当前在线人数13307
首页 - 分类讨论区 - 华人世界 - 三藩市地区版 -阅读文章
未名交友
[更多]
[更多]
文章阅读:[合集] goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
[同主题阅读] [版面: 三藩市地区] [作者:dadabear] , 2007年02月08日16:24:51
dadabear
进入未名形象秀
我的博客
[上篇] [下篇] [同主题上篇] [同主题下篇]

发信人: dadabear (bless you), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: [合集] goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb  8 16:24:51 2007), 站内

☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  MSJ (Mission San Jose) 于 (Tue Feb  6 00:42:38 2007) 提到:

看完他blog的《现在在哪里买房风险小》,我只能笑着摇摇头。在我眼里,这个列表与
其说是“风险小”列表,不如说是“房子难涨地区列表”。试论证一二:
1. 常言道“强者恒强,弱者恒弱”。NYC, SF地区房价高企不是一年两年了,支撑房价
的不是那个affordability的percentage,而是能afford的人口数和房子总数的比例。
这里看百分比是没有多大意义的。只要还有人能买得起还愿意买,即使affordability
只有15%又如何呢?
2. 正如high tech公司的P/E要远大于钢铁企业的P/E,一个就业繁荣,前景美好的地区
,其“风险”程度必然大于一个in the middle of nowhere的城市。公司,房产开放商
,和各种就业人群,都满怀希望在这里落户,希望能成功。那么,这样地区的房屋的确
会比较热销。现在已经经过了2000年的泡沫,在商业租价稳中有落的情况下,居民房价
仍在不断攀升,充分说明高收入的人口在不断增长并愿意在此扎根。他们或者是刚刚移
入,或者是经过几年的积累达到了高收入的标准。
3. 在房屋贷款利率可以抵税的情况下,高房价地区的居民有很强的意愿去购屋。如果
你在一个平均房价20来万,多年涨幅有限的地区居住,你购屋就是完全出于生活需要。
在湾区,省税的巨大好处让很多人愿意吃点苦也要先把房买下。这一incentive是光从
affordability的数据看不出来的。
4. 不能忽略的是,湾区是高收入亚裔占很大比例的地区。goldenrain的所谓“风险”
计算,可以说是从美国人的角度来看的。把收入的一半投入房贷会吓死他们。而这样的
家庭,在湾区是非常正常,完全可以计入能afford的类别的。前提只要一个:他是亚裔
。所以,可以afford湾区房产的人数,有一部分就像隐藏在海平面下的冰山一样。

当然,我也不认为湾区房价会在2007年重复前几年的那种惊人涨幅。问题在于,下跌的
可能性极低,基本上是一个上涨,平台,上涨的过程。在平台甚至小幅回落阶段(比如
去年下半年),如何慧眼识金,一举拿下好的deal,是考验你和你的地产经纪眼力的重
要时刻。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 01:06:01 2007) 提到:

强者恒强,弱者恒弱, 这个说的很对.

个人认为:

其实这里的好区什么时候都好买, 我一个同事, 911之后在PALO ALTO买的房子,还自豪
的说"我只加了六万".  我觉得现在好区也不能说EXTRA HOT.而现在一般的区确实还没
HOT起来呢.我个人会等到今年下半年再考虑. 如果大家不考虑学区,到也不用着急.  




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Tue Feb  6 01:07:22 2007) 提到:

en?这个是katie 的马甲?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  immortal (immortal) 于 (Tue Feb  6 01:09:45 2007) 提到:

顶一个


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Tue Feb  6 01:10:27 2007) 提到:

你说得下半年,是针对seller还是buyer
对了,你有MLS access吗?能看到最近南湾房价走低走高吗?谢谢!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 01:14:05 2007) 提到:

当然是BUYER.

没有,不过我在看FOSTER CITY的CONDO 和FREMONT, 没关注南湾. 但一二月总是会比去
年年底好一些的.这个TREND至少和去年同期比吧.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Tue Feb  6 01:15:12 2007) 提到:

No, this is a guy. Possible katie's LG though.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Tue Feb  6 01:17:07 2007) 提到:

buyer为什么要等到下半年?那卖房子什么时候好呢?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 01:28:40 2007) 提到:

不是啊.是职业选手.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  MSJ (Mission San Jose) 于 (Tue Feb  6 02:33:45 2007) 提到:

买应该趁现在,如果是一般地区,优先考虑新房子,因为还可以拿到incentive。如果
是好学区例如MSJ,应考虑1.1M左右的较大lot老房子,最近颇有几个不错的deal,可惜
bid的人过多了点。比起去年无人竞争顺利拿下的90来万超大lot房子,可以说已有10万
以上的差价。

卖?除非是upgrade到更好房子,否则为什么卖??



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Tue Feb  6 02:41:49 2007) 提到:

看来还是要找deal



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 02:44:42 2007) 提到:

i think you should buy condo now.

现在是断档期,所谓断档就是说

first time buyer还没跟进,而很多move up的要dump那些condo.
特别前一段和现在,市场上充斥了各种各样的condo.容易拿到deal.

加上现在租金还是相对较低,很多人还在观望.一旦租金上涨,新来的都ready了.
condo就拿不到现在的价钱了.

感觉弯曲最近来的人特别多.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 02:46:34 2007) 提到:

特别特别多


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 14:35:45 2007) 提到:

55555555555555555555555
Wrote a long post to argue against OP but lost it because I opened a new IE
window and it invalidated my login session.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Tue Feb  6 14:49:50 2007) 提到:

你的心意我们领了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  teil (有根菩提) 于 (Tue Feb  6 14:52:00 2007) 提到:

hehe  //cmf
用IE登陆 mitbbs , 10次有8次都不成 :(



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  dean (empty bottle) 于 (Tue Feb  6 14:59:44 2007) 提到:

IE
tools-->options-->delete cookies


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:10:29 2007) 提到:

Speaking of TownHouse, new TownHouse的floor plan普遍没有老一点的好。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:11:13 2007) 提到:

支持你再try一次。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:11:37 2007) 提到:

Agree!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:11:46 2007) 提到:

这不是吊我们的胃口吗, 来个GIST吧.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:15:03 2007) 提到:

That would delete all cookies. You can go to c:\document and settings \<your
ID>\Cookies and look for *mitbbs*.txt file and delete it.

But my problem is different. After I logged in to mitbbs in one window, and
if I visit mitbbs from another window, it would log me out without telling
me.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  dean (empty bottle) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:15:37 2007) 提到:

I am actually thinking about a scary scenario. If the interest rate jumps to
a much higher level, less and less people will be able to afford the loan.
Real estate owners with ARM and interest-only loan will be in a very bad
shape. Even if the current price drops, the high interest rate will prevent
people from buying real estates. So everything boils down to a single
question:
Is the current historically low interest rate sustainable?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:17:49 2007) 提到:

连专业broker都说平台了,广大homeless people的福音啊。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:18:10 2007) 提到:

this is absolutely correct!




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:18:40 2007) 提到:

Can't you click back to the prior window?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:19:03 2007) 提到:

it has to sustain, otherwise many will go broke,
So don't expect average salary to go up much in the coming years



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:20:29 2007) 提到:

or there is other ways to work it out

such as 50 year mortgage.

I wouldn't be surprise to see 100 years mortgage along the road...




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:24:03 2007) 提到:

Can't you click back to the prior window?

You can click "Back", but your posting is lost after you clicked the "reply"
button.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:25:29 2007) 提到:

there is a IO or negative amortization loan.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:29:26 2007) 提到:

yeah,
these are all creative.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:30:31 2007) 提到:

You are right!

That's the only I believe would bring Bay Area house price down,
the INTEREST RATE!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:32:53 2007) 提到:

Now goes up again.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:36:15 2007) 提到:




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  dean (empty bottle) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:38:00 2007) 提到:

Several of my coworkers are holding or planning to hold a secondary
investment property using the equity of their current house (they all bought
about 20 years ago). Almost all of them are using interest only loans. The
time frame for sale is about 5 years. They are betting big on the fact that
the interest rate will stay, thanks to Chinese cheap products to keep
inflation in check.
If green bills are getting cheaper and cheaper, will the low price of
Chinese imports be sustainable? Yes, almost all of them are even more
confident than I am, on the continuous improvement of Chinese and Indian
productivity. What is your opinion?





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:40:25 2007) 提到:

"below 7%" is still considered "low".



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:40:29 2007) 提到:

I would say for ppl that need to pay AMT, sustaining a house is not a
problem at all (unless you want the best). I'm not saying owning a house is
financially savvy because of tax though.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:44:51 2007) 提到:

that's partially because of prop 13.

otherwise, i doubt they will have so much to leverage.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:45:41 2007) 提到:

generally speaking, inflation favors home owner.

如果是因为美元贬值,通涨造成Interest上涨,那么人民群众的
工资和房租肯定会跟着上涨,反而会抵消利率上涨的因素。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:48:35 2007) 提到:

hehe  通涨造成Interest上涨 --> 工资和房租肯定会跟着上涨 is not always true.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:52:09 2007) 提到:

Even the house price don't change, when interest rate from 4%-&%, mean's the
payment increast 75%. Now the house price already goes up more than 50%,
the total payment increased 150% already.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:52:17 2007) 提到:

强者恒强,弱者恒弱是哪个圣贤的常言?我只听说“三十年河东,三十年河西”。子在
川上曰:逝者如斯夫。 房地产周期都在10年以上,不要以为96年到现在都是涨就意味
着从来没有跌过,永远也不会跌。 德州当年石油繁荣,也吹过房地产的大泡。 圣路易
当年是开发西部的门户,也繁荣过。底特律汽车方兴未艾时,匹兹堡钢铁业奋发的时候
,那个比硅谷的internet bubble 差?倒斗来还不是夕阳西下?

没有收入支撑的价格只能是投机,affordablility 15% 又如何?金字塔游戏没有新入
伙的是玩不下去的。

还是那句话,湾区自2000以来,进的人比出的人少,人口下降,就业人数下降,平均收
入减少。回到2000-2002年的价格不奇怪。

抵税和房地产税差不多,如果价格不涨,甚至大幅下跌,没有任何税收好处

亚裔比老美多一条腿?看不出来为什么老美只考虑25%的收入换房贷,亚裔可以用50%,
75%。房子疯长当然没事,90%用于还房贷都可以。跌的时候就不同了。










☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:53:37 2007) 提到:




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sinnet (思你特--新年好) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:53:37 2007) 提到:

:只要还有人能买得起还愿意买,即使affordability只有15%又如何呢?

这是什么意思?“买得起”难道不就是affordability?

:2. 正如high tech公司的P/E要远大于钢铁企业的P/E,一个就业繁荣,前景美好的地区
:,其“风险”程度必然大于一个in the middle of nowhere的城市。公司,房产开放商
:,和各种就业人群,都满怀希望在这里落户,希望能成功。那么,这样地区的房屋的确
:会比较热销。现在已经经过了2000年的泡沫,在商业租价稳中有落的情况下,居民房价
:仍在不断攀升,充分说明高收入的人口在不断增长并愿意在此扎根。他们或者是刚刚移
:入,或者是经过几年的积累达到了高收入的标准。

当年IT bubble时候,金融业为了抹去ridiculous high P/E的事实,引入了PEG ratio这
个概念,认为只要PEG ratio在1附近就是properly priced. 于是乎,出现一大堆P/E在
几百甚至是上千的公司。可是最终bubble还是破了,这说明了什么呢?

:3. 在房屋贷款利率可以抵税的情况下,高房价地区的居民有很强的意愿去购屋。如果
:你在一个平均房价20来万,多年涨幅有限的地区居住,你购屋就是完全出于生活需要。
:在湾区,省税的巨大好处让很多人愿意吃点苦也要先把房买下。这一incentive是光从
:affordability的数据看不出来的。

抵税也只能是利息部分拿来抵税,那也只是tax deductable, 不是tax credit.如果每
买房
根本就不pay those interests at the first place.说到头,羊毛出在羊身上。

:4. 不能忽略的是,湾区是高收入亚裔占很大比例的地区。goldenrain的所谓“风险”
:计算,可以说是从美国人的角度来看的。把收入的一半投入房贷会吓死他们。而这样的
:家庭,在湾区是非常正常,完全可以计入能afford的类别的。前提只要一个:他是亚裔
:。所以,可以afford湾区房产的人数,有一部分就像隐藏在海平面下的冰山一样。

看来房子还会reverse discriminate owner,中国人美国人还不一样了。有点意思
当年yahoo股票从200跌倒180时候,很多人都说dirty cheap, 认为以前还卖过200呢,在
200的时候,股民们都affordable,现在才180,绝对没问题。。。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:55:21 2007) 提到:

这房坑总算炒起来了...

//擦把汗...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:57:27 2007) 提到:

主力不加入战团就是不行



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:58:24 2007) 提到:

您老说的是微观Level,我老人家说的是宏观Level。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  etwei (隐形战斗猪) 于 (Tue Feb  6 15:59:23 2007) 提到:

现在银行CD利息降了一些,有没有可能联储会降息呢?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:00:07 2007) 提到:

sinnet 是您老MJ?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:00:46 2007) 提到:


强者恒强,弱者恒弱, new york 算不算一个例子. 想底特律那样,一个工业的兴起和衰
落要50-100年的时间,而我们现在谈论的房市,还着眼于5-20年之间.我反正看不出来5年
左右BAY AREA的HIGH TECH会衰落.

还有, 说湾区自2000以来,进的人比出的人少,人口下降,这个统计是2000-2005的吧,
这几年确实没进什么人,可是你不觉得2006年一年进的把前几年的都扑回来了吗?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:01:20 2007) 提到:

不知道,但FED肯定不会为了救房市降利率。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:01:26 2007) 提到:

//赞,主力出场.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:01:48 2007) 提到:

they can pay down the house any if interests rate rockets if bought 20 years
ago. it does not apply people discussing here.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sinnet (思你特--新年好) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:03:02 2007) 提到:

您老眼力也太差了点



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:03:38 2007) 提到:

tony lao ren jia,
can u explain explain the pro and con of
paying off mortgage as soon as possible?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:05:07 2007) 提到:

不用五年,三年之内很多startup就该bust了,这和弯曲没关系,startup就是这样
的风险,到时候大公司消化不掉的就只好离开了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:05:47 2007) 提到:


: 没有收入支撑的价格只能是投机,affordablility 15% 又如何?金字塔游戏没有新入
: 伙的是玩不下去的。

比如一个地方有一千个房子,两千家人,另一个地方有一千个房子,两万个人. 那么比较
这两个地方的affordablility 有很大意义吗? 要比较,应该比较那两万个人中的有房的,或收入最高的两千和前面那个两千.

根本没有这样的数据,所以affordablility应是一个地方的纵向参照,而不应成为两个地
方的横向参照.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:07:17 2007) 提到:

我看
1) 弯曲大面积裁员.
2) 利率上看7.5%+ or prop 13 给费掉了.

如果以上两个条件不存在,房子再跌也到不了哪儿...




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:08:08 2007) 提到:

prop 13, what on earth is it?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:08:45 2007) 提到:

due to the low rate right now, you shouldn't
pre-pay your mortgage, as long as you are
comfortable with your monthly cash flow.

Put extra money in tax-efficient account instead.

However, you think you don't have any good way
to put your extra money, you can put in your
mortgage, cuz it at least saves your interest.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:09:05 2007) 提到:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sinnet (思你特--新年好) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:10:06 2007) 提到:

请问,前者的一千家人和后者的一万九千家人都住在哪里?
如果是租房,那他们搬走了,空的房子怎么办?convert to condo or rebuild to TH,
SFH接着卖?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:10:11 2007) 提到:

What do you mean 宏观Level? My point is If I pay $1000 a month for a house
bought 4 years before, I have to pay $2500 a month now.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:10:56 2007) 提到:

金雨怎么还不反驳?我等不住了,重试:


1. 常言道“强者恒强,弱者恒弱”。NYC, SF地区房价高企不是一年两年了,支撑房价
的不是那个affordability的percentage,而是能afford的人口数和房子总数的比例。
这里看百分比是没有多大意义的。只要还有人能买得起还愿意买,即使affordability
只有15%又如何呢?

In the short term, 强者恒强,弱者恒弱, but in the longer term, everything
financial tend to revert to mean.
Denote affordability percentage by A, population by P, total number of
houses by H. You are saying what matters is A*P/H. Yes, but A is clearly an
important factor.

2. 正如high tech公司的P/E要远大于钢铁企业的P/E,一个就业繁荣,前景美好的地区
,其“风险”程度必然大于一个in the middle of nowhere的城市。公司,房产开放商
,和各种就业人群,都满怀希望在这里落户,希望能成功。那么,这样地区的房屋的确
会比较热销。现在已经经过了2000年的泡沫,在商业租价稳中有落的情况下,居民房价
仍在不断攀升,充分说明高收入的人口在不断增长并愿意在此扎根。他们或者是刚刚移
入,或者是经过几年的积累达到了高收入的标准。

The popularity of the bay area should lead to higher housing prices, higher
rent, but it does not mean the ratio of the two should be higher. A higher P
/E can only be justified if E can grow sufficiently faster than others in
the future. So if you think the bay area housing deserves a higher P/E,
logically you are predicting the rent will grow faster than other areas.
Currently our housing P/E is much higher than other investments. So if you
think your house as an investment, your return is too low. If you just need
a place to live, you can get a better deal in renting than buying.

3. 在房屋贷款利率可以抵税的情况下,高房价地区的居民有很强的意愿去购屋。如果
你在一个平均房价20来万,多年涨幅有限的地区居住,你购屋就是完全出于生活需要。
在湾区,省税的巨大好处让很多人愿意吃点苦也要先把房买下。这一incentive是光从
affordability的数据看不出来的。

In P/E, the E is after tax (both tax savings and property tax cost), and
after maintenance/insurance cost. So tax savings should not be considered a
separate favorable factor.

4. 不能忽略的是,湾区是高收入亚裔占很大比例的地区。goldenrain的所谓“风险”
计算,可以说是从美国人的角度来看的。把收入的一半投入房贷会吓死他们。而这样的
家庭,在湾区是非常正常,完全可以计入能afford的类别的。前提只要一个:他是亚裔
。所以,可以afford湾区房产的人数,有一部分就像隐藏在海平面下的冰山一样。

Agreed. Asians tend to accept higher risks in housing. We all want to buy a
house with a good school. A rising Asian population tend to improve school
API, which in turn attracts more Asians. This positive feedback lead to
spiraling housing price in MSJ and Cupertino. I sometimes wonder why we do
not form a 买房团 to buy the whole East Palo Alto or Richmond; or to build a
new community in the middle of no where.

当然,我也不认为湾区房价会在2007年重复前几年的那种惊人涨幅。问题在于,下跌的
可能性极低,基本上是一个上涨,平台,上涨的过程。在平台甚至小幅回落阶段(比如
去年下半年),如何慧眼识金,一举拿下好的deal,是考验你和你的地产经纪眼力的重
要时刻。

I don't see why it won't fall. Even if it stays flat, the cost is
significant. Say if the cost of capital (ie interest adjusted for tax
savings, plus property tax, insurance add maintenance cost) is 6%, a 1MM
house would cost 60K per flat year. The benefit is the saved rent and the
good feeling of owning ( if still feeling good in a flat market).



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:11:14 2007) 提到:

agree, to summarize, say your mortgage interest is x%, if you can find a way
to have higher return than this x%, don't pre-pay, otherwise, pay off,




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:11:45 2007) 提到:

弯曲这个问题不大,更多的Startup会出来。
startup里再时不时的出个GOOG之类的。

毕竟这里有人有钱有技术。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:14:43 2007) 提到:




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:14:51 2007) 提到:

or property tax increase is capped ya.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:15:06 2007) 提到:

这不是叫真吗, NEW YORK的RENTER总是CITY的大多数. 就是这里2000-2005年说人口在
减少,也不到总人口的1%吧. 两万人走了一千, 有多少影响?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:15:23 2007) 提到:

one more way to look at it is to diversify your portfolio.

rule of thumb, you dont want to put all your eggs in one basket.

