will always attract cash but the willingness to pay will decline…
i take the controversial belief (contrary to IR) that in a market with some stability… GRMs will differ from neighborhood to neighborhood just like a P/E ratio will differ on a stock due to future outlook…
It’s impressive isn’t it? See this blog does have real value.
I think the more recent stuff he just hasn’t gotten the data on. IR keeps saying that this spreadsheet shows DPs going down over time, so it’ll be interesting to see if graphically he can back that up.
(I’m assuming that the posts higher up were not you. I don’t know if there’s a way that the webmaster here can prevent that. I would make an account here if I were you as a starting point, and then perhaps they’d be able to fix this problem).
I’m seeing some all cash in South Fla–but at
the 50k level to 150k level. Which, I gather, wouldn’t buy a rat hole in Cali.
dafox. You nailed it with the question: Is it sustainable?
I have seen $1000 per month car parking spaces in downtown Boston twenty years ago, but none in OC. Has anybody seen an Irvine parking spot near that price? Irvine is neither downtown Boston nor downtown Tokyo. I’ve heard lots of examples where the parents will buy a place for the kid with all cash in Boston, but only few in Irvine. Irvine may be special, but it’s not Boston or Tokyo.
I notice that many of the properties no longer have the purchase history on Redfin and Zillow. An informed public too dangerous?
One large cash purchased pulled out of an Irvine SFU. Her mother essentially called in a money pit to the daughter who wanted to purchase it.
Does it need to be sustainable? E.g., you think high distress rates are going to happen forever too? Again, lets go back to Supply and Demand… the high Supply of distressed homes on the market is viewed as an opportunity for some who see it as an anomaly, a result of the crash of the speculative mass mania the past few years. Others see it as status-quo and await lower and lower prices… much like some await for Euro at $1.1 to visit Europe.
Your Moment of Zen:
===================
Do you market-time purchase of a car?
When you purchase a $40K luxury car (with a life expectancy of 10 years), it depreciates by 10% as soon as you drive it off the seller’s parking lot. Do you grieve that monetary loss? Do you call the purchase catching a falling knife? Was the bank at fault for lending you the loan for the car? Do you check the blue-book value of your car every week to see how poorly this (consumable) investment is doing?
And then do you lament after realizing you’ve lost $10K in 2 years, and sell the car when you realize it’s going to lose another 10% the next year or two?
What is fundamental price for a car? Shall we create an Irvine Car Blog?
Homes are multi-generational assets unlike disposable cars that we buy more than happily and then throw into the junkyard in a few years; homes are inflation-protected assets and housing is a human necessity. Homes are where your grandchildren will build memories that will indelibly shape their characters and influence later generations who you will not live to see in your lifetime.
Home prices are all about demand and supply… there’s no formula to what’s reasonable price for them. A reduction in price does not prove any theory correct, it only proves less demand. An increase in price proves an increase in demand. If there’s no buyers for a luxury home, it will have to cut its price until there is demand.
And you can positively influence demand by refusing to dump your home in a depressed market.
When is a good time to buy your PRIMARY HOME which you intend to retain long-term? When you have the money, and someone is selling your desired home. It’s a practical choice. You will not be humored for having bought in 2006, unless you sell now because you think it’s going to go down another $100K next year. Those selling from such greed are the only ones worth public humor.
If you are looking to buy and expect to make a killing profit from your transaction, as most here have expressed, then maybe we should call this the Irvine Flipping Blog instead.
ah, argument by analogy. My least favorite tactic.
Do you take a car-equity line of credit? Do you get an interest-only loan on a car (yes, that’s what a lease is, sort of, since you don’t own the car at the end)? Do you get a loan who’s term is longer than how long you plan on driving it?
Take it from an East-Coaster. 100 year old houses, need to essentially be rebuilt from the inside out and the outside in. They are just as much a consumptive good as cars, just on a longer time-frame.
Who will forget the family road-trips, the summer vacations that forge new friendships and deeper filial relations?
You pay money for goods. Duh. Aside from that I don’t see that you have a point. How do you go from there to implying that means that an asset, depreciating or not, becomes intrinsically priceless, unhinged from any fundamental valuation at the pure whimsical winds of supply and demand?
If what you’re saying is that people will pay more to own than they will to rent regardless of the calculations comparing the financial costs of the two, then say that. Posit that there is a premium people are willing and able to pay for the privilege of ownership. It’s certainly been claimed before. And it’s even been historically true in some elite posh neighborhoods in the largest cities. Good luck with having your neighborhood maintain that disconnect once home-buyers have so many other options of places to live where that’s not true.
