patrick.net

Satoshi_Nakamoto says

Nice strawman.

If most young people leave because they can't afford it, then what remains to justify prices growing to the sky?

CA had all the industries listed in 2007 and 2001 when housing crashed the last 2 times.

I'm not saying that CA housing is going to crash anytime soon, but the values today are even higher then they were in 2007. There's probably a lot of people that bought at the right time like BP and got some equity, but a lot of buyers didn't and are buying with very little down and having no equity. CA needs growth to drive 6% real estate gains every year. How can CA grow when new comers can't afford to buy housing?

People are leaving the state: http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/04/pf/people-moving-out-california/index.html
I predict that CA real estate will get along fine for the next few years with people with equity swapping houses and foreign buyers investing, but eventually some trouble (most likely China bubble bursting) will pop the CA housing bubble and it will crash again. The only way to win this game CA people is to not play it, take your equity, and get out.

anon_4e80d says

but eventually some trouble will pop the CA housing bubble and it will crash again.

Like this?

anon_4e80d says

There's probably a lot of people that bought at the right time like BP and got some equity, but a lot of buyers didn't and are buying with very little down and having no equity.

Several co-workers who bought around 2003-04 went from "yuuugee equity" to "no equity/underwater" and now back to "yuuuuge equity".

Satoshi_Nakamoto says

Several co-workers who bought around 2003-04 went from "yuuugee equity" to "no equity/underwater" and now back to "yuuuuge equity".

Hugely important to predict the next 20-30yrs.

Heraclitusstudent says

Satoshi_Nakamoto says

Several co-workers who bought around 2003-04 went from "yuuugee equity" to "no equity/underwater" and now back to "yuuuuge equity".

Hugely important to predict the next 20-30yrs.

There is no reason to believe the same rollercoaster shit can't happen once (or twice) again in the above mentioned time period.

anon_ef1f9 says

In fairness - note that you left certain industries out of your response.

This is true. You can't take for example the foot soldier of the silicon valley: the fresh-out-of-school engineer that, like, actually does the work.
His salary is not going up 6% a year. Right now many are living in cars, in closets, in bunk beds after many years of housing going up 6% a year.
There is a point when the entire premise that SV exists in CA doesn't make any sense. The idea of living in SF will be abhorrent and uncool to young engineers.

But people don't think like this. It's different this time. Rich Chinese will pop up with suitcases full of cash and swoop any available units, regardless of anything. It's California. Of course they want it.
Trees will grow to the sky - at least for an other 20-30 yrs.

Omfg they are fucking insane and stupid.

zzyzzx says

anon_4e80d says

but eventually some trouble will pop the CA housing bubble and it will crash again.

Like this?

Even worse, only illegal immigrants qualify as tax collectors in California.

Salary doesn’t necessarily need to go up with housing 100% at the time. Look at NYC.

Heraclitusstudent says

anon_ef1f9 says

In fairness - note that you left certain industries out of your response.

This is true. You can't take for example the foot soldier of the silicon valley: the fresh-out-of-school engineer that, like, actually does the work.
His salary is not going up 6% a year. Right now many are living in cars, in closets, in bunk beds after many years of housing going up 6% a year.
There is a point when the entire premise that SV exists in CA doesn't make any sense. The idea of living in SF will be abhorrent and uncool to young engineers.

But people don't think like this. It's different this time. Rich Chinese will pop up with suitcases full of cash and swoop any available units, regardless of anything. It's California. Of course they want it.
Trees will grow to the sky - at least for an other 20-30 yrs.

anon_02813 says

Hilarious seeing people getting worked up over BP's claims whether they are true or not. His numbers certainly are not impossible.

I wouldn't call it getting worked up. He was asked how what he claimed was possible and didn't answer after repeated attempts. If his spectacular gain in equity was true it could be explained in a short paragraph. It was made up and he didn't have a story to cover the lie, so he ignored the question. I even then proceeded to tell him how to cover for his lie, so I think I'm actually a nice guy and not worked up at all.

The numbers he provided didn't match about 99% of most likely scenarios. Sorry if I don't just eat bull shit because it's said on the internet. If you can't own up to your mistakes and lies, you're done with me. I won't waste my time. He's on ignore and I don't have any intentions of talking about this any further after this comment unless he wants to finally acknowledge it was all BS in the first place. I guess if lies are acceptable, then I suppose you'd consider my comments being worked up.

anon_02813 says

This reminds me of the time when Roberto was here and many hated him for his luck.

I was here, just not commenting. Roberto backed up and explained his moves logically. While his brashness wasn't liked by a lot of people, I had no problem with him and he was at least believable with his claims and explained what he was doing. He wasn't just saying he put down $100k on real estate, now has $1.6M in equity with no further explanation of how that was accomplished.

Ultimately it's okay to not know real estate. 90% of people know next to nothing. You can just say this area looks like a good place for some appreciation and move along. No need to make up false scenarios thinking it boosts your real estate cred. as BP did.

Final note, real estate is not luck for the most part. It's numbers. The numbers either work for you or they don't with contingencies built in. The rest is just management and the best don't even deal with that on a day to day basis. So Roberto wasn't lucky in my opinion, he was just willing to do what others were too scared to do at the time.

Also, I think I'm done with this thread. Joshuatrio was just making a point that for his scenario the grass was greener on the other side. This is 100% indisputable from someone not in the same shoes as him. For others to claim he could have done better in X location over ATL is complete BS and I guess that's what got me "worked up" on this thread.

A primary home is not the only type of profitable investment, even after the crash. Those who borrow the max amount are either desperate buyers in the Bay Area or idiots who know nothing about investing.

anon_23794 says

anon_c1f2b says

Maybe he doesn’t need a big house? Any purchase 5 years ago in Los Angeles would have good buy.

But he's making a big stink about appreciation and why someone should buy in LA. So he buys a $300K condo and "claims" a $160K appreciation.

If he's such an advocate for buying for appreciation, he should have bought that $1 million house, just think of the appreciation he would have on it! It would be over $500K. Why pass up on all that FREE money? His claim doesn't add up?

Then again, he would truly need to have the ability/salary to buy a $1 million house, and factually, he lives in an approximate $300K condo, so it appears THAT tells the true story.

WookieMan says

Your story can be legit, but the problem is you couldn't explain it and therefore I highly doubt your claim to be true. You ...

The problem is that today we no longer agree on facts. Winning for your side has become more important than the truth.

Raising taxes is bad. Left wing is just going crazy lately, all they want to do is raise taxes and scream obsenities at everyone about how they are oppressed. That kind of stupid needs to be contained so it doesn't pull the nation down. It's why I respect Trump, he isn't like Obama who just bends over backwards, he stands up to this crap.