For those who dont want to put all of your savings into real estate now, buy
some REIT, a good way to hedge, even you dont own re.

for those have chunk of equity in house, put some in stock, domestic or
international, you won't be disapointed as well, i guess.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:15:32 2007) 提到:

Oh, 等我写完才发现金雨发言了.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:16:25 2007) 提到:

to me, one should not buy REIT right now. Valuation too high.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:16:53 2007) 提到:

hehe, when economy go to south, all bets off.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:17:45 2007) 提到:

that's all about diversification, even with the current situation.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:17:57 2007) 提到:

短也不至于短到5年内吧. 一个地区的兴起和衰落怎么也是几十年的事. 我现在只讨论5
年之内,远了都没用.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:18:57 2007) 提到:

definitely wrong. it is the job market this time for sure.(as long as
without the support of another china)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:19:36 2007) 提到:

宏观Level means "treat the mortgage industry as whole",
historically, 7% is still at low end, horizontally
it is still cheaper than all other loans (E.g. car loan),
plus the mortgage interest is tax deductible.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:19:42 2007) 提到:

赞"三十年河东,三十年河西". 可是硅谷的人口自2000都在涨(自然加移民),看

http://www.jointventure.org/publicatons/index/2007%20Index/The%202007%20Index%20of%20Silicon%20Valley.pdf


后生可怕的说.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:19:54 2007) 提到:

fine. do whatever you want to do with diversification, or diworsification?
hehe.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:20:30 2007) 提到:

and young people earn comparable salaries as our old bones...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:20:48 2007) 提到:

俺老人家觉得,再坏也坏不过2001-2002那把吧!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:20:57 2007) 提到:

hehe. who said that? the issue would be more likely average jone would be
poorer and poorer.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:21:42 2007) 提到:

by the way, reit is not bad at all at least the moment, if you bother to
check.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:24:46 2007) 提到:

找任何的REPOT,你都会发现, 美国,中国, 95-05之间是富者越富,穷者越穷. 其实很简
单.你想做IT, 来BAY AREA,想做FINANCE, 去WALL STREET, 现在的社会是同样的人越来越扎
堆,而不是越来越EVENLY DISTRIBUTE. 所以地方也是富者越富,穷者越穷.

: in the longer term, everything financial tend to revert to mean.

这要看你说的LONG TERM是多少年, 我看这个至少20年以上的事.现在讨论最多是3-5年
的范围.





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:26:07 2007) 提到:

i roughly know REIT stock and mutual funds. There are a lot acquistion to
push the valuation to even higher level. but i don't think it is good time
to buy it anymore.

i guess i am more comfortable or sure about this point than my opinion about
housing mkt of bay area.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:27:56 2007) 提到:

that is not bad situation. check the 70. 80 .
hehe there was a China in 2001. one bubble to anthe buble. Do we have
another place this time?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:30:46 2007) 提到:

but rate was high at that moment.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:31:56 2007) 提到:

it was down so quickly and there was no such as big bubble as well.
hehe. check house price vs salary+option+bonus...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:36:04 2007) 提到:

:The popularity of the bay area should lead to higher housing prices, higher
:rent, but it does not mean the ratio of the two should be higher. A higher
P
:/E can only be justified if E can grow sufficiently faster than others in
:the future. So if you think the bay area housing deserves a higher P/E,
:logically you are predicting the rent will grow faster than other areas.
:Currently our housing P/E is much higher than other investments. So if you
:think your house as an investment, your return is too low. If you just need
:a place to live, you can get a better deal in renting than buying.


(1) even consider, we rise at the same rate with other place, it means if
they go from 30W- 33W, we go from 80W - 88W, same percentage, but higher
amount.
(2) we buy stock with high P/E, not because it is expensive, but because it has
HOPE. It is the same HOPE, that in the LONG TERM, it will rise faster than
other place that people buy here. 看看有多少人在这儿买SECOND HOUSE,RENT
PROPERTY就知道了. 因为很多人对这里有信心.这信心就象BRAND一样,是很直钱的!!!




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:37:54 2007) 提到:

i have checked neighbourhood data from ziprealty.

almost all desired locations, with neighbour house hold avg income like 130+
, 150+ or 170+,
shocking!




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:39:54 2007) 提到:

even lower than 2000 overall. :-)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:45:57 2007) 提到:

can not find a way to make more rate than mortgage  :(

but why so many articles said payoff is badbad idea nei?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:48:30 2007) 提到:

三番版选个股神出来帮你管钱好了,上次那谁不是说他这几年都是30%~50%的gain?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  iamcutedog (Dog) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:50:05 2007) 提到:

But most of the REITs are commercial related, office, apartments, or
shopping centers. Those commercial REITs are different from residential home
builders, if the "valuation" you are refering to is about the house price.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:50:43 2007) 提到:

So why bay area lost more than 400,000 jobs between from 2001 to 2003?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:51:36 2007) 提到:

try try stock? I think even S&P 500 has a good return last year.

Keep the money has one more benefit: in case you lost your job, you have
cushion. Other wise, even you prepayed before, if you stop paying monthly
payment, the house still will be foreclosed.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:51:59 2007) 提到:

因为老墨来得多了呗。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:52:38 2007) 提到:

it'll be bloodier when the job market is down and the house market is dead



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:53:31 2007) 提到:

My husband lost his job 2 times, but he didn't leave here. So, the people
left is much smaller than this 400K.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:53:35 2007) 提到:

Yes the interest rate is not high historically, but don't forget the house
price is increased 300% since that time. The amount of loan is so different.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:54:31 2007) 提到:

:but why so many articles said payoff is badbad idea nei?

because people are becoming more confident after recent stock market boom.
Not only the return needs to be higher than this x%, it also needs to be as
safe as US treasury bond. Why? because when you pay off, you are guaranteed
to save x%, but when you buy stock, your return is not guaranteed. Also, the
return needs to be after tax.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:55:20 2007) 提到:

Have you read a book named The World Is Flat? IT is not the privilege of
Silicon Valley anymore. Doing regular coding with a mountain high
indebtness is just risky, no matter where.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:56:45 2007) 提到:

The hope is reflected in the price already, now it's time for a reality
check.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:57:46 2007) 提到:

i am not pro. just my humble opinion. don't take it too seriously.

look at the id's here arguing about house mkt. those who plans to take
action is serious ones. i guess sevens is very serious since she probably
will buy again. others may just talk for the argument's sake, like me. hehe.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:58:38 2007) 提到:

No need to after tax, say mortgage interest is 6%, your tax is 1/3. you pre-
pay, you only save 4%, because, if you lost 2% tax-deduct, in the other case
, if you have a CD of 6%, you get 6% interest, but pay 2% tax, you still
gain 4%,

So, it is the pre-tax rate vs mortgage interest rate.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 16:59:13 2007) 提到:

sure, but these new grads with 0 downpay and 800k mortgage, I bet he didn't
do it at his time.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:00:33 2007) 提到:

also how can he survive without a greencard?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:01:17 2007) 提到:

Sevens has been saying buying for a long time. That alone tells something?
Butt decides brain after all.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:05:55 2007) 提到:

:No need to after tax, say mortgage interest is 6%, your tax is 1/3. you pre-
pay, you only save 4%, because, if you lost 2% tax-deduct, in the other case
, if you have a CD of 6%, you get 6% interest, but pay 2% tax, you still
gain 4%

Sevens: you are right. thanks.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:06:13 2007) 提到:

i always doubt the calculation has some draw back. say your investment rate
is 8% and your mortgage rate is 5%. in this case, you don't pay mortgage
principle and invest. however, your mortage is armotized in 30 years. so $1
in principle more will change armotization schedul start from next payment?

did not calculated myself, but i think your immediate saving is probably $1
*(5% + 5%*5% + ... + 5% ^30)? if should depends on your investing time frame
too?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:08:10 2007) 提到:

As matter of fact, I love that book and I high recommended it to everyone.

But, don't take the name for granted. I surely remember, that he mentioned
that compared with Mexico with China, that Mexico looks so good in paper but
fails to take off, which China does. He also mentioned that with the
flating world, the people in Bay Area and New York has more aligned interest
with people in Beijing/Shanghai, than the people in Middle US. In a
nutshell, here is the place that benefit from globaliztaion, we certainly
benefit most from that.

Again, if you are talking about 50 years. Maybe, it will be flattened. (Even
that, I am not sure, why Africa and US look so different?) But, we are
talking about next 2-3 years, no way they will be flatten with such short
period of time.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:10:59 2007) 提到:

No, you don't need to consider the compounding effects. B Franklin said: one
cent saved is one cent earned.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:11:41 2007) 提到:

You can consider the question the other way, you have $1, you want pay off
this year or invest in CD this year. Then, at the year end, both save you 4%
, then, consider next year.....

In this case, you don't need to consider the amortized effect. Hope it
clears a little.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:13:25 2007) 提到:

I am saying that I'll at least wait until later half of year a long time too
..

even in this thread.....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:14:13 2007) 提到:

basically, i suspect my immediate interest saving is probably higher than my
investment gain. it is only after a peroid that high rate investment makes
more.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:19:56 2007) 提到:

show be now ba.. if in good school...
I can see MSJ is really hot. any houses below or around 1.1m is gone so soon.
发信人: chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Tue Feb  6 01:17:07 2007)

buyer为什么要等到下半年?那卖房子什么时候好呢?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:20:12 2007) 提到:

u missed my point, I don't care if the world is really flat, I do know the
IT jobs here these days are created not just because of these jobs are hard
to do and no one in other corner of the world can do it with 1/3 of the cost.
they're created because of the hot money financed that the cost was not
taken into account.

when the tide's down, these jobs belong to China/India, and the people hired
need to rethink if they should take a 800k mortgage with 0-5% downpay



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:20:16 2007) 提到:

ha,, no me.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nachos (十年奶奶) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:21:23 2007) 提到:

sigh and big sigh

i know how poor i am after visiting MSJ open house



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:26:59 2007) 提到:

In 10 years, it is more likely that Beijing/Shanghai's house is more
expensive than here and at the same time the salary is comparable. Rather
than their salary remain flat and our house value drop.

It is bascially the same question why LanZHou's house is 1/5 of Beijing/Shanghai. Can they easily converged in 5-10 years.

Even it converges, in my opinion, it takes more than 5-10 years. Most of
people here are asking the question:

Can we buy house NOW???? NOW is the key word. even 5 years is too long for them.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:29:07 2007) 提到:

hehe, ppl here are asking the question.
Can we SELL house now? SELL will be the key wor.d :-)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:30:22 2007) 提到:

did you go to that 1.1m one I talked about?
were there a lot of ppl? I was waiting to see the open house of it.
did not even had a chance.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:31:12 2007) 提到:

:Can we buy house NOW???? NOW is the key word. 5 years is too long for them.


That is the problem. People's time horizon is too short, despite the fact
the house is a very illiquid product with high transaction cost. You shouldn
't buy a house if 5 years are too long.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nachos (十年奶奶) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:32:26 2007) 提到:

1.1m is too tough for me, sigh, i need money to raise my 2nd kid



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:33:09 2007) 提到:

If you want to sell and move into an apartment, OK, but be sure to look out
for the next surge.

If you sell your house in not-so-good district and want to buy in a good-
strict, not so good timing in my 2 cents

What is your purpose?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:35:33 2007) 提到:

No, I don't mean holding house for 5 years is too long. Waiting to buy your
first house in more than 5 years is too long. I don't see most first time
buyer wait that long.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:37:19 2007) 提到:

can't agree more. house to first time buyer is mostly likely not pure
investment. it is a lot of other things.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:37:20 2007) 提到:

the bottom line is just like the reversed interst curve. ppl are crazy like
end of world to invest(speculate/gamble) short term money into a long term
money.
that is :-)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:38:13 2007) 提到:

啊,太谦虚了吧。要不然就是也是养小金人?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:38:49 2007) 提到:

yeah, just like the famous dream of "DIAMOND".



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:39:39 2007) 提到:

famous dream of "DIAMOND", what is this?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:39:49 2007) 提到:

瓦, 大家现在都是用好长的英语灌房坑。跳起来太困难了。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:40:19 2007) 提到:


it is about the same.
nanny 1.5k, food+cloth+others 2k. it is about 3.5k after tax.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:40:31 2007) 提到:

1. in 10 years the housing bubble in China already popped. There'll be
farms of 90 square meter 经济适用房. And the salary will NOT be comparable.
IT worker is not Mckinsey consultant, it'll become commodity and mass
produced. If it gets closer, it only means there'll be less and less
IT jobs for MSCS here.

2. You divert too fast, I'm talking about if buying NOW(or short term)
for these newcomers makes economic sense. Job security is definitely
one factor we're arguing about, The World Is Flat was brought in to
ask the question of why you think a regular IT job is sustainable here
when the job can be done for 1/5 cost in China/India? For many jobs
newly created in the valley, are these jobs really hardcore or they're
just the by-product of heating job market with the ignorance of cost
of operation once again?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:41:17 2007) 提到:

wa, 太奢侈了。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:41:41 2007) 提到:

food+cloth+others 2k? so much. can you itemize it.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:41:46 2007) 提到:

你们争什么呢,先说谁跟金鱼一播,谁跟77一播,我再考虑怎么拉偏手让你们掐 //思考


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  qaz (得意的飘) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:41:48 2007) 提到:

同意,未来的几年,最有可能的是持平或缓涨
通过通货膨胀把前几年的疯狂抵消了
所以该买就买,买了就自己住好了
投资房投在湾区可能就不划算了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:43:54 2007) 提到:


你好像已经被化成77一派了。

肯定拉偏架。

还好死硬保房派katie没有来跳坑。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:44:40 2007) 提到:

actually, it might be your last chance to get cheap money.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:45:09 2007) 提到:

agree. If want to enjoy life, go buy one. if for investment, no.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:45:25 2007) 提到:

Yeah. but for the coming years, there are 3 big issues.
1. economics /job market sustainability.
2. the current mortage/rent ratio here is 2:1.(you already lose those 3~5
years  rental in this case. not to mention most mortage in first few years
is just interest)
3. lose both investment/career opportunities if any.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:45:25 2007) 提到:

哈哈


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:46:21 2007) 提到:

Good point. Just don't pray it is both good investment and good living; or
wait for the next surge. Plan to stay in the house for 5+ years.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:46:23 2007) 提到:

我唱衰弯曲工作市场,同时也不看好房市,不过估计不会暴跌。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:46:28 2007) 提到:

我心里是跟金鱼的希望一样的,希望房子暴跌
但我和他的区别是我知道那是个不可能的DREAM,他仍然相信可能实现


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:47:06 2007) 提到:

so if the price is high and the rate is high, who's gonna jump the house
keng?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:47:26 2007) 提到:

nbc 是金鱼派的新锐. 正赶上我刚忙完一段,这两天比较闲.要煽风点火赶紧.明天说不
定又忙起来了.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:47:29 2007) 提到:


他们都用英语挖房坑,著名的烂英语katie同学就不能跳了。
惨。

同情一把。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:47:35 2007) 提到:

短期内大规模LAYOFF不太可能,看CSCO这阵势。。。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:48:25 2007) 提到:

不同意,至少NBC很鄙视金鱼没事就狂扁弯曲怀念鸟不拉屎地方的态度


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:48:28 2007) 提到:

yeah. I could give you a way cheaper money if you like.
saying , you buy a a dime from me with a "your" buck with a downpayment of 3
dimes.
and you could pay only 4% interest on the remaining balance in 30 years(or
market rate).
I am definitely ok with that for sure.
The key issue here is not the (float) rate itself. but the price tag.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:48:33 2007) 提到:

我是刚需,我希望股票暴涨,房价暴跌,虽然这个可能性更小



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:49:04 2007) 提到:

no big rising is already a big diving.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:49:14 2007) 提到:

其实我特喜欢看你写英文,我觉得有CHALLENG有趣味,太难的题我不会,但FIGURE OUT
你要说什么我觉得我已经精通了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:49:32 2007) 提到:

Job market will be good for the next couple years,
cuz most companies make profit, there is no bubble
in the company, unlike year 2000.

However, real estate market could crash, cuz there
is a bubble in bay are real estate.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:49:50 2007) 提到:

不全是,他是理论派。我不看房价图表。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:49:55 2007) 提到:

我希望都跌,LAYOFF,然后我正好回国


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:51:07 2007) 提到:

这玩意很难说,Sun倒下也就一年的功夫。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:51:27 2007) 提到:

you forget something called "刚性需求",
when you need a house, no matter how high it is,
you will buy. Believe it or not!





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:52:07 2007) 提到:

FT.
但是我觉得你还不够强。

原来我在学校时候有一个老印officemate那才真叫强。

我想说蚊子,就m, m, mm.... 半天,然后煽煽翅膀,他就能知道我要说蚊子。

类似的还有很多。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:52:21 2007) 提到:

good没来,不然他要告诉你telecom复苏了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:52:42 2007) 提到:

actually i agree with qaz's point just now.

some people may just view house as pure investment like goldrain, or have
better investment channel, like whom, maybe easyfm. of course, then if you
are not that sure you can make money from the investment, you either invest
other places, or hold the cash. it makes perfect sense for them, but not
necessarily for everyone.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:52:47 2007) 提到:

你再这样下去非吧凯蒂的老公招来不可 //run



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:53:11 2007) 提到:

1 is different opinion for different people. No one can prove who is right.
We have to wait.

For your second opinion, does it make sense to buy in PA in early 1900 when
it is booming and hold it for 5 years? Of course yes. Hold it for more than
100 years? of course not. I still believe in the time horizon of 5-10 years,
it make sense to buy in the near future. The change you are talking maybe
happen, but it is too distance.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:53:15 2007) 提到:

哈哈。前些日子有国内同学狂扁美国,说什么这几年感觉美国越来越差,
我也鄙视之,我心说你就去个vegas你就来扁美国了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:54:10 2007) 提到:

你要f, f, ff.... 半天,然后煽翅膀, 他估计就猜不出来了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:54:33 2007) 提到:

工作稳定而房事垮掉,我认为只有一种情况,就是投资的人太多,弯曲这点还好,AZ,
DENVER,UTAH这种地方才真正危险。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:54:40 2007) 提到:

yeah. most "刚性需求" are just faked "刚性需求"
1. If you know that your 2M house would drop to 1M in 2 years , will you buy?
just an extreme case.

2. you could rent way better condition house with all kind of flexibility
such as good school, good living condtion, convient location, easy to switch
... while at the same time the landlord pays money to your for your living.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:54:53 2007) 提到:

csco stock up. 30K engineer here. the lowest rank makes 10w probably. the 3K
manager level make 50w probably. let alone Juniper probably will have
similar effect. Guess, it is highly unlikely the house price, especially
entry level goes down.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:55:00 2007) 提到:

nod. 但是有些ppl就是筑巢本能特别强,想我。

无论走到那里,只要可能,第一件事儿就是弄套自己的窝。

然后把自己的烂东西均匀的撒在里面以式所有权。 哈哈。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:56:14 2007) 提到:

fff..ff.f... 这个是什么?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:57:03 2007) 提到:

苍蝇,不过他可能会想岔了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:57:27 2007) 提到:

I partially agree that mass layoff might not happen in
traditional IT companies, such as CSCO, MSFT, IBM or so,
but for these new Web 2.0 upstarts... I can hardly see
enough revenue stream and customer space for them to
sustain their business. And new jobs are mostly in this
area.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:57:49 2007) 提到:

FT le.....
this word too easy, even I know .


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:57:50 2007) 提到:

同回,坐玛丽二皇后回



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:58:35 2007) 提到:

There are a lot of investors in the bay area, if Goldenrain's data are right
.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:59:04 2007) 提到:

me 3.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 17:59:24 2007) 提到:

what kind of need is that?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:00:14 2007) 提到:

看来还是剑走偏锋容易出名。

金鱼就贴几个图,现在俨然是本板第一房坑ID了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:00:58 2007) 提到:

你就挖了几个小坑,现在俨然是本板坑后。。。。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:01:01 2007) 提到:

a typical chinese story.
a shanghai girl said "I would not marry you if you have no house" and you
live her to death and not convince her.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:01:15 2007) 提到:

sm


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:02:07 2007) 提到:

不懂的说。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:02:38 2007) 提到:

嗯,偶都不挖坑久以,难道没有注音到



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:03:37 2007) 提到:




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:03:43 2007) 提到:

co-
不懂
我猜不是好话
傻冒?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:03:47 2007) 提到:

It's already happening big time, the India/China Centers hire people like
picking cabbage from the farmers market. It takes a couple of years for
the company to reorganize its structure to adapt the change, it won't
take that long.

Again, we're talking about new grad couples taking *5 mortgages at 0 down.
They run high risks of being the next victims of a bubble.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:03:57 2007) 提到:

恩,我还要学习。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:05:12 2007) 提到:

嗯,有助于锻炼自动究错能力



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:05:37 2007) 提到:

web2.0 is just in its infancy,
Even all busted, it won't impact so much.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:06:16 2007) 提到:

I can I live her to death? Live her like a house?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:06:26 2007) 提到:

恩,我认识一人,上次来VEGAS是淡季,团里给丁了VENETIAN,赞,很高兴。这次感恩
节来是旺季,旅游团只订到了ALADIN,狂不爽,什么都骂,跟我说美国越来越衰败了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:07:13 2007) 提到:

好吧, 我觉的这个五年之内不会影响BAY AREA的HIGH TECH,你觉的会.

看来我们只能AGREE THAT WE DON'T AGREE了.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:07:41 2007) 提到:

rent is rising, but to catch up with the mortgage...