I have never seen a home for sale. Maybe the ad will be: Teriffic Home for Sale: Comes with beautiful wife, smart kids, and great memories. Or 1 year lease on home. Description: one wife with 3 hours of time per day, two kids and a cat with option to extend lease.
Don’t confuse a house with a home. RE agents have sold houses as an assess that aways goes up in value. Cars are completely different. I don’t know anybody who really expects their used car to sell more than what the purchase price. I also know people who think that a fancy car will girl magnet. Opps they do, but maybe not the type one will want to marry.
BTW, IR says he will not call a market bottom before it occurs, becuase he will only know after it has occurred. I doubt that he will say time to buy.
RE agents sell houses as a great investment and a home. It’s not a great investment and not a home. Traditionally, they been safe and didn’t appreciate that much after expense. Houses are for stability. Instead we have overinflated prices creating the mortgage slave, loss of resources and loss of home due to excessive stressful finances. — the number one reason for divorce: finances.
“IR says he will not call a market bottom before it occurs, because he will only know after it has occurred. I doubt that he will say time to buy.”
If he won’t even call the market bottom, then I guess IR is the smartest guy in the room. He’s a market timer who doesn’t need to be right or wrong by taking a stance. Or shall I say, ultimately, with his non-stance, he will always be Right; in the meantime we shall be provided our daily dose of a grotesque Reality Show, while he learns enough from the input of those who naively contributes valuable information to write his next book and keep the blog hit ratios up for advertisement revenue.
I’ve gleaned massive personal lessons from visiting this blog, and can profusely thank IR for unwittingly vindicating my belief that renting is just not for me, and those who discern the shades and multitudes of parameters not in our control that feed the homeownership frenzy for the past millennia. It’s easy to rationalize why are homes go down or up, it’s another thing to have self-knowledge of what can I afford and where I wish to buy. In those locations, these formulas have no bearing since they never applied in any past corrections. Why should I delude myself into thinking they will apply this time!
Saying supply and demand governs home prices is not saying that homes are priceless and you should buy with your heart. You’re misinterpreting. Supply and demand also governs the value of Euro, and it carries a heavy premium ($.30) over fundamental value (based on PPP of $1.1). If I’m not willing to go to a European vacation at that price, I just stay put. But if my adopted rule is to only go on a European vacation if the exchange rate returns to fundamental value of $1.1, I’m I not delusional? Oh wait, even a broken clock is correct twice a day. In case of Euro/USD, it’s probably be once a century that it’ll be a at PPP value.
You’re the one who keeps saying that house prices don’t go by any fundamental rule and that all of IR’s rules are useless and meaningless and have no basis in the realities of the market. Hence why I put it so starkly because that’s what it took to get you to admit that you don’t really mean it.
And it worked. Once I translated your words into the logical absurdity that they are, you were able to see that what you really meant was that there is an additional premium in price that people are willing to pay for ownership.
Now that we can speak the same language, what do you think it a typical amount or reasonable amount for that premium?
Or, if it’s not a premium, because home-owners ALWAYS come out ahead, what assumptions do you think it’s reasonable to put into something like the much more thorough nytimes rent or buy calculator in order to make this financial decision?
google: NY Times rent buy calculator
Because I’m sorry but if you’re going to claim that owners _always_ end up better off than renters you’re making some assumptions in there that need to see the light of day.
And you might want to check out both today’s post and some of IR’s older classics which lay out just how financially damaging buying at the wrong time can be.
I’m not a professional debater, Cara, but do you watch Colbert (a parody of O’Reily)? The above could have been taken from his book. His method of debating is resoundingly similar. He paraphrases his opponent’s claims except he twists it beyond recognition, when the opponent denies he ever said that, he asks if the opponent is negating the complete opposite of the original twisted assertion. The opponent at that point gives up and just looks at Colbert speechlessly, except the audience knows that this is a parody of O’Reily’s faulty debate logic, and the real message is between the lines, in the paradoxes that surface from hard-liner, fundamentalist stances when examined rationally and carefully.
BTW, I like Jon Stewart’s sincere style much more than Colbert’s feigned hypocrisy… Colbert’s a bit annoying, but I fully support how he’s reasoning with America, rendering them immune to false logic.
I reckon Mark Twain and Ben Franklin would be proud of him.
Wasn’t it Mark Twain who suggested that instead of burning witches on the stake, that the masses wait until spring for the frozen waters to thaw, to see if the women floated on water (witches are expected to sink, I reckon)?
When Colbert started I couldn’t handle it because it was too close to O’Reily. But since he’s gotten more and more surreal I’ve grown to like it more and more. The worst is that bow-tied guy who’s often on OReily and their ilk. They’re just plain mean.
You should check out Colbert again, the ones from Iraq were totally wonderfully fun. He got tons of politicians to tape saying really silly things. It was great.
It’s a tough call, John Stewart versus Colbert, a lot of John’s best correspondents have left for bigger and better things though, which is kind of sad.
But I don’t see why you haven’t understood my point yet, that if there is a cost premium of owning versus renting, that it is quantifiable?
Though I totally agree with what you said in the next blog post, which is that at some point soon, the claim that renting beats owning can not possibly still be true.
For the bottom rung of the ladder, as IR has pointed out we’re getting there quickly. Lucky for me, that’s the rung I’ll be buying in (in DC) so we can afford to have my husband go to law school full time if need be.
Two more points:
1. Homes are consumables: for some, yes; certain people go wild spending beyond means once they move in; I don’t, until may savings earn enough interest that I can remodel my home with it, and pay for new furniture too.
2. Homeonwers who milked the bank with HELOCS and such while they owned… they’re just not homeowners in my book, they’re deadbeats,charlatans; they’re not the people I look at to learn a lesson about why it’s not good to own versus rent. There are people who live on debt, and the banks will ensure they weed them out, going forward. They won’t be moving in our block anytime soon.
Prudent homeowners are *always* ahead of renters in the long-run. If you bought high and feel bad about it, just retain the property longer until the breaking point occurs, and that point will invariably occur sooner or later.
Which breakeven point? The one where the nominal price rises to your purchase price again?
Your assertion that owning beats renting is true but only under certain conditions. And the primary one is that the cost of owning eventually falls to less than the cost of renting a comparable house. If you want to let that time be 5-10 years in the future, because you plan to die in the house, many years after paying off the mortgage, fine. But say so. Because there are other expenses to a house other than just P&I, and those don’t stop with the mortgage. There’s replacing the roof, replacing the siding or re-grouting the brick or whatever is appropriate for your exterior. There’s redoing the floors, there’s taxes, there’s insurance. In many cases, downsizing to a 1 bedroom apartment in retirement might be vastly less expensive. And if you’ve saved money by not spending it on maintanence in the interim, and not paying interest then you might still come out ahead, renting your entire life. I know it’s heresy, but it can be true.
We agree on one primary thing which is that the 15 year mortgage is infinitely better than a 30 year one. Which is why I find it strange that you can see that paying more interest that you have to on an asset is a bad thing, but you can’t see that if the original sale price is non-sensically high, that you lose just as much money.
Cara,
I gave a personal example of saving money by renting that Nancy though was statical analysis. Even without maintainance/replacement cost, insurance and other expenses, I was ahead ~$2000 per month for 4 years.
She changed her approach: citing NR or another articles and then draw an opposition conclusion or imply the author’s a hack.
A 15 year loan is not always better than a 30 year loan. Depends on the family reserves and the difference in interest rates, no-prepayment penality. A 15 year fixed loan at 4.55% or a 30 year loan at 4.70%? At those rates, I would take the 30 year loan.
No one can call the absolute peak or bottom ahead of time. The game is don’t get caught in an extreme or prolonged downdraft or vastly overpay for a house. The RE agents, banks, and federal govt are playing on fear and greed.
House does not equal home. Home does not equal house.
that’s true, “infinitely” was hyberbolic of me. I tend towards the hyberbolic, it’s a failing. Yes, if interest rates on the two cases are closer than say 0.5% (depends on the base rate) then there’s no advantage to committing to the 15 year loan, you can just pay off the 30 year loan at the 15 year rate when that’s the right thing cash-flow wise.
Recently they were as much as 1% different, such that if you can easily swing the 15 year payment, it’s a no-brainer to take the lower total interest costs.
Sometimes the blog is chasing its tail, sometimes I see sparks of genuine “breakthrough” the audience’s analysis and conclusions. I’m optimistic that for the majority, common misperceptions will be eliminated; they will put the people who feed them factoids and memes under the spotlight. Always question generalizations, always question “absolutes” and fundamentalists, always question herd mentality – it’s the only way to recognize genuine truth and emancipate from mass ignorance. Leaders should aspire to be put through such challenges and if they emerge unscathed, they will have a more devout followership. Leaders should refrain from using lynch men to neutralize valid challenges.
Universal and universalizeable truths will not crumble with the test of time.
This observation, from an independent thinking woman who has only wished to inspire those who understand.
Second Moment of Zen:
=====================
Re: 4th of July
“Liberty and Justice” are *not* for all. Never was in the US. Every inch of it was earned by sweat and blood, and every inch of it may be eroded by those who lay complacent or in passive acquiesce to the status-quo.