I have friends living in the city, the HOA itself is $500-$1000
for condos, who on earth wants to own?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:08:08 2007) 提到:

也有可能是按揭利息的抵税优惠没有了,去年这个时候唱衰派都在HIGH这个,成天转贴
这方面的NEWS,跟打了鸡血一样


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:08:35 2007) 提到:

oh yeah? the job market "boom" is all by the VC in the valley,
and look at their portfolio and the latest term sheets..



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:09:19 2007) 提到:

赫赫,摇头



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:09:58 2007) 提到:

a simple example,

Given your kid is back from her school, someday,
she asks, "why all my friends have house, and we
stay in APT?"

If you can't afford a house, no problem, what if
you are able to own a house? If your kid looks at
you with her naive eye, asked fifth times, will
you consider to buy?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:10:12 2007) 提到:

只要整个MARKET好,VC有钱,那些小公司就有钱烧,WEB 2。0公司没有什么HARDWARE,
BURN RATE都是人的工资,好控制


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:12:03 2007) 提到:

我认为支撑弯曲房事的不是他们,是普普通通的IT民工们,上一次是70年代生,90年代
末来美的那些,现在这次是80年代生,911后来美的这播


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:12:19 2007) 提到:

Your kid wouldn't ask that question again if you rent a nice house.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:12:35 2007) 提到:

终于TOP 10 了.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:15:24 2007) 提到:




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:15:30 2007) 提到:

well, if I'm that old already and I still live in an
apt but my peers are living in a house, I'm a pure
loser, end of story;

but if all of them put 0 down and take 1m mortgage,
I'll tell my kid take it easy, we'll buy one soon or
we'll leave this crazy place. 




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:15:54 2007) 提到:

Nod!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:16:01 2007) 提到:

所以不挣钱得话也就直接开人了,一般三年差不多了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:16:35 2007) 提到:

我靠,80年代生的都中坚力量了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tvstar (hehe) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:16:50 2007) 提到:

hahahahahaha.... good



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:17:17 2007) 提到:

握手!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:17:42 2007) 提到:

其实最能炒火弯曲房事的除了低利息就是RENT UP,RENT DOWN房事就会COOL一些。
当然RENT UP主要还是JOB MARKET,所以我坚信弯曲如果没有大规模LAYOFF就不会大跌
,INVEST的投机的起不了什么作用


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tvstar (hehe) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:17:46 2007) 提到:

hahahahahah....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:18:18 2007) 提到:

是呀, 功劳肯定有你的一半.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:18:26 2007) 提到:

其实我早就说过了,关于买房子在弯曲一共就三派。

死保房派:怎么都会买,第一时间买的起就买了。第一时间换的起就换了

死唱跌派:怎么跌都觉得还没有到低,想抄底。 没有抄到就又长起来的化,就想等下
一个底,结果还是不如第一个底低,就接着等。 永远不会买。

随时等待买房派:想买,觉得高,也在看,越看越高,终于忍不住跳了。



除了第三派有一点点动摇外,其它两派谁都说服不了谁。

发信人: BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Tue Feb  6 18:12:03 2007)

我认为支撑弯曲房事的不是他们,是普普通通的IT民工们,上一次是70年代生,90年代
末来美的那些,现在这次是80年代生,911后来美的这播



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:19:56 2007) 提到:

how did you get 10w ya? joined a couple of months ago ye neng make 10w ya?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:20:01 2007) 提到:

web2.0总共没有hire掉多少人.
大头都在CSCO,YHOO, EBAY, GOOG,
APPL, MOT,IBM等这些公司。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:23:23 2007) 提到:

还有一个supply的问题,Dublin/Pleasanton那边已经over supply了,builders
前几年market hot的时候拿很多地,现在房子建好了也降温了,肯定会drag the
price down;旧金山市里也有一大坨康多会推出,rental很难爬很高。房价就
不会高居不下。另一个普遍情况就是入市早的房东不愿意降价卖房(或者卖不出去),
就廉价租房,满足一部分对sfh/twh刚需



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:24:22 2007) 提到:

我不想抄底,我也不想当傻瓜接棒,我就等着公司派我海归



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:24:30 2007) 提到:

最鄙视这种认为唱跌的人永远不会买,永远买不起的论调,
你的一切假设都建立在一个沙滩上,就是湾区的房子永远不会跌。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:25:10 2007) 提到:

yahoo/goog我都当web 2.0,还有什么aol

MOT已经裁人了今年。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nachos (十年奶奶) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:25:22 2007) 提到:

no easy these days to get a export package 吧



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:25:30 2007) 提到:

不一定,很多VC认识的人,总能弄到钱的,这个黄了就再开个别的,反正带着他喜欢的
ENGINEER到处跑
要知道很多创业的目的不是一定要赚钱,他们就是觉得他们喜欢作这个觉得酷,前提是
他们有钱烧


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:25:47 2007) 提到:

这不是偏锋。 我顶得住地主们的压力啊。 :-).




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:26:04 2007) 提到:

所以在等



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:26:10 2007) 提到:

我也是才发现啊


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:26:13 2007) 提到:

expat, not export btw



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:26:55 2007) 提到:

我认为我是现实派。我没必要死保房子,我也不怕跌,我房子跌也跌不到哪去


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:26:58 2007) 提到:

NOD, 俺老人家前公司,烧了10多年钱了,还在烧。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:27:20 2007) 提到:

一般engineer也不带的吧,尤其是没绿卡的。我怎么这么关心新来得这些外州民工



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:27:18 2007) 提到:

那也是一种危险,不过很难想象国会会通过这样的提案。真通过了受损最大的恐怕是银
行,美国没有哪个政治家敢得罪银行吧。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:28:26 2007) 提到:

偶又没有说唱叠的买不起,偶只是说不会买。

偶还没有鄙视你,到先被鄙视了。 FT...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:29:21 2007) 提到:

人不说了么,10个startup,三年之内要倒一半,再过三年再一半,再一半。。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:30:32 2007) 提到:

no argue, you r the first type.
就酱紫。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:31:09 2007) 提到:

从60,70年代仙童公司半导体开始萌芽,到现在股沟,有图不, IT产业也走过了三,四
十年的风风雨雨。胜极而衰,
50年,现在就该衰了。
100年,现在也过了青少年时代,进入稳定增长期了,2000年的IT bubble再也不会在硅
谷重现了




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:31:51 2007) 提到:

DUBLIN那边我还是了解的,那么一点点TH区不能说明整个弯曲OVER SUPPLY,更DRAG不
了什么整个市场。DUBLIN连PLEASANTON和SAN RAMON的房事其实都影响不了。
如果你看SC,SM和ALAMEDA三个县整体,SUPPLY是相当LOW


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:31:54 2007) 提到:

So what? Have you read the book "Poor dad, rich dad". His friend's family
live in a shabby house, even his friend's father can afford a new one. So
what, that guy become a billionair. Want to laught at him?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:31:55 2007) 提到:

一个董存瑞倒下了, 千百个新STARTUP又站起来了....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:36:01 2007) 提到:

FT


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:37:06 2007) 提到:

你错了,没绿卡的才好使唤


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:37:17 2007) 提到:

不会吧,supply你还要看inventory,这个金鱼可以提供increasing inventory
for sure。builder降完价就该seller了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:37:19 2007) 提到:

Does anyone like the book " "Poor dad, rich dad"? I read his articles at
yahoo, they are just hype.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:37:35 2007) 提到:

我觉得你像katie的马甲




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nachos (十年奶奶) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:38:07 2007) 提到:

我也觉得是



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:38:34 2007) 提到:

而且你也没有换房的压力,爽歪歪



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:38:38 2007) 提到:

FT.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:39:09 2007) 提到:

the truth is, 董存瑞一起来一起去。VC is not constantly pouring money in
one place, and their reservoir of money fluctuate too. So when the market
is up, there're hundreds of new startups coming; when the market is down,
no new jobs will be created and people need to figure out how to deal with
their 1m mortgage.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:39:14 2007) 提到:

同感.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:39:54 2007) 提到:

你总动不动就说弯曲房事历史,其实你对弯曲2000年是怎么回事一点概念都没有,唯一
的理解就是那几张图表。
你的结论对错不说,你的论据和你论证的方式十分可笑,这个是我绝对不能AGREE的原因


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:40:42 2007) 提到:

showoff stayed in bayarea for a really long time
//run


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:41:29 2007) 提到:

GOOG aside, if you look at Yahoo, their business can be cut in half and
it will only help them with their wall street numbers. There're all kinds
of media/advertising startups these days, it's just they're still in stealth
or production mode, when they try to sell, it's time to shut down some



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:42:06 2007) 提到:

first, that is a faked story.

If you billionaire like Gates, invest stock returns more, if you are
ordinary guy without any talent in stock picking, consider buy house....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:42:25 2007) 提到:

我觉得其实金同学对房地产市场根本就不太了解,

所以才会贴出什么MSJ一天就出来多少房子那种图。

其实只要看过房子的人都知道那是怎么会师。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:43:56 2007) 提到:

尤其是在现在MSJ的房子inventery那么少的情况下。我是真的FT乐。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:44:50 2007) 提到:

金鱼的此论比较弱.但是他的图表用事实和数据说话,很好呀.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:45:01 2007) 提到:

照这个结论, WALL STREET, NEW YORK, BOSTON这些上百年历史的地方,早该是一堆黄土
了. 历史的进程尽管在加快, 但比你想象的,还是慢的多了.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:45:49 2007) 提到:

历史可以从书本,网络中挖掘出来,不一定非要身在其中啊。当局者迷。
图表都是转载的,不是我编的。
你说说2000的概念是怎么回事?
什么样的论据和论证不可笑呢?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:45:51 2007) 提到:

笑翻在地


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:46:29 2007) 提到:

嗯,他的数据比较misleading.

如果你对弯曲的情况并不了解的化。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:46:46 2007) 提到:

sheng xiaobao jiu you le.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:47:42 2007) 提到:

真是的,怎么每过一阵子就有人跳出来说我象katie,

我的英语有那么烂吗? 侮辱偶。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:48:46 2007) 提到:

这么大一个房坑, KATIE都没出现, 是很可疑呀.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:49:20 2007) 提到:

如你不是KATIE, 她回打烂你.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:49:34 2007) 提到:

嗯,听说她脚盆洗手了。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:49:37 2007) 提到:

For Fremont, the inventory is worse than 2003,
2004, and 2005, but better than 2001 and 2002.

http://www.morrar.com/market_condition.htm

still less than 300, given the population 220K,
and total 68K+ houses. The number seems not
too bad.





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:49:57 2007) 提到:

那你写两句英文我看看



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:50:18 2007) 提到:

I don't think TonyXu's statement ever happened in Bay Area, I mean in our
past life span: "Once the rent surges to the point that makes purchase
attractive again"

但是,除非想马上离开湾区,长期自主还是应该买房。在湾区买方不是为了省近期的房
租,而是锁定5-10年之后的房租,并且等房子升值。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:51:11 2007) 提到:

你乍和她心连心,手连手?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:51:12 2007) 提到:

co-翻



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:51:18 2007) 提到:

//blush


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:51:40 2007) 提到:

不要强人所难撒。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:52:23 2007) 提到:

fremont 去年800+的inventory.都没垮...
现在才450...

弯曲这房子我算服了...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:52:52 2007) 提到:


啊,她有那么凶吗? 怕怕。

听说这个ID很温柔呀?
//吐ing....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:52:52 2007) 提到:

This is totally misleading. Buy house and buy stock is same, all about the
timing. Don't think you gain some money by lucky will always happen.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:53:56 2007) 提到:

LOL


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:54:14 2007) 提到:


实事求是的说,去年年底还是有个小bottom的



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:54:35 2007) 提到:

It depends how to understand,

for me, make 30%-40 down and can achieve cash even is attactive enough for
me to dive in. But for other place, I will only consider 10% down and cash
even is attractive to me. Again, it is the confidence and hope make the
definition of 'attactive'.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:55:33 2007) 提到:

温泉小学还不错的吧?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:55:47 2007) 提到:

in 2002, the rent did match, actually exceeded
the mortgage payment.

That was one of the motivation I bought house,
though the price was still higher the historic
peak, even with the impact of 911.





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:55:54 2007) 提到:

Have you bought investment property with your 40W cash? *_*


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:56:10 2007) 提到:

I see. I only saw data for SF and SJ, SF inventory up 25% from 05
and SJ 20%.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:56:38 2007) 提到:

这篇比较搞笑, 那一万八千个人露宿街头?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:56:39 2007) 提到:

估计被老公勒令结网了,嗯。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:56:44 2007) 提到:

:make 30%-40 down and can achieve cash even

showoff! Stamp!


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:57:13 2007) 提到:

2001 - 2002 那叫坏?还没有90-96厉害呢




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:57:43 2007) 提到:

同情一个。好惨那。

多么有前途的一个大好ID来者。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:57:54 2007) 提到:

也有卖不出去就撤下来租的。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:58:06 2007) 提到:

sigh, 2002年没绿卡壮胆,硬伤


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:58:07 2007) 提到:

芥末好的英文,估计不是凯迪mm



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:58:48 2007) 提到:

that's why I'm arguing, not because I'm betting the bubble will burst,
but I'm against advising newcomers to rush to the market based on biased
opinions.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:59:02 2007) 提到:

You just replied her, haha.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:59:09 2007) 提到:

两万人走了一千,房子价格翻了一番, 你看影响大不大?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  liliput (粒粒菩提之Leopold) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:59:32 2007) 提到:

对,我们都觉得katie英文暴滥。

大家乘机b4她吧。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:59:49 2007) 提到:

how can you make 30% down now and achieve non-negative cash flow??



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:59:54 2007) 提到:

是呀,是呀,海地老人家不在,小猫小狗都来霸占江湖了 //standing still



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 18:59:55 2007) 提到:

co-b4 it... haha



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:00:14 2007) 提到:

May not be true. Japan has negative actual interest rate for a long time
after housing bubble bust.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:00:39 2007) 提到:

b4 她


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:00:59 2007) 提到:

不管怎么样吧,
没有crash...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:01:43 2007) 提到:

mobile home or cheap apt ya.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  liliput (粒粒菩提之Leopold) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:02:40 2007) 提到:

对,katie太滥了,我狠狠地在他额头跷一个“虚伪”的利氏公章



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:03:07 2007) 提到:

nod, but buying high and sicheng with risk of losing job is not a good idea
except for agents, agree?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:03:24 2007) 提到:

再踏上千万只脚。。。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:03:46 2007) 提到:

如果人们能在最高点买的个这个烂区的烂房里住上个20年,房子跌不跌还真没有什么,
就怕3-5年就要搬家,换房子,到时候卖了亏个底掉,不卖又没法再买房子。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:03:54 2007) 提到:

还可以很多人挤在一个HOUSE 里, 想我们当年在宿舍里一样. IT HAPPENS HERE.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:04:51 2007) 提到:

so rental is not a bad choice.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:05:05 2007) 提到:

唉,名ID倒众人推压。

惨。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:05:08 2007) 提到:

Was it 30-year fixed morgage or ARM? It is not fair to compare ARM morgage
with rent because the former was supper low.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:05:24 2007) 提到:

隐隐有showoff的味道



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:05:38 2007) 提到:

中西部鸟还是很多的,如果夏天停车在露天的地方,满车顶都是鸟屎。好像湾区鸟儿们
老实一些



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:06:01 2007) 提到:

再插个牌子,住MSJ苦穷者鉴



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:06:40 2007) 提到:

估计就是katie showoff太多,民粪太大。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:06:44 2007) 提到:

我支持katie, 虽然我不能同意她的房托观点



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sinnet (思你特--新年好) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:06:54 2007) 提到:

then what happened to these mobile home and cheap apt?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:07:54 2007) 提到:

en, 我会转告他




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sinnet (思你特--新年好) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:09:15 2007) 提到:

一脚把katie踢翻在地, 再踩8脚
反正你不是她//grin



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:09:22 2007) 提到:

今年春天的inventory一定爆1000+, 让我们拭目以待



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:09:53 2007) 提到:

where?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:09:59 2007) 提到:

这是什么逻辑,
走了一千,使房子翻了一倍? it is corrlation, not cause, cause是那两万人, 不管
是两万,还是一万九. 所以我的例子是证明这的房子贵有贵的道理, 和长不长没有关系.

至于翻了一番, 全国很多地方都是这样的.大环境如此,和LAS VAGAS, SOUTH CA相比,我
们张的不多呢. (PERCENTAGE WISE)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:10:19 2007) 提到:

可年,可年。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:10:59 2007) 提到:

谁都不卖,市场上的房子哪里来的,有很多精明的房主2006就已经脱手了。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:11:14 2007) 提到:

only MULTIPLEX POSSIBLE


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:11:57 2007) 提到:

you wanna bet?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nxgre (nx) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:12:02 2007) 提到:

re


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:12:40 2007) 提到:

cause 很简单,就是投机的心理,预期房子一定会涨,永远涨。
这就是泡沫,早晚要破的




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:13:07 2007) 提到:

co - ask.
and also, please define spring. I think it is already spring.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:13:23 2007) 提到:

fremont


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:13:27 2007) 提到:

It's also mental. In other areas people tend to be less optimistic and
confident so they behave normal in a downturn, while in the bay area
everybody is a super star and would rather SC than giving up.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sinnet (思你特--新年好) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:13:28 2007) 提到:

痛吗?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:14:21 2007) 提到:

in bay area? I doubt it...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  liliput (粒粒菩提之Leopold) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:14:27 2007) 提到:

多少buyer是买了自己住的,多少是买了投机的。
有数据么?这个比较重要,要是投机的比率不高的话,
俺们这种买来自己住的,可以出手了吧。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:14:31 2007) 提到:

嗯,脑袋上8个包。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:15:18 2007) 提到:

你到底啥时候买压?

上次问的那个给奥佛了吗?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:15:21 2007) 提到:

再忍忍,曙光就快来了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  liliput (粒粒菩提之Leopold) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:15:58 2007) 提到:

没。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:16:25 2007) 提到:

其实今年比去年卖的贵



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  liliput (粒粒菩提之Leopold) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:16:42 2007) 提到:

其实越吃越好呀,手头缺钱,迟点手头积蓄就会多点。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:16:46 2007) 提到:

我举的例子讨论的是AFFORDILITITY的问题. 讨论的是这里AFFORDILITY低为什么合理的
问题. 和你这个例子有什么关系?

这完全是驴唇和马嘴吗!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:18:03 2007) 提到:

赞七七严肃的讨论态度
你的耐心真好。

赞, 赞, 赞。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  qaz (得意的飘) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:18:10 2007) 提到:

房子一定涨,永远涨不对么?
long term讲是这样的呀



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:20:49 2007) 提到:

对,放到money market总比交变态mortgage强。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:20:52 2007) 提到:

你要move up, 什么时候都好,paper money 从哪里赚来再陪到哪里去。了不起不赔不
赚。

如果是first time buyer. 在湾区买哪里都是引颈受戮。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:20:56 2007) 提到:


goldenrain has a map showing lot of investors in the bay area.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:21:45 2007) 提到:

你的意思是bay area人多?所以房价贵只要top的人能住上就行?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:24:16 2007) 提到:

严格的说是人口密度大,所以要么降低住房质量,要么提高房价. 实际上是两者兼而有之.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:24:25 2007) 提到:

这个理论都出现过无数次了。一点儿都不新鲜了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:25:02 2007) 提到:

NOD,除非再来一次2001-2002。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:25:48 2007) 提到:

Depends on how to define long term. In LA area, from 1990-2000, nominal
housing price actually declined a little. Actual price (after adjusting for
inflation) declined much more. In the last 50+ years, housing price beat
inflation by 2-3 percent annually.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:26:42 2007) 提到:

赫赫,这个论据我必须PASS了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:26:52 2007) 提到:

纸面价格涨,去除通货膨胀,就是个1%还不到的年收益率,是房主们辛勤劳动维护房子
的合理报酬




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:26:59 2007) 提到:

LOL


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:28:29 2007) 提到:

我有,只不过我现在基本是慢慢被PRICE OUT的趋势无理回天了,前几年是被PRICE OUT
OF MSJ,后来是WEIBEL,现在大批鬼工入住暖春区,我连家门口的房子都买不起了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sinnet (思你特--新年好) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:29:48 2007) 提到:

这个情况(one family unit expending to two family units)是会对房子价钱又影响,
但是在弯曲都多少影响,我无法了解

我们可以这样看问题:
真正决定房子价钱的是: total family units vs total house units in a specific
area, such as bay area. 一个萝卜一个坑, 大家都有房子住,whether rent or own.

so, if move-in > move-out, price goes up

但是from renter to owner变化, 从长期来说, 对房子价钱影响不大.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:30:20 2007) 提到:

NOD,我没赚到但是我看到了,就是这么个循环而已


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nachos (十年奶奶) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:30:22 2007) 提到:

必须要让沥沥普来敲章了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:31:56 2007) 提到:

YAHOO有问题,但YAHOO的问题跟WEB2。0没什么关系


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:32:29 2007) 提到:

有点,YAHOO的问题是向WEB2。0转化做的不好



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:32:33 2007) 提到:

why i heard the opposite?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:32:49 2007) 提到:

有些东西他是不了解,有些东西他是不肯了解。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tvstar (hehe) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:34:06 2007) 提到:

reminds me of the WellsFargo ads.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:37:19 2007) 提到:

感觉现在MSJ inventory似乎很低啊,谁能讲讲为什么?是季节性吗?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:37:53 2007) 提到:

I'm talking about bay area in general, not the city of Fremont



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:38:49 2007) 提到:

EVEN暖春都带抢的,这个我很郁闷


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:39:12 2007) 提到:

你讲两句鹰文先


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:40:21 2007) 提到:

图表并非事实,there are many图表 out there. whatever he presented are just a
selective subset, not to mention some of the charts have credibility issue


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:40:46 2007) 提到:

个人感觉是因为没有小孩上学的老住户搬的差不多了。 剩下的都是从小学就开始进来
,要一直住到高中毕业的了。

我个人感觉今年应该还不是最糟糕的,明年和后年应该抢的更厉害。

不过我不是专业意见。 tony应该有跟合理的解释



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:41:07 2007) 提到:

PENG



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:41:11 2007) 提到:

继续挖


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:42:03 2007) 提到:

这么多小孩,你不担心,msj要排队抽?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:42:18 2007) 提到:

弯曲也真pathetic,一一半老中老印的破学校都要这么抢。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:42:33 2007) 提到:

嗯,今年真的很疯狂。

不知道是怎么了。
1。1米一下,只要是还看的过去的房子,通通一个星期内不见。

好像1。2米是个坎儿,再往上就好一些



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:43:16 2007) 提到:

老大你怎么定义WORSE和BETTER的?
反正我只看94539,现在的INVENTORY SUPER LOW


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:43:39 2007) 提到:

因为他们的房子都卖了好价钱呗,共同和新来鬼工一起背债。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  qaz (得意的飘) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:43:41 2007) 提到:

1.2m.
有钱人太多了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:43:54 2007) 提到:

我在的那个小学好像还好。因为学校挺大的。有几年没有抽过了。

出来的房子也好少。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:44:33 2007) 提到:



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:44:39 2007) 提到:

暖春鬼影



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:45:15 2007) 提到:

赫赫


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:46:23 2007) 提到:

大部分的图表出自于realtors,finantial institutes, banks. Those guys have a
long history to make data look bright. Of course they have different
explanation for each curve than mine. It just like half cup of water on the
table, realtor said that means we have more and more water coming, and I
said there is a hole on the bottom of cup and the cup is leaking!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:46:24 2007) 提到:


就是,真是去看open house才知道有钱人真多。

就和自由市场差不多。 那可是1。1米的房子呀。

晕四了。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:46:30 2007) 提到:

to me this is flat out wrong.
Buy house and buy stock is NOT the same.
如果你认为买房子和买股票都一样,最好不要在弯曲买房子,应该投资AZ那样的地方


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:46:36 2007) 提到:

这样的苗头不存在。现在如果你是first time buyer,要是租都租不起,那就该
卷铺盖扯了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:48:07 2007) 提到:

you must not in bayarea in 2000.
at that time, a 2 bedroom one rent can be  as high as something like 2300...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:48:51 2007) 提到:

露猫脚了...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:49:06 2007) 提到:

haha



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:49:20 2007) 提到:

wa haaaa..............



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:49:42 2007) 提到:

这个原因很简单, 卖掉烂区的房子大家就能赚这么多,1。2米以下可以承受, 所以大
家就抢。
等烂区再降点,卖掉以后就只能负担1.1米以下的乐。1。1米的也没有人抢了。
这恰恰证明了afffordability 是个大问题。





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Fallapart (full house) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:50:01 2007) 提到:

不是租不起,是觉得不值。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:50:20 2007) 提到:

agree


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:50:30 2007) 提到:

I was not talking about fremont. I heard that the price of KB home in
Milpitas has gone up by about 20K, not to mention that the 40k incentive
they used to offer is now gone.

i know nothing about bay area in general, so maybe you were right in general
:)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:51:10 2007) 提到:

赫赫。我认为存在,你认为不存在,没得争了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:51:17 2007) 提到:

why peng me?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:51:25 2007) 提到:

老实说,好像很多人都是first buyer。或者pay cash。

你太低估弯曲的有钱人了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:51:32 2007) 提到:

Can you be more specific? I found many of his figures have sources; and many
sources are respectable.

If you disagree with his figures, can you present competing figures?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:51:39 2007) 提到:

再怎么大概因为房子贵而卷铺盖还是比较少吧. 可以降低你的LIVING STANDARD吗.

当年我们还想过住LIVE-IN,总是能有办法住下来的.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:51:42 2007) 提到:

2300好像是一个BEDROOM的价钱,赫赫


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:51:52 2007) 提到:

why didn't you jump?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:52:27 2007) 提到:

估计同志们都憋坏了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:52:44 2007) 提到:

because if u keep renting, obviously u can figure out how much u will lose
for sure for the nex 1-3 years


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sinnet (思你特--新年好) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:52:50 2007) 提到:

LOL, her english is indeed...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:53:03 2007) 提到:

of course I was here, and FYI the house price is 80% higher, while
the rent is about the same level, if not lower.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:53:14 2007) 提到:

没有什么像样的房子


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:53:40 2007) 提到:

住过live in.的飘过....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:54:20 2007) 提到:

I've asked parents about this. They said: " do you want to put your kids
with people who do drugs?" You can argue most don't do drugs, but they just
don't want to risk that.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:54:31 2007) 提到:

if mortgage + HOA + other fees is $1000 more than your rent(tax adjusted),
which is worth? buy or rent?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:54:48 2007) 提到:

what is live in?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:55:43 2007) 提到:

那是你标准太高了。

当时好几栋4bedrooms的房子。在gomes.大概17,8百尺。

要价90万上下。to me. good enough le...




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Fallapart (full house) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:55:46 2007) 提到:

想买的总比budget 贵一点,买的起的总比想要的烂一点



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:55:48 2007) 提到:

That's individual builders, I know builders in Dublin have 90k decrease
on SFHs, but overall builders will always try to play the game like
their homes are selling fast, it's part of the show.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:56:00 2007) 提到:

no. I don't debate sth following my opponents approach. I don't present the
number just because others did so. to me, looking back what happened in the
past 10 years are good enuf to draw my conclusion. I've been following house
market in bayarea, at least, in fremont, pleasanton tri-valley, and
milpitas san jose area. the numbers are in my head.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:56:26 2007) 提到:

en..

半夜找两流浪汉,随便到msj砸窗户去.每月一砸,不出半年,msj的房价就得降.

//run...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:56:27 2007) 提到:

不会吧,你的condo也涨,没20W也有10W了吧,不信你不能MOVE UP。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:56:51 2007) 提到:

but he's talking about renting being more expensive than buying,
think about it, how much rent would that be?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:57:17 2007) 提到:

80% HIGHER THAN WHAT?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sinnet (思你特--新年好) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:57:28 2007) 提到:

well, people living in cupertino and MSJ areas better pray that these areas
won't enforce "quote system", similar to what is being enforced in the city
of SF.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:57:45 2007) 提到:




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:57:48 2007) 提到:

我的博克有2000年,2005年房价租金比值的对比
如果你不像老包一样认为我的图有credibiliy问题的话,可以看一下



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:58:40 2007) 提到:

说最高价没有意义。当年在San Mateo一个不错的2bed也就1900吧(W/D inside, close
to Foster City)。这房子现在大概还便宜点。周围的房价你去问问。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:59:08 2007) 提到:

what is the hell if the house price is not rising but the cost is 2x rental.
you could buy it later saying 5 years with 20W more saving.
the only priliege you may lose ( cost about 1k) is about painting as you
wish.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:59:13 2007) 提到:

GOMES都是一层的小草屋,我没孩子要急着进MSJ,没必要跟开大VAN的抢那类房子。我
从来没看过那些。MSJ我看的更多是WASHINGTON沿线的,MONTE VIDEO还有MISSION
PALMS。当然,早就PRICE OUT了,01年卖63万的现在LIST98万,3/2 1600吃


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Fallapart (full house) 于 (Tue Feb  6 19:59:58 2007) 提到:

it's not a simple math problem. when people pay $2000 for rent, they feel
they are throwing away $2000,
when they pay $4000 for house, they are nesting/investing .....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:00:37 2007) 提到:

the thing is, you pay more mortgage than your rent(tax adjusted). the only
good thing about buying is you're leveraging to bet on appreciation, and
whether it'll appreciate in 1-3 years is a million dollar question.

to view it in another way, if one rent, one buy, and the renting guy
buys after 3 years, who is better off?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:00:50 2007) 提到:

相比很多当年低价位的SFH,CONDO MOVE UP的速度太慢


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:02:11 2007) 提到:

租不起不等于租金贵于按揭。我当年买房子就是因为我发现租房子我租不起,太亏,用
腿肚子想想就算出来了。当然我不是说现在的形势跟那时完全一样,我只是说有这个苗
头。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:02:17 2007) 提到:

and house now is still cheaper than 20 years ago (even after 20years'
mortage, oh, they have 50 years mortage)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:02:37 2007) 提到:

i agree on this part.

say if you could rent a sfh for 2400/m in msj/pa, why bother buying.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:02:48 2007) 提到:

I have to say to look back what happened in past 10 years only is very very
misleading.  For housing market, you have to put it into a larger image, 20
years, 30 years.  Of course, 100 years will be the best way to see it
clearly.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:03:15 2007) 提到:

AGAIN,请重新理解一下“租不起才买房”的概念


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Fallapart (full house) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:03:33 2007) 提到:

that really depends on housing appreciation ba.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:03:37 2007) 提到:

其实我小时候边上玩的几个小朋友后来都吸毒致死。我觉得老中在美国没有安全感,
所以对这个学校看得尤其重。除了高中以外,我觉得能上上好的就上,上不了也没
必要死撑着挤这种有点过分单一的学校吧?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:03:53 2007) 提到:

ppl live in 小草屋 piao guo....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:03:55 2007) 提到:

2000年?u gotta be kidding me!!! u are not talking about those with waiting
list, are u?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:04:32 2007) 提到:

deal!


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:05:06 2007) 提到:

这个多少有个赌博性质。SO FAR在弯曲,赌买房子的还没亏过,如果你看3年


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:05:27 2007) 提到:

我非常同意你的这个观点,老包
涨的时候SFH比CONDO 涨得快
跌的时候SFH比CONDO 跌得慢

同样的,好区比坏区涨得快, 跌得慢




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:05:53 2007) 提到:

2000 median house price in alameda county: 370k
2006 median house price in alameda county: 600k

I'm not talking about one single city, although it holds true for
many cities.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:06:25 2007) 提到:

I think your observation is more in check with the majority case.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:06:30 2007) 提到:

赫赫,如果那个RENTER EVENTUALLY还是要买(比如金鱼),在弯曲,肯定是那个RENT亏
,而且不是一点半点。这个我毫不怀疑。如果这个人根本就不打算买,RENT是他的生活
STYLE,那就没有什么亏得


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:07:02 2007) 提到:

Two weeks ago in the MSJ area all cars parked on streeet had their windows
smashed. Now I understand maybe the jealous people did it.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:07:17 2007) 提到:

不用看,我2000年也租,所以知道房价涨了房租基本持平。不可能说房租会比房价
还贵。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:07:30 2007) 提到:

hehe. but still don't understand is why the builder i mentioned is just "
individual" but yours is not ? it would be more convincing there are more
examples :)




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:08:18 2007) 提到:

对,你可以看100年,所以我说你那个图表MISLEADING,我根本IGNORE那些30年100年数
据。100年前,哪怕是20年前弯曲都没有什么中国人印度人在BBS上讨论房子,give me
a break


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:09:19 2007) 提到:

91 or 29 is not the worst. actually 2001-2002 is one of the pretty good year
though.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:09:21 2007) 提到:

这个跟房价的讨论毫无关系,你喜欢不喜欢这个社区是一回事,这个社区的房子是涨是
跌是另外一回事


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:09:40 2007) 提到:

I'm not gonna hallucinate like that. If I'm pyaing $4000/month for the
house, I know I'm throwing more than $2000 away to the bank and I can
only hope by taking more debts than renting I'm betting the house to
go higher.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:09:49 2007) 提到:

really? 2 bad, where?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:09:51 2007) 提到:

你说得太好了,现在在湾区买房子就是赌博, 赌博有赢就有输,赌客把把赢,赌场倒
闭了。
贷80万90万去赌博, 我玩不起。我也不觉得硅工们玩的起。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:10:26 2007) 提到:

not yet exclude the property tax + maintenance fee.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:10:46 2007) 提到:

现在对first time buyer来说,不是不想买,而是实在亏啊



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  qaz (得意的飘) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:10:47 2007) 提到:

买房子自住不行么?
干嘛非要赚钱?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:11:07 2007) 提到:


who is 赌场?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:11:23 2007) 提到:

你2000年来的?你什么时候开始租的。现在还有人1000块租2 BEDROOM呢,那些人住里
面N年了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:12:37 2007) 提到:

Facts in your head surely are enough to convince yourself. But if you are in
a debate trying to convince others, how can you do it without presenting
your facts?

What about facts going beyond 10 years? They may be irrelevant to you, but
can help to shed lights on current housing market.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:12:55 2007) 提到:

这个话你可疑跟广大SF版正在看房子的FIRST TIME BUYER说,看你能不能CONVINCE他们
,赫赫


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:13:25 2007) 提到:

老包你太牛了, 一个人战他们两个, 我已经累了.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:13:36 2007) 提到:

这个没办法,我觉得还是有人做事喜欢ALWYAS OUTSMART EVERYBODY ELSE的


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:14:35 2007) 提到:

sure, that's the bet everyone has different takes.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:16:14 2007) 提到:

还好了,我们去租的时候没排队,当然那时候也没太多空房,但$1900当时确实觉得贵。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:17:02 2007) 提到:

you always pay a premium to buy at the moment.
inflation will secure the premium hopefully along the way.

in regarding of how many years, i dont know.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:17:55 2007) 提到:

How about in 3 years the price down 5%? and your rent in these three years
are less than the wasted mortgage? In that case I'll definitely wait and
get the money in an index or money market, and put more equity 3 years later.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:18:09 2007) 提到:

他们很简单,IN DENIAL,这样的我比较适合应战。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:18:22 2007) 提到:

that is true though.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:18:50 2007) 提到:

because builders have their own ecomonics, hard to say



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:19:37 2007) 提到:

You meant "租不划算才买房"; 租不起 means u can't afford it. Period.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:19:43 2007) 提到:

that is super true.
yes. you could buy yahoo in 2000.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:20:18 2007) 提到:

FT,我根本不要CONVINCE金鱼还是NBC,他们根本不会买,买了不等于把自己过去不买
的DECISION彻底推翻打自己耳光么。I don't give a damn about if they are
convinced or not. I only see problem and jump out to counter their opinions
when they try to convince others.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:20:19 2007) 提到:

好学校的房子抗跌不就是agent给新移民洗脑来的?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  qaz (得意的飘) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:21:09 2007) 提到:

难道不是市场决定的?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:21:20 2007) 提到:

至于FUTURE,谁也不知道,过去的数字图表,过去的记忆都可能是扯淡。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:21:21 2007) 提到:

i thought this is true...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:21:23 2007) 提到:

starting 2000. The apt is not those ghetto ones for sure.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:22:00 2007) 提到:

看了还不买本身就是犹豫,这个版也不是没有



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:22:44 2007) 提到:

me t000

and still thinking it is true...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:23:21 2007) 提到:

laobao, how long have you been so positive on housing? No objection on that.
Just curious, why haven't you upgraded up ASAP if that's so sure a case?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:24:33 2007) 提到:

我不认为房市会大跌,但10% correction is not impossible。另外关于rent和house
price,我举的不是特例。数据也肯定支持我,这个没什么可争的。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yourtt (rainmaker) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:24:42 2007) 提到:

one reason i am pretty sure,

since he does not have any kids.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:28:19 2007) 提到:

该买的时候自然会买, 哪有什么打耳光。
现在不是唱衰派太多,说服first time buyer不买的问题。
first time buyer 根本买不起。还要被realtor,房托们忽悠着买烂区的龛豆和汤耗资。
老包你自己都是烂区龛豆的受害者,再说你还没有买在最高点,难道你就想拉几个垫背
的?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  qaz (得意的飘) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:29:27 2007) 提到:

需要买房的人
不会只看钱
还有其他需要



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:29:39 2007) 提到:

No, I think they just want to buy at a lower price.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:30:23 2007) 提到:

为什么老报就是受害者者呢?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:31:18 2007) 提到:

Now you are saying the past is irrelevant and the future is unknown. What is
the point of debating?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:35:15 2007) 提到:

price/rental increase little by little ya.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:39:46 2007) 提到:

Our arguments are based on opposite predications. You are betting on housing
price staying flat, while I standing on the positive side. What makes you
so sure that 5 years later the price will still stay the same? I would say
no simply because of inflation...


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:43:40 2007) 提到:

top % is lower than national average bah.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:58:45 2007) 提到:

please don't modify my words.
I said past is irrelevant when u try to predict the future. that doesn't
mean people can not predict the future. it's still a fun game


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 20:59:53 2007) 提到:

我知道我说的话什么意思,你不理解是你的问题,只能说明你还没经历过那样的
SITUATION


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:00:53 2007) 提到:

赫赫,那这么说,是那些AGENT给新移民发钱了?看看那些房子涨了那么多的新移民,
其实他们一点都不感谢那些AGENT


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:02:08 2007) 提到:

好吧,你是对的。我当时看到的APT是要么2000多,要么没VACANT,我必须提前去
OFFICE帮我同学迅速压上DEPOSITE


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:02:41 2007) 提到:

恩?你的POINT是。。。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:06:12 2007) 提到:

Certainly you know what you meant, but the way you said it caused a lot of
confusion.

I've joked that you must be quite old to know that radio program; I am also
old enough to experience the tech bubble first hand.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:06:57 2007) 提到:

这还不简单,我没钱。但是如果你问我过去几年有没有认为过房子会大跌,从来没有。
不要说我POSITIVE ON HOUSE PRICE,我没有说一直坚信房子会永远涨,我从来没说过
这样的话。
ALL I SAID IS,那些靠挖图表骂AGENT念地震盼萧条来预言唱衰弯曲房事,以达到心里
安慰或者为自己已经意识到自己过去几年已经犯了JUDGEMENTAL错误来寻求理由的,我
认为这种总要OUTSMART OTHERS,BEAT MARKET的想法RIDICULOUSLY NAIVE。
如果有个人说我不买房子,我就喜欢租房子的生活STYLE,我从来不劝这样的。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:09:58 2007) 提到:

在我看来,如果这人需要买自己住而且是长期准备留在弯曲,10%基本可以忽略不计。
至于RENT和HOUSE PRICE,我坚信很多人理解我说的所谓“租不起才被迫买”的感觉,
and all of them now found it was probably one of the best decisions they've
done in their life.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  cher (不需要) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:14:33 2007) 提到:

en, 准备长期自住的,价格差不那么敏感,不是说差10%钱就不肉痛,这么
贵房子,10%肯定痛死,但是价格变化都很难掌握,保不定稳定好久,甚至
低几个月又慢慢涨回去,所以能够拿到这10%的概率并没那么大,就不一定
值得为此等了又等了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:16:27 2007) 提到:

你总是喜欢用你的心计揣摩别人,别人支持买房就是AGENT,别人反对唱衰房事就是拉
别人垫背。也许你人生经历不同,遇到了太多NEGATIVE太多阴暗小人,才致使你总这么
分析别人的话,好像别人都是要骗你。因为你不理解,如果这个人没有什么利益好处在
里面,为什么他神经病似的在这对着屏幕打字跟我辩论啊,本来没有他什么事啊。
这只能说明你看问题太窄,太主观。你这样的心理不适合作出正确的战略决定。因为你
总是把别人都假设跟自己一样。我就喜欢在没有我利益的事情上多说两句。我希望别人
通过我的话看到事情的更多方面,而不是说一定要被我说服。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:17:07 2007) 提到:

ft, who doesn't???


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:19:31 2007) 提到:

因为他想分裂他辩论的对手,把我PAINT成一个高房价的牺牲者受害者,EITHER我加入
他的阵营或者SHUTUP,实在不行就PAINT我成个傻子,自己被骗了还帮骗子打广告。
其实如果我是受害者,我受害的原因多多少少跟金鱼今天IN DENIAL的原因有相似之处
。and that's also why I talk  about house price here again.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:20:23 2007) 提到:

nod. and I said a couple of times, when you find housing market is on
uptrend, it's 10% increase already, unless you believe you can time market
and catch the bottom.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  katiezhang (股票暴跌中) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:21:36 2007) 提到:

well said
gua ji, gua ji...
发信人: BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Tue Feb  6 21:16:27 2007)

你总是喜欢用你的心计揣摩别人,别人支持买房就是AGENT,别人反对唱衰房事就是拉
别人垫背。也许你人生经历不同,遇到了太多NEGATIVE太多阴暗小人,才致使你总这么
分析别人的话,好像别人都是要骗你。因为你不理解,如果这个人没有什么利益好处在
里面,为什么他神经病似的在这对着屏幕打字跟我辩论啊,本来没有他什么事啊。
这只能说明你看问题太窄,太主观。你这样的心理不适合作出正确的战略决定。因为你
总是把别人都假设跟自己一样。我就喜欢在没有我利益的事情上多说两句。我希望别人
通过我的话看到事情的更多方面,而不是说一定要被我说服。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:23:03 2007) 提到:

HOUSE PRICE DOWN 5%?哪怕是10%,我都会觉得3年前还是应该买。值得,划算
这也就是为什么我认为买房子和股票不同,房子你住在里面,除非有些人认为哪怕房子
DOWN一天他就坐镇镇站彻夜难眠。。。这个要看人的RISK TOLERANCE。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:24:23 2007) 提到:

吃饱了帕斯塔,接着灌。

我和你一样,老包,没有足够的钱。 我也不想花50万买烂区的龛豆,70万买烂区的SFH.
大多数first time buyer就是没有钱。事实就是这么简单。
市场就在这里摆着,唱衰不是它变衰的原因。蒙人。蒙得了一时,蒙不了一世。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:28:50 2007) 提到:

look, that's my style of watering. I am NOT writing a spec or thesis here to
defend stuff. I water for fun and I want people to understand my point in a
fun way. if you are looking for bugs in my statement, u can find plenty,
and u should just ignore that statement of mine. I guess a lot of people
actually just ignore my posts for that reason. when i talk sth like “因为租
不起才被迫买“, please understand it in the alternative way. it's figure of
speech not price comparision.
about the second part, 我认为TECH BUBBLE的时候你没在HOUSE HUNTING


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:29:23 2007) 提到:

不要搞人身攻击
辩论房价走势和人身攻击没有必然的联系
动不动就人身攻击, 只能说明你理屈词穷



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:31:27 2007) 提到:

Well said.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:33:26 2007) 提到:

赫赫。你看,我哪里人身攻击你了?你倒是不理屈词穷,因为实在没词儿了你还可以说
别人人身攻击你。
我倒是觉得我总能击到你的SPOT,赫赫


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:34:19 2007) 提到:

nobody is talking about if should have bought 3 years ago. ppl are talking
about if need buy now.
This is the big Difference.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:34:30 2007) 提到:

金雨,偶觉得玄
控制房价的因素太多了,AGENT吹牛什么的也就影响一栋两栋
这几年的大泡泡不是那么简单吹起来的
而且人民政府从来都是劫胆小济胆大的,他们最希望胆大的能挺过去
RENT慢慢涨,工资慢慢涨,最后填平这个窟窿的可能很大
当然这样的结果,没房子的和有投资房的都不大好过



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:35:17 2007) 提到:




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:36:20 2007) 提到:

Exactly! the time I bought house, the rent was
a little more expensive than my mortgage payment.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:38:22 2007) 提到:

别总说你和我一样,我和你一样的,我跟你不一样,PLEASE READ MY LIPS,不--一--样
HOHO,你看到的FIRST TIME BUYER和我看到的大概不同,我看到的FIRST TIME BUYER相
当有钱。。。
看到你和我不同了吧,我从来不想号召别人或者拉拢别人,好像你是FIRST TIME BUYER
的代言人,好像你特在乎别的FIRST TIME BUYER的荷包,为了他们好似的。这个也很可笑



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:39:16 2007) 提到:

NBC这么问我了,我当然要回头看3年,往FUTURE看三年?那个问题本身就不存在


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:39:55 2007) 提到:

经历这个大泡沫,这事短期估计看不到了
没等到那个点价格早就抬起来了
为了救经济,民工们过着民工的生活,也算活得其所,呵呵



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:40:03 2007) 提到:

so called soft-landing.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:40:28 2007) 提到:

熟女/男啊



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:41:16 2007) 提到:

sure. you can see, yeah, bought it 3 year ago. :-)
anyway,no argue on this topic la. hehe. when are we going to have lunch. :-)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:41:38 2007) 提到:

If you believe, there is a bug inflation ahead,
you will see that day pretty soon, maybe just in
3-5 years.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:42:41 2007) 提到:

given the house price stays flat or goes down.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:45:39 2007) 提到:

laobao du kuai triple le.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:46:25 2007) 提到:

Boxter actually have quite a few valid points such as "现在在湾区买房子就是
赌博". I just feel s/he is a little mean to goldenrain //run



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:47:34 2007) 提到:

哈哈,如何击倒我的spot, 通过以小人之心度君子之腑的方式?
唱衰的就是阴谋?心里阴暗?被小人骗得次数太多?自以为比别人都聪明?要beat
market?

你的帽子工厂很高产. 哈哈哈哈.
不管什么原因你生产这些帽子, 市场不会因为这些帽子很继续疯长, 现在价格一天天下
跌, 从外围的中谷,北湾,继而罗毅,一天天现在到北谷,苗必答,福瑞梦,南圣何夕,爱窝
哥润,
接下来这些好区也开始撑不住的时候,就算你生产再多的帽子也不也不顶用娄





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:50:55 2007) 提到:

在弯曲买房子一直是赌博,至少我看的这些年,都是一直有人说要跌了要跌了别买了别
买了,结果是谁最后都要买。
真正不买房子的人根本也不会去烟酒什么方式,老老实实住APT。
唱衰没有关系,但得看怎么唱衰,不能总东部东因为别人不唱衰就说别人是AGENT,别
人是蒙你。我不唱衰房子就被金鱼打成了坚定的保房派,这有什么意思嘛。我知道某个
东西好但买不起,步一定我就一定要说那个东西一定烂一定降价啊。他总要把别人的心
理想得跟他一样,这个对于我来说就是INSULTING



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:51:02 2007) 提到:

现在价格一天天下跌.

which area ( i mean small one, like msj, sunnyvale cupertino high etc) did
you see this happening?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:52:11 2007) 提到:

LOL,现在价格一天天下跌?你可以申请残爬了,整个一盲人啊


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:53:32 2007) 提到:

BTW,小人之心度君子之腑这话好像我刚才说你更合适些?我忧郁了一下,最后没说你
这词儿是怕你咬我PA你是小人,结果你还是咬我PA你,赫赫


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:55:53 2007) 提到:

in my place, last sept, oct and nov. the price dipped around 5%. however,
yesterday, i saw an investment house listed for almost half year get sold. i
always wonder why don't they buy it las oct when price dip? 


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:56:29 2007) 提到:

bushi shuo le ma, zong you 1 tian hui dao msj,sunnyvale,cupertino.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:56:35 2007) 提到:

his-dream area


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  cher (不需要) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:57:07 2007) 提到:

买涨不买跌吧,hehe, 其实是有道理的strategy, 虽然不能保证你买到
最优价格,但是算最优策略了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Tue Feb  6 21:58:35 2007) 提到:

这就说明,买房子大军的TIMING是因为需要买房子,而不是要CATCH BOTTOM


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:00:04 2007) 提到:

that is what i said ya.  but i don't know what goldenrain's last comment is
fact or not. I like to see fact, not emotional argument. from cisco's
earning, i don't see house price drop this year, especially entry level, or
locally best places. no sure next year though.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:00:07 2007) 提到:

ppl buy house in up trend ya.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:06:39 2007) 提到:

house price drops in Sac/Fairfield in early 2006-->drops in Fremont/Santa
Clara
in late 2006-->drops in Sunnyvale, Cupertino, MSJ in the future ya.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:07:42 2007) 提到:

i can't agree. entry price is very important. buy house is trickies than buy
stock in the sense that buying stock you can diversify and buy average of a
period. buying house, you can't.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:09:59 2007) 提到:

let us see. so far, drops in south bay is hard to say, but up space is not
high too.

did you watch the mission terrace condo?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:10:25 2007) 提到:

agree
buy-into-uptrend is more or less a stock term
if buy to live, entyr price is important than the short term trend



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:10:37 2007) 提到:

总结一下:
房地产的大周期说明全美国的房价飙升的10年已经过去,不管是软着陆还是硬着陆,全美
的房价3-5内要么持平要么下跌.
硅谷的房价从2000年以来完全是投机在支撑
从硅谷房价和全国房价的比值,硅谷房价和租金的比值,硅谷房价和收入的比值, 加州房
地产代理的人数都可以看出2006年夏天就是这个周期的顶点,下跌是不可避免的,调整的
幅度会很大, 价格会回归2000-2002 的水平,下跌的时间最乐观的估计要3-5年, 悲观的
估计10年以上.






☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:12:57 2007) 提到:




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:13:04 2007) 提到:

hehe. glad you agree. what do you think buying a locally best place with a
small premium stratgy in buying house?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:14:05 2007) 提到:

why not? did you have any information of the pricing. i recall last year you
went to moreland ya.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  cher (不需要) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:14:43 2007) 提到:

买涨不买跌这个策略是在这样一个假设的前提下的:未来曲线是单调跌,
然后单调涨,跌多久跌多少和涨多快是变量。这样买涨不买跌的确是很好
的策略,保证了永远只比最低价高一点而已,如果引进看涨幅度的filter,
就是说涨幅达到某个量才下手,还能把假设改更宽松些:有小曲线调制过
的跌+涨.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:20:42 2007) 提到:

there is how i look at it. may not right.

买涨不买跌, probably works in a limited degree in stock market. there is
people doing momentum trading. but don't forget in house market, you have a
big mortgage. (talking the house price here, not in Dallas, where you can
pay down a house) if 跌 a small percentage, your down payment or (equity) is
goine le. you want and probably need to hold for a long time, thus entry
price very important. in fact, i sort of agree that goldenrain has a point
to wait till the market cools down. however, there are also substantial risk
there too. anyway, it is hard.

time for supper le. originally did not want to water this keng, just do some
real stuff de. magic keng ya.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:30:04 2007) 提到:

:我就喜欢在没有我利益的事情上多说两句。我希望别人
:通过我的话看到事情的更多方面,而不是说一定要被我说服。

这个要zan 一下.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:46:07 2007) 提到:

你这个联接相当好,很多数据很有意义.
硅谷的人口在这个资料里确实是下降的,虽然2004-2006有增长,但是还没有填上2000-
2004的大窟窿.现在人口比2000年还是少一点.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 22:53:51 2007) 提到:




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Tue Feb  6 23:04:06 2007) 提到:

The major influx starts from 06, which is not yet shown here. But the new
blood won't be in house market until a few years later.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 23:17:04 2007) 提到:

did you seriously read that article?

Each year's NET-INCREASE is positive, since 2000.
The bar is net-increase, not population itself.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Tue Feb  6 23:19:05 2007) 提到:

though from 2000 to 2005, more people migrate out than migrate in,
but adding up the natural increase, the net-increase is still positive,
every year.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Tue Feb  6 23:21:14 2007) 提到:

You are right. I made a mistake about net increasing or total population.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Tue Feb  6 23:30:57 2007) 提到:

谁说的.从上个周末到现在就有三个NEW BLOOD要买房了.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Tue Feb  6 23:55:57 2007) 提到:

I am no expert....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Wed Feb  7 00:03:24 2007) 提到:

家里有钱的还是少数。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Wed Feb  7 00:10:25 2007) 提到:

nod,但是架不住工资高股票还涨。双职工住一年APT就存下好几万。前几年没买房的
FTB一出手就是20%downpay



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Wed Feb  7 00:13:58 2007) 提到:

It would take single-income at least 3 years to come up with 20% downpay bah
. And usually they need to replace old cars or buy 2nd car.
Double-income usually aims higher, so still 2.5+ years I guess?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Wed Feb  7 00:17:06 2007) 提到:

10% DP is enough,

so far, nobody I know, bought house with 20% down, all 10%.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Wed Feb  7 00:19:11 2007) 提到:

Really? I though most asians will put 20% down. I still remember you advised
ppl to put 20% down.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Wed Feb  7 00:21:53 2007) 提到:

not too sure nowadays, the HELOC used to be around 4% and tax deductible,
no point to put 20% down.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 00:23:04 2007) 提到:

if you can borrow them all out, that's like 0 down



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Wed Feb  7 00:24:27 2007) 提到:

they don't allow you to do that.
Otherwise, it just like someone give you free money.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 00:49:44 2007) 提到:

问题是五年已经涨了百分之七八十以后,涨速已经趋于0,泡掉inflation就是负数
的现在,是等三年再买还是马上就买,是可以算算的。

下面计算是assume MSJ一个90w的房子,craigslist上租$2,500。如果假设三年房租
每年涨百分之五,房价每年涨百分之三的话,基本上这三年买或者租是持平的,租
房略省五千。

但如果房价这三年都是0增长,就是说三年以后还是90w,那么这三年租房会省将近
9万块!换句话说,如果房价不涨,房租要涨到$4,750才能持平。

也就是说,如果你bet这三年房价基本持平的话,买房确实不划算,更何况真正租
也不用租那么贵的,而且灵活。如果三年我能省10w税后cash,比进个小公司混
option也不差,我何必赶着堵枪眼呢?

当然,如果你bet这三年房价还会每年涨百分之三,或者说道2010年这个house就
到1m,那么现在买是对的,因为到时候再买就晚了。很多人也是这么想这么做的。
当然,1m house sustain不易是大家都知道地。

赌博的时候知道什么at stake就够了,没有绝对对错。

Information About Your Current Rental Situation
Period Over Which Comparison is to Be Made             3 years
Current Monthly Rent           $2,500
Estimated Percent Increase in Rent per Year            5.00% per year
Monthly Rental Insurance               $0 per month
Information About You and the Home You Wish to Buy
Estimated Property Appreciation Rate           3.00% per year
Income Tax Bracket             27%
Pre-tax Rate of Interest on Savings            5.00%
After-tax Rate of Interest on Savings          3.65%
Monthly Real Estate Taxes              $938 per month
Estimated Percent Increase in Real Estate Taxes per Year               0.00
% per year
Monthly Home Owners Insurance          $150 per month
Monthly Home Owners Dues               $100 per month
Loan Information
Purchase Price                 $900,000
Down Payment           $90,000
Loan Amount            $810,000
Interest Rate          6.500%
Loan Term (in years)           30 years
Monthly Mortgage Payment               $5,119.76
Monthly Mortgage Insurance Payments            $351.00
Loan Balance Reaches 80% of Appreciated Value in Month                 35
Points                 1.00%
Other Closing Costs            $2,000
Estimated Sale Costs as a Percent of Sale Price                0.00%
Results - Assuming a 3 Year Holding Period      Rent    Buy
Cost of Rent   $99,669         
Cost of Renters Insurance      $0      
Cost of Lost Interest on Down Payment          $10,398
Cost of Points Net of Tax Savings              $6,644
Cost of Other Upfront Charges          $2,231
Cost of Monthly Mortgage Payments              $194,469
Cost of Monthly Mortgage Insurance Premiums            $12,629
Cost of Homeowners Insurance           $5,698
Cost of Homeowners Dues                $3,798
Cost of Property Taxes                 $35,629
Costs of Sale          $0
Less: Tax Savings on Mortgage Interest                 $44,254
Less: Tax Savings on Real Estate Taxes                 $9,620
Less: Increase in Property Value               $83,454
Less: Reduction in Loan Balance                $29,021
Equals - Net Cost      $99,669         $105,147
Conclusions
The Cost of Buying Exceeds the Cost of Renting by:     $5,479
Renting is the Better Choice as Long as Your Current Monthly Rent is Less
Than:        $2,637



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 00:52:02 2007) 提到:

另外,如果house price down 10% in 3 years, 那么省的钱(>15w)可以在德州退休了。
:)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:00:57 2007) 提到:

哪来的百分只七八十呀.大部分就百分子五十左右.
MSJ九十万出阻的房子一工才几个呀,你得保证你老能租到才行啊.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:01:54 2007) 提到:

也可能长10%,赚的钱去德洲退休啊.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:06:08 2007) 提到:

现在就有租,我的数字都是保守的。那个$2500的要买不止90ww



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:07:11 2007) 提到:

所以看你如何估计,然后看现实数字如何走了。老包说如果down 10%也应该买,我只是
说从计算来看这不make sense



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:14:49 2007) 提到:

nod, 而且很多房子是因为涨得超过免税额,为了避税拿出来出租,只租一年就卖了。
总不能每年搬次家吧?对于小孩子来说,稳定和对家的回忆是很珍贵美好的



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:15:17 2007) 提到:

是有一两个租的呀.你不劝大家都去阻嘛,一两套哪满足得了呀.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:16:31 2007) 提到:

应该是有DOWN 10%的"可能"也要买吧.要是都知道要DOWN EXACTLY 10%,大家都看着它
到那再买了.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:18:34 2007) 提到:

MSJ就是个例子,Sunnyvale, Fremont行不?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:22:15 2007) 提到:

不是说了么?涨幅已经趋于0了,每个人对这个涨跌都有个判断。如果持平的可能性是
80%,涨5%跌5%可能性各10%,那当然等三年省10万的可能性大多了。你说现在就买,
不会亏,但三年以后再买更不亏,而且如果概率很大的话,in the long run you
earn 10w less, 不是很简单么?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:25:03 2007) 提到:

MSJ有盯MSJ房子的盯着,SUNNYVALE有盯SUNNYVALE房子的盯着.哪个CITY供出租的房子都
只能满足要住房子的零头而已呀.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:28:52 2007) 提到:

我那个计算是给短期省钱长期买房用的,为了公平我给算得是同样的house,其实
住个条件好点的apt省得更多。目的就是等过这个price peak来入市。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:34:41 2007) 提到:

你这假设就不成立. 5%多小你不知道呀?没见MSJ一个月就转了10%+了?MARKET差的时候很
容易就NEGOCIATE一个5%DEAL,强的时候一下就得OUTBID 5%,10%呀.有几个人能正好在
要上升的时候买啊.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:40:00 2007) 提到:

我三年多前也是这么算的,不过我是用来反驳那些买房肯定赚的观点的.结果算着算着就
亏了十来万.555.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:44:12 2007) 提到:

所以每人对这个估计不同,你老盯着MSJ干吗?你也知道大部分地区跌个5%很正常。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:44:52 2007) 提到:

3 years, only 10w?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:48:45 2007) 提到:

我们这已经跌了10%了.555


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:50:45 2007) 提到:

也没那么多,计算是根据90w的房子。而且上涨3%你就赚了。只赚不赔已经
很好乐。如果我三年后买房了真赚了十万,也是今天被price out没有其他
选择。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:52:46 2007) 提到:

然后我入场了,最高赚到十万,现在赚五万.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  papercat (tiger) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:54:27 2007) 提到:

where?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:55:01 2007) 提到:

您老这个算法有问题的,您老晚三年买,就比人家完三年payoff,实际上的
payment是一样的。如果您老prepay,现在的低利率不合算。

当然若您老没存够Down Pay,则是另一回事,显然要先存够Down Pay,这跟
是否涨跌没多大关系。

如果您老最终还是要买房子的话,俺老人家看不出有啥道理。除非您老能确定
未来三年一定跌。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:56:53 2007) 提到:

会回去的,而且你随便卖点option就全回来了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:58:18 2007) 提到:

so, total difference is 15-20w
good


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 01:59:27 2007) 提到:

SUNNYVALE,SANTA CLARA的一般学区离高点都跌了10%左右啊.
比如去年底买DANBURY的TOWNHOUSE,基本跟2005.1买差不多.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 02:02:13 2007) 提到:

没上市,卖不掉呀.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 02:06:10 2007) 提到:

Who pays off the house to sell it? When you sell it, isn't the price
the same? Then minus the equity you have on the house?

I rent for 3 years and saved 8w more than I buy right now(net the
equity I put in 3 yrs). Then when I buy the house at the same price
3 yrs later, dont I have 8w more in cash/equity position? And I
can put down the money to lower the mortgage.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 02:06:45 2007) 提到:

你也知道现在5-10% down基本是norm,没人攒够20%再买



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Wed Feb  7 02:13:39 2007) 提到:




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Wed Feb  7 02:17:16 2007) 提到:

一般是10%吧,5% down 利率上太亏。

俺知道不少是有20%down也放10%。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 02:19:11 2007) 提到:

Buying early doesn't mean your equity is higher. The calculation already
shows, the 3 years you buy vs I rent, you build a little equity, while
I save some mortgage, the difference is let's say 8w. ThenI buy exact
same house with exact same price,15 years later, I only paid 12 years
mortgage, but nobody cares, the house sells for the same price and
the only thing matters is the equity I have.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Wed Feb  7 02:21:57 2007) 提到:

why don't you also consider rent will hike? It's been higher than last year.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 02:22:40 2007) 提到:

it's all in that calulator, I assumed 5% hike. also you should know
renting is flexible



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Wed Feb  7 02:30:46 2007) 提到:

it's true you build little equity in the first 3 years.
But given the same loan amount, the first 3 years, you
need spend as everyone does. You just make your term
longer than the other one 3 years.

When is right time portion of down payment? Aggressive
guy thinks 10%, conservative guy thinks 20%, the ideal
down payment is between 10% to 20%. You save a lot down
payment, doesn't mean it is necessary. Just like people
probably don't want to pre-pay their mortgage, due to
the low interest rate.

Not to mention, the other guy enjoy houses 3 more
years than you.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 02:36:20 2007) 提到:

I built more equity in the first 3 years, and I put that down
to lower my mortgage more than I can if buying 3 yrs earlier.

And to make it more real, say I hold off buying a crappy
SFH for 80w for 3 yrs and then 8 yrs later I will upgrade
to MSJ. Then we're comparing the 6th, 8th and 9th year's
mortage with the rental of the 1st, 2nd 3rd year, that's
fair enuf right? the savings won't be off too much the
figure.

Also the 3 yrs we assume we rent comparable house, not apt,
else the rent will be even cheaper.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Wed Feb  7 02:41:25 2007) 提到:

that's the same as you save down payment.
It is not always the more down payment, the better.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 02:42:25 2007) 提到:

sure, there's the rate factor. We'll see how the rate and
price go. It could be price dip a bit, rate up a bit, in
3 yrs.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fuzzymemory (遗忘的记忆) 于 (Wed Feb  7 03:09:32 2007) 提到:

condo不是不保值吗?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Wed Feb  7 12:47:41 2007) 提到:

Thanks. But if you read carefully, you'll understand that every year there
is increase (during 2000-2004, there is negative immigration, but growth due
to birth compensated that). I think you misread the growth amount as the
total amount: the growth amount in 2006 is still lower than in 2000.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:09:31 2007) 提到:

Sorry, others have already figured this out long ago.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:31:28 2007) 提到:

金鱼,你小看老包了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  qaz (得意的飘) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:34:38 2007) 提到:

对,我觉得老包正在酝酿
一定会大爆发
直接上1.2m MSJ



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:34:57 2007) 提到:

en, any time bah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:36:23 2007) 提到:

这个我一定得苟同一下了。我看到的first time buyer很多相当的有钱。
其实也不是赚了什么横财,就是两口子工作几年。工资股票挣的。

很多都是上来就买90万的房子。咱们中国人攒钱的本事。我真的是很佩服的




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:37:07 2007) 提到:

//上


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:37:20 2007) 提到:

en...?
what is bug inflation?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:37:30 2007) 提到:

en, make sure you get a 3 car garage one. :)


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:40:43 2007) 提到:

这个我一直=都想知道呀。大家去年年低好像在集体睡觉,新年的钟声敲向后就集体开
始买房。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:41:03 2007) 提到:

not many listings on market?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:41:30 2007) 提到:

恩,实在不行把前厅改成GARAGE,母哈哈哈


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:41:53 2007) 提到:

ft. //stamp. rich enough to waste the $$.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:42:00 2007) 提到:

有道理.跟中国同胞竞争可怕啊.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:43:12 2007) 提到:

我不认为他真的知道那里跌了。他的理论都来自图表。

看他的一些贴子就知道。

他肯定没有真的去follow市场.
鄙视我自己房子都买完了,还帮朋友看。





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:45:09 2007) 提到:

终于又看到大房坑,我很高兴:)
我也以小人之心度君子之腹一下,为什么去年买房的first time buyer不来发言呢?
tonyxu的房子买在绝对的低点了。劳保自己说他鼓励别人死撑,但是他自己不会。
其实我的观点是:
1。 没有在2000年买房,很亏。但是我2001才来:)
2.  在硅谷,双职工攒钱2年,的确就可以买房了。
3。 我同意房子不会涨了,因为太贵了,但是在弯曲可能也很难跌,因为有钱人太多了。
4。 高薪工作是有很大可能消失的:(


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:45:18 2007) 提到:

我记得你说你准备09年买来着,因为那时候会大跌。

还有你也说07年会大跌来者。我也没有看见。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:45:23 2007) 提到:

乖乖,又来了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:47:13 2007) 提到:

不同意4
1也不对,2001年是最好的时机



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:49:15 2007) 提到:

MSJ现在好像基本上没有90w的房子
//run



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:50:07 2007) 提到:

我没孤立别人死撑吧,我不反对就是了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:50:38 2007) 提到:

说说你为什么不喜欢SC?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:51:00 2007) 提到:

//papaya
he doesn't have to yah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:51:30 2007) 提到:

ft
papaya me



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:53:33 2007) 提到:

nod nod.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:53:50 2007) 提到:

好像国内知青再出国插队一样,当初我撑过一阵了,好不容易现在松快了,再回去撑,
不甘心啊。我还想炒股票呢。。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:55:07 2007) 提到:


其实有多少并不重要,关键是有一个好的就行压。

现在的也很少呀


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:55:19 2007) 提到:

我因为不撑,搞得现金放在手里难受,//润



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:55:51 2007) 提到:

you are fv? //stamp



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:56:23 2007) 提到:

//stamp!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:56:35 2007) 提到:




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:57:31 2007) 提到:

对,所以一定要撑一次,晚生不如早生,一?不对,是晚撑不如早撑,


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:57:52 2007) 提到:

//stamp



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  qaz (得意的飘) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:58:05 2007) 提到:

那你去参考fv的豆腐坑



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:58:07 2007) 提到:

严厉打击假冒产品



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Wed Feb  7 13:58:18 2007) 提到:

你是谁?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  killernight (阿Q的红卫兵有意思!) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:02:23 2007) 提到:




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  killernight (阿Q的红卫兵有意思!) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:02:51 2007) 提到:

first time...


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:04:05 2007) 提到:


为啥。

偶就不能替阴险的地主们说说话?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:04:41 2007) 提到:

你都买了N个了。。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:05:02 2007) 提到:

oh, did not noticed
//blush


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:05:50 2007) 提到:

呵呵。。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:06:50 2007) 提到:

我胆子小, HSBC 6%我就跳了。。。唔唔唔



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:07:27 2007) 提到:

//stamp!
ppl have no $$ to jump the 6% sadly floating by.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:08:12 2007) 提到:

我亏了,原来在里面的钱不算啊,5555


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:10:24 2007) 提到:

ING played this trick before



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:11:10 2007) 提到:

恩,讨厌讨厌


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:16:28 2007) 提到:

when? still have it?
CD? for how long?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:17:08 2007) 提到:

//stamp
extra $$ for HSBC


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:17:11 2007) 提到:

3 months or so
for new money only tho




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:18:02 2007) 提到:

ONLINE SAVING, 只到4月底,估计四月底后他们也要降利息了,现在是5。05,CITI已
经降了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:19:44 2007) 提到:

Fed不降,他们也不会降把



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:21:12 2007) 提到:

eloan saving 5.25%
就是他们的online system太烂。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:21:55 2007) 提到:

amtrust 5.30



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:22:19 2007) 提到:

i SEE.  I nevered used the them before. may have a try.
thanks.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:23:01 2007) 提到:

if u don't have an account with them, don't bother lah, it takes quite a
while (2-3 weeks) to open the account.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:23:13 2007) 提到:

eloan烂的我已经不敢用了,system老down

先跳HSBC, 4月以后再说



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:23:25 2007) 提到:

那为什么CITI降,CITI降了他们也可以降啊


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:23:55 2007) 提到:

OH, I see, thanks.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:24:22 2007) 提到:

citi plays dirty... I am transferring out



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:25:07 2007) 提到:

据传有人笑话katie的英文



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:26:34 2007) 提到:

haha....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:26:51 2007) 提到:

其实他LG来BBS上,专挑英文帖子KG,很快就可以找到她的



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:27:20 2007) 提到:

据说katie是恐龙脸皮,不在乎。哇哈哈



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:28:27 2007) 提到:


katie LG 那个烂英语,根本就看不懂英文. 嘎,嘎



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:30:53 2007) 提到:

能把这个坑灌到1000么?
其实现在真是关键时刻,我觉得3月是个坎,如果价格反扑成功了,去年年底没有买的
就亏了。
如果下跌了,就要至少10万。
不过现实的可能是,不涨不跌,大家就是普通工作,还是不会买。5-10年后,通货膨胀
和工资上涨了,房子价格继续大幅上涨。
现在很多first time buyer就买不起。house owner也换不起。最着急的是agents和小
孩要上学,想买大房子享受的,只能去其他州了:)


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:31:45 2007) 提到:

ING also very low now




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:32:54 2007) 提到:

看来fanrf LP还得等4年,然后在那个5-10年后大涨之前再考虑买房子



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:32:57 2007) 提到:

10年以后MSJ涨到2m?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:34:09 2007) 提到:

嗯,要能把这个坑灌到1000, 现在真是关键时刻



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:34:28 2007) 提到:

借您的吉言

//阴险的MSJ地主day dreaming着飘过



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:35:12 2007) 提到:

那我是不是就可以退休了?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:36:32 2007) 提到:

我觉得12点是个坎



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:37:09 2007) 提到:

u know her LG well? wow!!!!


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:37:56 2007) 提到:

count++



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:38:23 2007) 提到:

acturally we share one. ga, ga....
//mao..

help digging this hole deeper and deeper.
zhuan mao keng....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:38:25 2007) 提到:

u know ucla's LG well? LOL!!!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:38:50 2007) 提到:

blogcity的文档好小资啊,和ICON的FBI形象不配.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:38:54 2007) 提到:

LOL


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:39:07 2007) 提到:

:) 这不叫阴险吧。阴险的是盼地震的。要是我有房我也不希望跌阿。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:39:35 2007) 提到:

你现在就可以退休了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:39:51 2007) 提到:

even without house, earthquake is not a good thing yah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:40:30 2007) 提到:

争取灌到一千,
其实,现在first time buyer可以买烂区的龛豆和汤耗资
move up 可以买好区的烂4b2b.

等到烂区的价格再跌一点, move up 的人们也没不起好区的4B2B的时候, 价格打滑梯就
正式开始了. 我预计就在春暖草黄的时候





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:40:38 2007) 提到:

搏出位阿,我服了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:42:35 2007) 提到:

好区就那么一点,价格要降也是小幅徘徊,滑梯的话大家先考虑工作安全吧。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:43:32 2007) 提到:

为啥无论啥房子到您这儿都是烂房子压?

偶家房子比我年级还大,欧住这也挺好的



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:43:51 2007) 提到:

//stamp



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yiran2006 (亦然) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:44:27 2007) 提到:

amazing ya....  睡了一觉,这个坑还在.....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:45:00 2007) 提到:

normal ba
i am ganna say that if it still here tomorrow morning




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:45:44 2007) 提到:

继续睡。。。。。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:46:06 2007) 提到:

每年好区的房子一共就那么点儿。偶就不信还能找不到这么几个有钱人?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:46:23 2007) 提到:

if schools continue to have lotteries, good school district will not be that
attractive lah. :(



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:46:52 2007) 提到:

but if u pay the premium price, can't make sure kids can go to the schools,
why bother yah? :(



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:48:00 2007) 提到:

i start to think that private school is not a bad idea
in bay area

not much expensive than owning a house anyway



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:48:49 2007) 提到:

good private school would be hard to get in too bah.
also, for elementry, u can't live/work too far from school.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:51:52 2007) 提到:

其实,我也觉得没必要,可是这种敏感话题,相信很多人喜欢:)
另外,有时候自己会问一些自己认为是key factor的问题:
比如:绿卡,是不是first time buyer,什么时候买的,一般都没有回答。当然,劳保
又要说我先入为主了,也许我本质上是唱跌派,毕竟作为first time buyer,咱也要有
原则不是:)


发信人: lingsu (树叶会啊会阿), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 14:45:00 2007), 转信

normal ba
i am ganna say that if it still here tomorrow morning




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:52:44 2007) 提到:

地震不用盼,早晚会来的,是自然规律.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:52:57 2007) 提到:

that's why u need to buy PA ya, no matther what school, it's good. forget
about monte vista ba. haha



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:53:21 2007) 提到:

qishi i agree with u

heehee

i am pessimistic all the time on all topics, basically
born with gene lah, no method




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:53:27 2007) 提到:

nod, especially one kid.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:54:37 2007) 提到:

精英们的思维方式跟常人不同



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:54:49 2007) 提到:

茅坑?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:54:59 2007) 提到:

劳保最鄙视你这种自己为是first time buyer 代言人的人. :-).




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:55:36 2007) 提到:

我觉得你特神。有次你发长贴唱衰,
我和mm说:看来湾区要地震,金鱼的预言才能首先
当天berkeley就发了4.x级的地震



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:55:41 2007) 提到:

en? I just read from PM that you have lotto for schools as well yah?
if all schools are good, why your home school can't guarrantee a space for
you?


I need to call our homeschool to see how their regitration going later this
week. :(



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:56:21 2007) 提到:

出来看成功人士



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:56:41 2007) 提到:

b4n, new cop.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:56:48 2007) 提到:

美女都这样



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:56:57 2007) 提到:

lottery for alternative school ya. if she cannot get in the homeschool, she
will go to another neighborhood school, still a good school just a little
bit far la.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:57:35 2007) 提到:

that's the same case for cupertino yah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:57:39 2007) 提到:

不是他神,是你神,你千万别跟mm再说话了,要说也要说好听得



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:58:05 2007) 提到:

其实他是对的.
我是first time buyer里面没钱,还幻想房子跌价的一小撮.不能代表别人,只能坚持自
己的原则了.
其实很多人和我不一样,人家敢于买贵的,享受好的,不光只是房子:)

发信人: goldenrain (金雨), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 14:54:59 2007)

劳保最鄙视你这种自己为是first time buyer 代言人的人. :-).




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:58:21 2007) 提到:

b4 back, 成功人士每日一拜



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:58:51 2007) 提到:

nbc= New Bbs Cop



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (nbc) 于 (Wed Feb  7 14:59:41 2007) 提到:

zan, 拜你所赐,我就改这个昵称了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:00:08 2007) 提到:

你这些鬼话,你LP都信了?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:01:06 2007) 提到:

其实很多地主也盼着地震呢,尤其是老地主。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:01:13 2007) 提到:

你是不是那个泡麻油啊



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:01:53 2007) 提到:

en, I have about 24w home insurance, add 10w, good enough for a 2000sqft new
home lah. //dreaming


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (New BBS Cop) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:02:02 2007) 提到:

泡你个头。who 泡 who啊



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:02:15 2007) 提到:

谢谢鼓励, 不是我神.
就像老包说的,我只不过是坐在电梯的那个人
看到4,8的灯亮着, 等快到4楼的时候,
我说:要停了,开门,
电梯停了,门开了,
我说:门要关了,要上了,
电梯关了门,接着向上走.

当然可能没到四楼就停电了,不会向上走了
也可能没到四楼就地震了,楼都塌了,更不会向上走了

不过,停在四楼,开门关门,在向上走的概率是很大的.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:02:22 2007) 提到:

zan坚持原则!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:02:34 2007) 提到:

她信..................她自己

发信人: blogcity (live, love, hope), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 15:00:08 2007)

你这些鬼话,你LP都信了?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (New BBS Cop) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:02:41 2007) 提到:

24+10=34



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:02:42 2007) 提到:

u know, u really should consider ur wife's opinion too

even if you don't believe it is financially sound,
to make her happy, u should do it from time to time.
.. //me very tang seng a





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:03:19 2007) 提到:

only 24w home insurance?

why so low?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:03:37 2007) 提到:

//stamp



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:03:48 2007) 提到:

你HI那么低啊?我的小烂房子都保了18w呢
看来你们那里地皮太值钱了。
你extended是多少?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:03:50 2007) 提到:

small house yah. :(



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:03:56 2007) 提到:

why? :(




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:04:44 2007) 提到:

my house is smaller than yours bah.
what is extended?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:04:54 2007) 提到:

show off mo fan lg yah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:05:22 2007) 提到:

真是这样的话,你其实已经很神了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:05:43 2007) 提到:

现在死撑是让她高兴了,
等房子跌了,那愁云惨雾的时候,你替我跪搓衣板?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:05:51 2007) 提到:

nah... just straightforward thought 21 mah //ywyf




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:05:54 2007) 提到:

最高赔偿=保额*extended



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:06:29 2007) 提到:

ft.  she won't blame u for the decision she made bah




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:06:39 2007) 提到:

你不是前年买的SECOND TIME BUYER吗?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (New BBS Cop) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:06:55 2007) 提到:

对,这个8楼的灯亮不亮也很难说阿



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:06:56 2007) 提到:

at least you make her happy for a while.
if cuo yi ban can make her happy, why don't u do it?
:P


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:07:12 2007) 提到:

nod, lingsu is the #1 meinv i have seen in person. en.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:07:26 2007) 提到:

oh, don't know about mine, didn't read it carefully.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (New BBS Cop) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:07:59 2007) 提到:

关键是工作安全。再加上一些周转资金。这些对于首次购房者都是比较薄弱环节。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:08:21 2007) 提到:

now, nod.
job security is no.1 concern.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (New BBS Cop) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:08:54 2007) 提到:

To knee down on the motherboard or to knee down to the house market?
That's a question



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (New BBS Cop) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:09:16 2007) 提到:

你是我的成功人士偶像,你每句话我都当真的



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:09:27 2007) 提到:

i need to  bai fuo today, hope my ld get well soon...


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:10:26 2007) 提到:

//bless.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Aff (阿非) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:10:47 2007) 提到:

blessing


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (New BBS Cop) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:10:51 2007) 提到:

fo! typo会ruin运气。赶紧拜。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:11:30 2007) 提到:

ur equity neh?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:12:54 2007) 提到:

en?
I'm not selling the house, can't get equity out unless I get an equity loan
yah.
the second loan rate is really high. :(



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:13:41 2007) 提到:

24w seems low la, my insurance insist i need to buy 45w for my tiny little
house. :(


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:13:57 2007) 提到:

歪歪湖看不到自己,所以谁第一还不定泥.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:14:55 2007) 提到:

//stamp!
they told me the amount is based on the size of the property yah.
yours must be twice size of mine.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:15:13 2007) 提到:

ft le, 50% of my posts on bbs are lies. :(((



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:15:48 2007) 提到:

this keng still alive? deepest in history le bah.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:16:19 2007) 提到:

bai fo bai fo bai fo...


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:17:09 2007) 提到:

so, u r still available?  great!!!!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (New BBS Cop) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:17:11 2007) 提到:

...要求弯曲超级女人大PK



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (New BBS Cop) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:17:58 2007) 提到:

is this a brain teaser, is this post a lie?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:18:00 2007) 提到:

i mean ur equity should be more than 24w le ba?  if only insure 24w, not
enough ya.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:18:24 2007) 提到:

wwh is indeed no.1 yah. pretty looking, good at making money, two kids, PA
house. all red eyeable yah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (New BBS Cop) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:18:30 2007) 提到:

祝福祝福祝福



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:19:16 2007) 提到:

en? insurance is the cost of rebuilding the house bah?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:19:34 2007) 提到:

NOOOOOO way!!!  my house is indeed veli veli small.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:20:06 2007) 提到:

HI amount not related to equity la
it's the cost of rebuilding a same house on ur land.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  nbc (New BBS Cop) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:20:10 2007) 提到:

无人争锋?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:23:20 2007) 提到:

FT le! i am far from #1 here.
my LD is the #1, but he doesn't come here, kaka.
bai fo bai fo bai fo...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tvstar (hehe) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:24:01 2007) 提到:

what's wrong w/ ur ld?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:24:05 2007) 提到:

thanks thanks. need that. 


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:24:15 2007) 提到:

he doesn't look as pretty as you yah.  :)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:25:59 2007) 提到:

ic, i am dumb. :(


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:26:14 2007) 提到:

玩大了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:26:31 2007) 提到:

那时一两个M哪够退休,大家都二三十万工资.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:27:18 2007) 提到:

老兄,你这可真的是当短线股票炒了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:28:32 2007) 提到:

sever GI bleeding, will do a GI scope this afternoon. //zai bai fo zai bai
fo


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:28:56 2007) 提到:

what is GI?
//blush



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tvstar (hehe) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:29:13 2007) 提到:

ft. best wishes.
how did that happen? his first time?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:30:16 2007) 提到:

现在看房子还用去open house挨家看?
mls 照片,大小,学区,哪年的,lot多大,有什么硬件,上一次交易多少钱,再上一
次交易多少钱,那天list的,
什么没有?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:30:43 2007) 提到:

xiao hua dao. he probably had wei chu xue.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:31:20 2007) 提到:

he had stomach ache before, but never paid attention. his first time wei chu
xue.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:32:05 2007) 提到:

huh?
//pat pat.
//bless



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:33:00 2007) 提到:

饮食不规律?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:33:40 2007) 提到:

worked/study too hard bah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:33:58 2007) 提到:

QQMJ你的房子多少钱买的我都知道, 上一个房子多少钱买的,多少钱卖的我都知道
这些都是公开信息, 网上全都查得到。
看看市场上的同类型的房子,价格趋势一清二楚。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:34:30 2007) 提到:

maybe, and too much spicy food?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tvstar (hehe) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:34:42 2007) 提到:

has the blood stopped yet?

after the blood stops, he needs staying at home at least for 3 days - 1 week
. don't let him do any labored work. and can only eat soft/easy-digested
food. and watch his stool to make sure no more blood.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:34:45 2007) 提到:

wow.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:34:53 2007) 提到:

work too hard le, nod nod. :(((


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:35:33 2007) 提到:

wawawa, that's insane!


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:36:32 2007) 提到:

the blood stopped yeaterday. but he went to work already la. :((
i asked him not to, but he insisted. :((



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:36:41 2007) 提到:

你想查查自己购房信息的网上有没有?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:36:54 2007) 提到:

get well soon!

take good care
must be hard for u with 2kids on top of that




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:37:19 2007) 提到:

sigh, such a hard working employee yah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:37:28 2007) 提到:

haiyou director in successful IPO-ed startup.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tvstar (hehe) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:37:33 2007) 提到:

ft. he should've not.
he needs full recovery, otherwise, if it happens 2nd time, it becomes a
habbit. (hope not)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:37:40 2007) 提到:

but how do u know which one is hers?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:38:01 2007) 提到:

i only know my house info. but not anyone else on this bbs ya


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:38:54 2007) 提到:

if you want, you can check your information online.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:39:15 2007) 提到:

thanks. luckily i am lao you tiao at work. can go home early


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:39:48 2007) 提到:

but I don't even know her name yah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:40:18 2007) 提到:

hope it will be successful next year //dreaming~~~


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:40:49 2007) 提到:

You could find any house transactions information of anyone, if you know his
/her illegal name.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:40:53 2007) 提到:

sigh, u rich ppl get richer and richer....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:41:15 2007) 提到:

where?
newspaper?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:42:04 2007) 提到:

thanks thank, i will let him know that.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:42:13 2007) 提到:

online



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:42:47 2007) 提到:

you gals are moving up on the wealth ladder
quicker and quicker a

ur shen yin is  further and further in my eye sights




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:43:33 2007) 提到:

which site? @_@



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:44:05 2007) 提到:

ipo can be counted as successful already le.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:44:26 2007) 提到:

呻吟????



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:45:39 2007) 提到:

hehe, u don't know, biotech ipo seldom makes money. regular employee at
genentech makes more than me in their stocks.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:47:23 2007) 提到:

how many stock option genentech gives to new employee ya?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:47:40 2007) 提到:

oh. no wonder a guy i know who joined DNA in 2003 changed his house from
south san jose to foster city le ya.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tvstar (hehe) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:47:47 2007) 提到:

u got an offer from them? hehe



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:48:13 2007) 提到:

1600sqt?
//run


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:48:37 2007) 提到:

show off big 3000sqt house in good school


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:48:50 2007) 提到:

a few thousands ba, remember, their stock already gained ~$160/share since
2002
plus they have ESPP.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tvstar (hehe) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:49:39 2007) 提到:

what's good about it when you think of the TAX they need to hand over to IRS.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:49:45 2007) 提到:






☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:50:48 2007) 提到:

ur 3000sqt house will worth 2.5M in PA ba


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:51:20 2007) 提到:

mei you


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:53:50 2007) 提到:

but no big change in recent 2 years ya. no oil water ya.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:54:39 2007) 提到:

even wilder than i originally imagine.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:54:46 2007) 提到:

here in my city
used SFH inventory can last 4 months
new SFH can last 7 months
TH can last 18months

heeheehee




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:55:24 2007) 提到:

co-wow..
FL..


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:57:43 2007) 提到:

ppl don't have 3000sqt house floating by...


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:58:28 2007) 提到:

2999? :P


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 15:59:06 2007) 提到:

5b3b 2500?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:04:10 2007) 提到:

问题是我老婆看上的房子都是她同学在田纳西的标准,3000尺,大院子,木地板,一层.在
田纳西20多万,这里120多万?
所以我们就算买了,也不见得高兴.
而且,买贵的,比如65万的,就很大的压力.平时工作,绿卡已经很烦了,我最近就很烦,在
公司里训同事,回家和老婆吵架,已经是depression的前兆了.我老婆工作也很忙,加上房
子,恐怕她的精神负担也会大,根本不是享受,尤其我们的工资不高,她的工资还比我高,
其实压力很大在她那边.我们也没有绿卡,这个排期还不知道什么时候呢.
总之,其实我老婆也很犹豫,背这么个大负担,还是想想吧.

发信人: jeeves (coala-diving), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 15:06:56 2007), 转信

at least you make her happy for a while.
if cuo yi ban can make her happy, why don't u do it?
:P


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:05:10 2007) 提到:

only 50%?:).................

发信人: wwh (歪歪糊 (quitting~~~1/2/2007)), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 15:15:13 2007)

ft le, 50% of my posts on bbs are lies. :(((



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:05:17 2007) 提到:

在公司里训同事.... showoff自己是manager啊



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:05:43 2007) 提到:

//show off managment position
在公司里训同事


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:06:35 2007) 提到:

root cause haishi no GC
//pat




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:07:36 2007) 提到:

IT dou very niu a
xun xun this one, xunxun that one,
very cow




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:08:13 2007) 提到:

对于没有绿卡的人,只能短线了:)
而且,价格的调整从去年6月就开始了,先是外围,比如sac,然后fairfield,至于弯曲会不
会我不知道,因为弯曲有钱人太多了.
所以我觉得3月份可以看出来了,如果价格上不去,就是上不去了.如果inventory继续涨,
那么至少我们这边还要跌.

发信人: Grapes (老葡萄), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 15:27:18 2007), 转信

老兄,你这可真的是当短线股票炒了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  giest (andy 回帖攒rp 挖坑伤rp) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:08:42 2007) 提到:

有房的看长
没房的盼跌

讨论结束



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:08:43 2007) 提到:

"buying house needs to make your feel comfortable"; that is the an agent
told me long ago. it actually contains more truth than i originally thought.
now actually i am wondering that if

"not buying house also needs to make oneself feel comfortable." hehe.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:08:47 2007) 提到:

ppl still no GC floating by...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:09:17 2007) 提到:

especially the only IT in a non-IT company:)

发信人: lingsu (树叶会啊会阿), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 16:07:36 2007), 转信

IT dou very niu a
xun xun this one, xunxun that one,
very cow




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:10:47 2007) 提到:

那是你神



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:11:07 2007) 提到:

看来你们已经是不是150-180K档啦.那65W还好啊.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:12:07 2007) 提到:

MANAGER就叫训下属吧.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:13:38 2007) 提到:

你自己PENG一下吧
我下手很重的



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:15:10 2007) 提到:

sigh!!
self-peng


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:17:46 2007) 提到:

都说了65万对我们来说是很贵的.
别的州的房子看着真大,真好呀.
在弯曲就是这样,感觉自己是低收入不说,还要和很多人抢:(

发信人: gas (consume me), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 16:11:07 2007), 转信

看来你们已经是不是150-180K档啦.那65W还好啊.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:19:15 2007) 提到:

3000尺好学区没有180万恐怕买下不来



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:19:57 2007) 提到:

MSJ, 1.4M should be ok. I guess....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:26:04 2007) 提到:

3000尺,大院子,木地板,一层
MSJ 1.4米有点悬




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:28:10 2007) 提到:

还好啦.我九万多都能撑得住.呵呵.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:29:25 2007) 提到:

那时候利率低吧



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:32:17 2007) 提到:

Some new data on CA housing market:

source: http://www.car.org/index.php?id=MzcwNzU

Affordability concerns continued to impact the residential real estate
market in California, with the share of first-time buyers declining to their
second lowest level from 30.5 percent in 2005 to 27.1 percent in 2006

the share of buyers who used a second mortgage climbed from 38 percent in
2005 to 43 percent in 2006, more than triple the percentage since 2001 and
the highest percentage since 1982.

Home buyers with zero-down payments increased significantly from 4.5 percent
in 2000 to 21.1 percent in 2006

Sales in the Bay Area housing market fell at a slightly lower rate than for
the state as a whole. After peaking in 2004, Bay Area sales declined 10
percent in 2005 and then 19 percent in 2006. The median price in the Bay
Area -- the highest of any region in the state -- continued to increase by
small single-digit increments throughout 2006,in part because of inventories
that were well below the statewide levels.





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:41:41 2007) 提到:

才差半个破扇呀.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:43:36 2007) 提到:

听说你现在12万了,还不算65%的bonus,还有老婆要毕业,也至少12万?

发信人: gas (consume me), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 16:28:10 2007), 转信

还好啦.我九万多都能撑得住.呵呵.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:47:14 2007) 提到:

看起来确实能上1000.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:50:34 2007) 提到:

还是那句话,每次参加聚会,看到那么多高薪双职工都还没有买房.我就知道盼着弯曲房
价跌,是很难的.
不过个人可以做到不买:)


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:53:35 2007) 提到:

能买的起就买,否则就不买
你在法儿菲尔德也有那么多聚会?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:56:04 2007) 提到:

聚会是自己找出来的,脸皮要厚一些:)

发信人: Grapes (老葡萄), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 16:53:35 2007), 转信

能买的起就买,否则就不买
你在法儿菲尔德也有那么多聚会?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:56:33 2007) 提到:

我的感觉是,每次聚会看着那么多的高薪双职工都买不起,我就知道弯曲的房价一定会跌




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 16:59:10 2007) 提到:

exactly....不过大家都很怒,也都很想买,只是力有未逮.或者是去学MBA了...........
...

发信人: goldenrain (金雨), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 16:56:33 2007)

我的感觉是,每次聚会看着那么多的高薪双职工都买不起,我就知道弯曲的房价一定会跌




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:03:55 2007) 提到:

你是不是又打退堂鼓乐



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:04:11 2007) 提到:

我看如果不是为了熬绿卡,大家都跳去外州了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:10:09 2007) 提到:

我老婆说她自己从来就没有严肃的要买房过.

发信人: Grapes (老葡萄), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 17:03:55 2007), 转信

你是不是又打退堂鼓乐



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:11:46 2007) 提到:


严肃的说,你这就说错了。

偶家LG是死都要死在加州的。除非海龟



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:12:34 2007) 提到:

me too.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tonyxu (无斋主人) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:13:34 2007) 提到:

me 3, hehe



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  showoff (Showoff! Stamp!!) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:14:36 2007) 提到:

b4 你们两个死硬分子。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xterm (lemontea) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:16:15 2007) 提到:

on earth who are you? hehe.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:32:03 2007) 提到:

我是说first time buyer
我不是要给他们带言,只是我的观察,因为我的朋友圈里,这两年来的有很多。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  showoff (Showoff! Stamp!!) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:32:46 2007) 提到:

最近很多人侵犯我的版权,包括金雨你。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:33:34 2007) 提到:

u need to copyright your "stamp" and "showoff", will bring in good revenue
for you too. :)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:34:12 2007) 提到:

哪个著作? 告诉我,我赶紧撤下



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:34:25 2007) 提到:

ft, the id one yah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:36:10 2007) 提到:

They are not gonna buy the same house as you will bah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:37:45 2007) 提到:

You double-income think $650k too expensive???



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:39:19 2007) 提到:

还有盼平台等inflation catch up的



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:40:25 2007) 提到:

even smaller:)

发信人: LieHeart (莱因哈特), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 17:36:10 2007)

They are not gonna buy the same house as you will bah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:41:02 2007) 提到:

有钱人说话就是气粗:)

发信人: LieHeart (莱因哈特), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 17:37:45 2007)

You double-income think $650k too expensive???



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:51:27 2007) 提到:

他是说田纳西标准的65万的
这里少说也得180万



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Wed Feb  7 17:57:40 2007) 提到:

Oh, i c.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:03:33 2007) 提到:

阿福就是不一样,一步到位180W了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:05:26 2007) 提到:

裤子大的喜欢三步走,六年买三个房,
pku都喜欢一步到位



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:07:51 2007) 提到:

您老呢



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:08:18 2007) 提到:

he puts his $$ under the mattress and count them every night. :)


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:13:46 2007) 提到:

其实我装在玻璃罐里,埋在cisco旁边那片果树园了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:14:10 2007) 提到:

which tree? which tree? @_$


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:16:09 2007) 提到:

就是你抱着的这一棵 :-).



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:16:27 2007) 提到:

that's in SF yah.
u moved the tree?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:19:32 2007) 提到:

tree.... I am no tree....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:19:52 2007) 提到:

你们都咋知道谁是裤子大,PKU 的?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:26:00 2007) 提到:

裤子大喜欢受哦副
PKU喜欢民主+自由



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:26:45 2007) 提到:

so you are PKU?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:33:14 2007) 提到:

then what about thu?
从一而终?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  decay (taxation without representation?) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:35:25 2007) 提到:

ft


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:40:26 2007) 提到:

No wonder the high housing price:

all but one of the eight rooms at the MacArthur house contained growing
marijuana plants, as did a cellar and garage.

``There were no living quarters in that house, it was just strictly housing
the grow,'' he said.

See http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/16645391.htm


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:45:01 2007) 提到:

THU离得这么多,不能算从一而终吧?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 18:55:26 2007) 提到:

不是说自己在家里种自己用不违法吗?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 19:22:58 2007) 提到:

这个不大对
很多人没房子,但是很喜欢这个的地方



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 20:31:24 2007) 提到:

nice lp ya. don't want to put pressure on u.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 20:51:29 2007) 提到:

//狂羡慕




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 20:53:10 2007) 提到:

你被PUSH了?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 20:56:19 2007) 提到:

fan xiao benben


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 20:56:59 2007) 提到:

你没见我的膝盖和陈冲拍妹妹找哥泪花流抬担架的时候差不多了
拍个潘神迷宫一样的血淋淋的镜头一点问题没有



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 20:59:28 2007) 提到:

切,你个新警察,至少SF版的SHOWOFF/STAMP鼻祖师爷(奶)都是PKU的


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 20:59:28 2007) 提到:

//同情
尊领导这么厉害。。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:00:13 2007) 提到:

不过现在好像裤子大的更胜一筹阿



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:00:51 2007) 提到:

那是凯蒂的功劳



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:01:38 2007) 提到:

KATIE?她SHOWOFF的太明显了,我们都不西说她


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:02:36 2007) 提到:

最近没人盖她,她有点坐不住了,总想无意的暴露身份。。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:02:39 2007) 提到:

严重怀疑MSJ就是凯蒂的劳工



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:04:12 2007) 提到:

要相信潜水员的实力,SF版很多高级潜水员,随便写两篇就够你掏几天图表的


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:05:12 2007) 提到:

闹的闹的,金鱼去的网站说不定是他们家开的。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:06:38 2007) 提到:

因为这个坑,我发现WEB下的页码40页一行,这个坑能不能搞出三行来呢?会不会因此
崩溃呢?//CONSIDERING。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (live, love, hope) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:09:32 2007) 提到:

SF版最大的坑是tmm的名校坑,好像是1600贴
其次是我的电影明星坑,到1000多贴被大熊砍头了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:10:06 2007) 提到:

hehe... who cares ah



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:11:02 2007) 提到:

这你都记得,你的数据库不亚于汽油了嘛。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:12:00 2007) 提到:

我还以为TMM的纪录已经被破了呢
你那个电影明星坑比较赖,里面跑题严重,TMM的坑一直坚持主体,里面打的一塌糊涂
,好玩


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:14:25 2007) 提到:

let's try try



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  gas (consume me) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:16:47 2007) 提到:

ni LP ye nice ya. didn't put pressure on you either.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  showoff (Showoff! Stamp!!) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:17:11 2007) 提到:

我记得那个top3坑只有38、9页或是40页出头。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:21:32 2007) 提到:

我们不争第二,也得挣个第一啊。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:23:39 2007) 提到:

老包说的队,跑题的不算,我们还是要坚持型散神不散,房子的主体思想要坚持



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:24:36 2007) 提到:

对付这些可笑的理由还用我掏图表?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  showoff (Showoff! Stamp!!) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:24:57 2007) 提到:

我说了其实是我的马甲。//blush



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  showoff (Showoff! Stamp!!) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:25:29 2007) 提到:

有人把你的名字放在标题里你就high了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:26:53 2007) 提到:

又来了。人家也可能会说,对付这些可笑的图表我还用换马甲?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:28:38 2007) 提到:

我的名字出现在题目里又不是一次两次了,我都不西的回。
这次是看MSJ理智讨论房坑,很难得。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:29:39 2007) 提到:

我宁可换衣他是你马甲,自己跟自己辩论,挖坑PROMOTE你主ID
怎么样,被我揭穿了吧,母哈哈哈


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  showoff (Showoff! Stamp!!) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:30:15 2007) 提到:

我上一个马甲调戏调戏你而已。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:30:59 2007) 提到:

其实我的煮爱地就是BOXTER



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXTER (相拥噙泪, WWW blog有故事后续 :D) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:31:45 2007) 提到:

//不拉屎


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:32:48 2007) 提到:

谁调戏谁可说不好啊,其实我就是马甲



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:34:02 2007) 提到:

怎么这个坑僵而不死呢,再踢一脚


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:35:27 2007) 提到:

金鱼这下美名远洋了,公司里的老中天天看他膝盖的伤痕 //跑


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:35:56 2007) 提到:

和房市一样,僵而不死,我们倒要看看它是返老还童呢,还是回光返照




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:37:01 2007) 提到:

在长裤里面,看不见
read my lips -----  看不见
赫赫



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:52:47 2007) 提到:

The American people appear to be oblivious to the economic hurricane which
is expected to touchdown in late 2007. That's when $1 trillion in ARMs (
Adjustable Rate Mortgages) will “reset” triggering a massive increase in
foreclosures and plunging the country into a deep recession. If energy costs
continue to rise at the same time or if the dollar loses more ground, we
may be rooting around in the backyard garden-plot looking for passed-over
spuds and radishes.

“The Fed, in effect, has become a serial bubble blower.” Stephen Roach,
chief economist, Morgan Stanley

“This is the biggest housing slump in the last 4 or 5 decades: every
housing indicator is in free fall, including now housing prices.” Economist
Roubini Nouriel, Dow Jones, 23 August 2006
The crisis is entirely the work of Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan, whose “
cheap money”

The crisis is entirely the work of Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan, whose “
cheap money” policy caused a speculative frenzy in the real estate market
which sent home prices through the stratosphere. In fact, the bubble
originated in 2001 when Greenspan lowered interest rates to a meager 1% and
ignited a refinancing boom as well as a sudden up-tick in home sales. Now,
after 17 straight interest rate increases, the bubble is quickly losing
steam and the effects are being felt from sea to shining sea. Rest assured,
the sudden downturn in the housing market is just the first gust from an
impending tornado. By the end of 2007, America's match-stick economy will
look like the rubble strewn landscape of New Orleans 9th Ward.

Greenspan has been the biggest player in this pre-Depression operetta. He
kept the printing presses whirring along at full-tilt while the banks and
mortgage lenders devised every scam imaginable to put greenbacks into the
hands unqualified borrowers. ARMs, “interest-only” or “no down payment”
loans etc. were all part of the creative financing boondoggle which the kept
the economy sputtering along after the “dot.com” crackup in 2000.

It worked like a charm, too. Aided by the Fed's cheap money policy, the
housing market sizzled. In just 6 years the total value of real estate
jumped from $11 trillion to $21 trillion! (“From 2001 through 2005,
outstanding mortgage debt rose 68% from $5293 billion to $8888 billion”) It
's the biggest expansion of debt in history and it was all engineered by
seductively low interest rates.

Greenspan executed the swindle with the adroitness of a carnival huckster;
luring millions of buyers to the real estate gold rush. Now, many of those
same buyers are stuck with enormous loans that are about to reset at
drastically higher rates while their homes have already depreciated 10% to
20% in value. This phenomenon of being shackled to a “negative equity
mortgage” is what economist Michael Hudson calls the “New Road to Serfdom
”; paying off a mortgage that is significantly larger than the current
value of the house. The sheer magnitude of the problem is staggering.

For example, an article in the New York Times last week noted that “1 in 5
sub-prime loans will end in foreclosure”…

“About 2.2 million borrowers who took out sub-prime loans from 1998 to 2006
are likely to lose their homes”.

In real terms, that translates into roughly 10 million people!

Greenspan, of course, nodded approvingly while the new regime of shaky
lending practices was being put into place. What really mattered to the Fed-
chief was making sure the economy could be kept on life-support while the
massive “unfunded” tax cuts were provided for his well-healed buddies in
corporate America and while the country charged off to war in Iraq.

Greenspan knew that his “low interest rate bonanza” was driving the wooden
stake into America's heart. In fact, every banker understands the effects
of interest rates; it's fundamental to their trade. Lower the interest rates
and the people will swarm to the banks like piranhas to a hambone. It never
fails.

The housing bubble has nothing to do with “market forces” or (Gawd help us
) supply-and-demand. That's all gibberish. Low interest rates provide a
channel for pumping cheap money into the economy which inevitably creates
equity bubbles. When Greenspan lowered rates to 1%, he knew that he was
simply trading a technology bubble for a real estate bubble. Now, of course,
he has retired before the wheels fall off the cartso he can avoid being
blamed for the coming catastrophe.

The fallout from the housing explosion will be much more destructive than
what most people imagine. In fact, Peter Schiff, president of Euro Pacific
Capital Inc. believes that the NY Times' estimates are too optimistic.
Schiff anticipates that failures in the sub-prime loan market will put
greater downward pressure on housing by increasing inventory and lowering
prices.

Schiff says:

“The secondary effects of the “1 out of 5” sub-prime default rate will be
a chain reaction of rising interest rates and falling home prices
engendering still more defaults, with the added foreclosures causing the
cycle to repeat. In my opinion, when the cycle is fully played out we are
more likely to see an 80% default rate rather than 20%”.

80%!?!

40 million Americans headed towards foreclosure? Better pick out a comfy
spot in the local park to set up the lean-to.

Schiff's calculations may be overly pessimistic, but his reasoning is sound.
Once mortgage-holders realize that their homes are worth tens of thousands
less than the amount of their loan they are likely to “mail in their house
keys rather than make the additional mortgage payments.”

As Schiff says, “Why would anyone stretch to spend 40% of his monthly
income to service a $700,000 mortgage on a condo valued at $500,000,
especially when there are plenty of comparable rentals that are far more
affordable?”

Why indeed? There's simply no incentive to hang on to a home or condo that's
losing value every day.

“Lobster Potted”?

Economist Nigel Maund describes what over-leveraged homeowners can expect as
real estate values continue to plummet:

“For the majority of homeowners, they are now ‘lobster potted' for the
rest of their lives in the 21st Century's version of the Victorian treadmill
. Welcome to modern debt-controlled serfdom, where if you lose your job,
either through retrenchment or illness, you lose your home. It has become a
veritable Sword of Damocles, or a stick with which to beat recalcitrant
labor into a bloody pulp, should they ever prove restless or disobedient.
The ruthless and faceless plutocrats who benefit vastly from this dreadful
scheme must be laughing on their return to a status of demagogic power which
is the modern equivalent of Roman or Medieval Aristocracy at its
exploitative worst….

The mortgage weapon forms an integral part of the armory of the so-called
New World Order (NWO) as it seeks to accumulate wealth and power to control
people by stealth.”

Maund nails it; the “mortgage weapon” has been used effectively to thrust
millions into debt-servitude and shift the nations' wealth to the upper 1%.
Meanwhile the Decider-in-Chief has been busy rewriting the nation's laws so
they meet the requirements of an economically polarized society. (The
erosion of civil liberties is the unavoidable consequence of the greater
divisions in wealth)

The first wave in the tsunami is timed to hit in late 2007 when $1 trillion
in ARMs reset; wreaking havoc across the country. That means that millions
of borrowers will see dramatic increases in loans on homes that are of
steadily-diminishing value. (Many monthly payments will nearly double!) The
number of foreclosures will skyrocket, unemployment will soar, and America's
consumer economy will swoon.

How bad will it be?

According to statistical analyst, Jim Willie, “One third of job creation
has come from the housing industry in the last 5 years.”

How will we make up those losses in employment?

Equally worrisome, is the amount of money which will stop flowing into the
economy because of the declining home values. In 2005, Americans pulled $732
billion out of their home equity to spend on consumer items. By the 2nd
quarter of 2006 that number was down to $327 (annualized) a loss of more
than half. In an economy where 90% of growth has depended of the housing
boom, these are ominous signs of impending disaster. (Current Fed Chairman
Ben Bernanke said that the slowdown in housing has been a “major drag” on
the economy which has already caused a 1% decrease in GDP in 2006. What
effects will it have in 2007 when the real storm hits!?!)

If homeowners can't tap into their equity to augment their stagnant wages,
GDP will shrink and investment will flee to foreign markets. That's when we'
re likely to see the lines at the neighborhood shelter winding around the
block and whole families camping-out in the backs of their Suburban's.

The Sub-prime “Time Bomb”

It looks like the meltdown in sub-prime loan business will trigger a steady
downturn in the entire housing industry. The Center for Responsible Lending
(CRL) issued a report which says that they anticipate a “humanitarian
disaster worse than Katrina”. The report states:

“The sub-prime market was designed with a built-in time bomb. In testimony
to the Senate Banking Committee in September, Michael Calhoun, the President
of the CRL, showed an example of the most typical sub-prime loan, known as
a 2/28, with an "exploding ARM" (adjustable rate mortgage). Buyers can
qualify for this type of loan if the original ("teaser") monthly payment is
not higher than 61% of their after-tax income. At the end of two years, even
without a rise in interest rates, the payment will typically rise to 96% of
the purchaser's monthly income. No wonder then, that the study
conservatively forecasts that one-third of families who received a sub-prime
loan in 2005 and 2006 will ultimately lose their homes!”

A “96% of the purchaser's monthly income”?!? That leaves a measly 4% of
one's earnings to pay for clothes, food and other essentials!

The disaster in sub-prime loans is leading the housing market into a
waterfall-type decline. It's the first indication that a real catastrophe is
just around the corner. The inability of over-leveraged borrowers (many
with a poor credit history) to meet their obligations is spreading to other
areas of the market. This is called “contagion”. The defaults are
symptomatic of a larger problem which could quickly affect the entire system.

Realtor Don Stacey describes the phenomenon this way:

“The fact of the matter is that sub-prime lenders are closing shop and
dropping like flies…. What does this signal? To me it suggests that the sub
-prime lending cycle is history. And, if it is history, then a very large
chunk of the nonconforming borrowing seen in 2004, 2005 and most of 2006,
will not be repeated in 2007.”

Why should this matter to the average homeowner?

Because in 2003, 35% of all mortgages were “nonconforming” loans. In 2004,
it went up to 59%; and in 2005, nonconforming loans were a mammoth 65% of
all mortgages! As the lenders return to more conventional practices the pool
of potential customers will dry up accordingly and housing prizes will fall
precipitously.

Once again, we need to remind ourselves that the housing boom was not
created by market forces, “real demand” or increases in wages. It is
entirely the outcome of Greenspan's “cheap money” policy (low interest
rates) as well as the widespread shabby lending practices. (“Creative
financing”, ARMs etc.) These factors have caused the largest expansion of
personal debt in history and are creating a real risk of a complete
financial collapse.

So, why would the banks commit to such a risky scam when the standard
criterion for loaning money has been understood for hundreds of years?

For the banks to ignore the rules for prudent lending (20% Down-payment,
fixed interest rate, sufficient collateral and income) is like a scientist
saying that the rules of gravity no longer apply or that the chemical
composition of water has changed.

It simply makes no sense, does it?

It's different for the Federal Reserve. The Fed knows that the US consumer
is already over-extended and mired in debt. They've decided to increase our
(collective) obligations while their corporate colleagues load the boats for
more promising markets in Asia and Europe. They cling to the notion that
they can preserve the greenback as the “reserve currency” even after it
has been deflated to the value of the Peso. (The actual face-value of the
dollar makes no difference to the Fed as long as they continue to produce
the “international currency”. That preserves their power-base and control
of the global system.)

“Cheapening” the dollar by doubling the money supply paves the way for
hyperinflation and (the Fed believes) a more competitive American workforce
going nose-to-nose with competitors in China and India. It's a plan that
globalization's foremost champion, Tom Friedman, would probably greatly
admire.

By pulverizing the dollar, the Fed can crush the middle class and lay the
foundation for a “class-based”, police state; Bush's nascent Valhalla.

The first step to “reordering” society is destroying the currency.

Famed economist, John Maynard Keynes, showed a keen grasp of this when he
said:

“Lenin was right. There's no subtler, no surer means of overturning the
existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages
all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does
it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.”

This suggests that the greatest threat to “democratic institutions” is not
repressive legislation (as most believe) but monetary policy. The
manipulation of currency can precipitate economic divisions in society which
make democracy impossible. That's why Thomas Jefferson said:

“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties
than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to
control the issue of our currency, first by inflation, then by deflation,
the banks and the corporations that will grow up around (the banks) will
deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on
the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken
from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”

Jefferson understood that monetary policy is central to the maintenance of
personal freedom and should not be ceded to a few “unelected” and
unaccountable men whose interests diverge from the public good. The Fed's
ability to “inflate and deflate” the currency allows privately-owned banks
to decide the country's future and remake society according to their own
inclinations.

America's political transformation is being engineered by the Federal
Reserve.

But, what about the banks?

What would compel the banks break with traditional lending practices and put
themselves at risk of millions of foreclosures?

The banks eke out their survival in an extremely competitive environment
where short term profit determines their behavior. Not only have they loaned
out zillions of dollars to people with poor credit, they've also played a
major role in repackaging substandard loans and selling them off to Wall
Street as “mortgage backed securities” (MBS) These MBS are high-yield debt
instruments that evolved through “deregulation”. They're sold to hedge
funds as securities and are rarely (if ever) checked for the reliability of
the borrower. This has created a great opportunity for the banks to loan as
much money as possible using funky ARMs and nontraditional loans knowing
that they'll be rubber-stamped on their way to Wall Street. (The practice of
shipping B grade loans to fund managers is like gift-wrapping dog poop and
selling it as Belgium chocolates. Nevertheless, it has fattened the bottom
line for nearly all the major lending institutions)

Unfortunately, the terms of the MBS allow non performing loans to be sold
back to the lender that originated the loan. Now that the number of “non-
performing” loans is on the rise, (through defaults) the banks are
scrambling to avoid liability. (In fact, according to National Mortgage News
, Fifth Third Bank is “selling $11.4 billion in securities (almost all MBS)
before year-end 2006 and is taking a loss of approximately $500 million.)
This reflects the new mood in steering away from shaky loans.

As the great housing Hindenburg continues its downward trajectory, the banks
will undoubtedly do their best to prevent the deluge of foreclosures (and
failing MBS') from dragging them under. Perhaps, they will offer more
flexible terms to over-leveraged homeowners as a way of recouping their
losses; it's impossible to know. It's also hard to gage how many struggling
homeowners will be able to hang on even with a more flexible payment
schedule. Unfortunately, the present trend-lines offer little reason to be
hopeful.

These are grim times for the mortgage industry and we shouldn't be too
surprised if one or two major banks hobble into receivership before the
storm is over.

Housing Hullabaloo: “the worst is yet to come”

Reports in the mainstream media tend to obscure the severity of the housing
bubble. Typically, the articles are full of “Sunny-Jim” claptrap about a
“rebounding market” that is suddenly “correcting” after an explosive
decade of growth. For example, over 250 articles appeared in US newspapers
this week celebrating; “New Home Sales Rise in November”. Readers should
not be taken in by this type of hype. A careful reading of the facts
indicates that, “rather than foreshadowing a quick rebound, the news high-
lighted how fragile the residential construction remained and suggested that
the downturn rattling the housing market has not run its course.” (NY
Times)

Translation: The worst is yet to come.
How to Profit from the Coming Real Estate Bust: Money-Making Strategies for
the End of the Housing
$17 (34% discount) How to Profit from the Coming Real Estate Bust: Money-
Making Strategies for the End of the Housing


The number of homes sold in November was the LOWEST IN ALMOST 4 YEARS”
causing inventories to swell to a “7.7 month supply, the highest since
December 1995”.

These are very bad numbers.

So, why is the media cheering?

The news reports draw attention to a slight 3.4% increase in sales in
November from a thoroughly dreadful October! If, however, we compare the
figures from November 2005 to November 2006, we find that housing sales are
actually down 12.4% from a year earlier. (and, this, of course, is how one
normally evaluates a downturn in the market)

The media is no more dependable in their coverage of the housing bubble than
they are about Iraq. The reader must do his own research and draw his own
conclusions. But one thing is certain, house prices are way beyond any
historical relationship to rents or salaries. They are bound to come down…
and fast.

We can also assume that the number of foreclosures will skyrocket in 2007
from defaults on sub-prime loans and the “resetting” of Adjustable Rate
Mortgages. (The monthly payments on these loans will go up significantly
whether the Fed raises interest rates or not)

Business Week summarized our current predicament saying:

“Today's housing prices are predicated on an impossible combination: the
strong growth in income and asset values of a strong economy, plus the ultra
-low rates of a weak economy. Either the economy's long-term prospects will
get worse or rates will rise. In either scenario, housing will weaken.”

The real estate slump will seriously dampen consumer spending and further
shrink the already miniscule US GDP (1.9%) This will undoubtedly have the
added effect of curtailing foreign investment; putting more downward
pressure on the floundering dollar and triggering a round of hyperinflation.
Ultimately, the Fed will be forced to make one of two choices; either lower
interest rates and forgo foreign investment ( $2.5 billion a day) or keep
interest rates where they are and accelerate the collapse of the housing
market. There is no “third” option.

Most analysts and traders believe that Fed Chief Bernanke will follow the
well-worn path of Dr. Weimar and begin “hurling bundles of greenbacks from
helicopters” rather than allow the economy to grind to a halt. Hence, we
are likely to see the further “debauching the currency” sometime in the
very near future. As Stephen Jen, the chief currency economist at Morgan
Stanley, said recently in an article in the New York Times, “All the policy
makers still believe in the possibility of a dollar crash. It's still
lingering out there.”

No doubt, Fed-master Bernanke will work towards that goal by keeping the
printing presses humming-along while praying for the elusive “soft landing
”.

The Fed's plan to reshape American Democracy: "One bubble after another"

As a privately owned organization the Federal Reserve cannot be expected to
operate in the public interest. The Fed's views on policy are primarily
shaped by elite opinion which favors a small group of powerbrokers at the
top of the economic food-chain. The Fed's power to manipulate interest rates
and increase the money supply, allows it to engage in “social engineering
” which merely reinforces its own class interests. This, in fact, is what
Jefferson intimated when he warned that if “private banks” were allowed to
control the issuance of currency, than they would inevitably “deprive the
people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the
continent their fathers conquered.”

That shift in wealth is underway even as we speak.

These massive equities bubbles, (stock market and housing) which have had
such a devastating effect on working class people are the predictable result
of a class-based orthodoxy. They inevitably widen the chasm between rich
and poor and strengthen the power of the ruling elite. It is crazy to think
that they are merely “accidental”.

The upcoming recession is the direct result of policies which originated at
the Federal Reserve and which were intended to create a crisis. It is a
clear attempt to change American societyon a structural level by
exacerbating the divisions in wealth. The expansion of debt invariably
strengthens private ownership and enhances corporate profits. It also
weakens democratic institutions and national sovereignty.

Democracy cannot long endure where the money supply and interest rates are
controlled by privately owned banks. Their behavior is guided by self
interest and profit and is hostile to liberty and the equitable distribution
of wealth. The policies of the Federal Reserve are transforming the country
in a way that will eventually make democracy in America unworkable. We are
becoming a de facto aristocracy and will continuealong that path until the
“issuing power of currency is taken from the banks and restored to the
people, to whom it properly belongs.”

The Federal Reserve System was established by President Woodrow Wilson in
1913. Wilson bitterly regretted his foolishness from the very onset and said
in his book “The New Freedom”:

“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great
industrial country is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of
credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all of our
activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be the worst ruled
, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the
civilized world. No longer a government of free opinion, no longer a
government of conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by
the opinion and the duress of a small group of dominant men.”

As millions of people lose their homes and life savings from the crashing of
Greenspan's Housing Bubble, we should reconsider Wilson's words andmake a
concerted effortto dump the Federal Reserve.

By Mike Whitney

Email: fergiewhitney@msn.com

Mike is a well respected freelance writer living in Washington state,
interested in politics and economics from a libertarian perspective.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 21:57:33 2007) 提到:

CNN:

What's your house really worth?
How Zillow is turning online voyeurism into a real estate revolution.
Fortune's Jeffrey M. O'Brien reports.
FORTUNE Magazine
By Jeffrey M. O'Brien, Fortune senior editor
February 7 2007: 5:55 PM EST

(Fortune Magazine) -- This is what usually happens the first time you visit
Zillow.com: You type in your address to check out the Zestimate, an
approximation of your home's market value. It appears in a little pop-up
superimposed on a photographic map of your neighborhood. The number might
make you smile; it could make you angry.

Next, you realize that the information on your property is incomplete. What
about the kitchen upgrade? Your new deck? The landscaping? All that work's
gotta count for something. You've spared no effort to convince the assessor
that your house is worth less than the official report, but now it's time to
primp. So you tap in some modifications and watch your home's value rise.
zillow_founders.03.jpg
Zillow founders Lloyd Frink (inside house) and Richard Barton swear they
have no desire ot make the real estate agent extinct.
barry.03.jpg
Phoenix agent Barry says Zillow's valuations are wildly optimistic. He
predicts an ugly '07 in his region.
humphries.03.jpg
As Zillow's statistical guru, Humphries has a big job: improving the
Zestimates' accuracy.
coverage_accuracy.gif
More from FORTUNE
GE CEO Immelt douses the drivel
EMC's Joe Tucci on the VMware IPO
Debunking the private equity myth, Part II
FORTUNE 500
Current Issue
Subscribe to Fortune
Bird's-Eye View
You've found your neighborhood. (We're using Seattle.) Or maybe you're
selling. Either way, Zillow's tools come in handy.
For Sale:
Users list homes for free.
Make Me Move:
We all have our price. What would it take for you to pack your bags and get
out? Careful - put that number up on the site and you just might get it.
Recently Sold:
Good for figuring out neighborhood trends.

Next, you check your neighbors' Zestimates. Then your childhood home, a best
friend's place, your boss's house. Just as you open your address book in
search of more targets, your spouse calls out from the bedroom, wanting to
know what the hell you've been doing for the past two hours. "Nothing, honey
," you say, shutting the laptop and trudging off to bed, caught red-handed
in a loop of real estate yuppie porn.
The new rules of real estate

If you haven't heard of Zillow by now, it's probably because you don't own a
home. Or maybe you're just not as prurient and narcissistic as the rest of
us. The national real estate market is in flux: Prices fell last autumn; new
-home sales have risen for the past two months.

But what does that have to do with you? Zillow knows. With 52 million house
valuations across the U.S., the site attracts as many as four million
visitors a month. In less than a year since launch, the Seattle company has
become one of the Internet's biggest real estate destinations. There are
many listing sites on the Web, but Zillow is more of a media play. It makes
money by selling ads to brokers, banks, contractors, appliance retailers and
anyone else interested in reaching data-obsessed homeowners and -buyers.

And now the company is trying to create something even more ambitious: a
perfect market for real estate. Mix E*Trade, Craigslist and the Multiple
Listing Service together, and you begin to get the idea.
A pair of disruptors

The two men behind Zillow, a pair of former Microsoft executives named
Richard Barton and Lloyd Frink, don't exactly cut the image of moguls intent
on upsetting a $2.27 trillion industry. On the day of my visit to Zillow's
headquarters, Frink, who's 42 and president of the operation, is wearing a
Seahawks jersey and seems most interested in talking about football. And
Barton, the company's 39-year-old chairman and CEO, couldn't look less
threatening - put a pool cue in his hand and he'd be perfect in a Dockers ad.

But the two entrepreneurs know an industry in transition when they see it.
They've placed $5 million of their own money, $1 million from early
employees, and another $51 million in venture capital on a bet that real
estate is ripe for some good old-fashioned Internet repositioning.

Barton and Frink (not to be confused with "Barton Fink," the most excellent
1991 Coen brothers film) have had this feeling before. Thirteen years ago
Barton convinced Bill Gates that consumers would benefit from a more
transparent process of booking flights and hotel rooms. With his boss's
backing, Barton launched Expedia, hired Frink, took the company public, and
proceeded to massively disrupt the travel industry.

When Barry Diller bought the site for $1.5 billion in 2003, the duo cashed
out. They won't say how much they made, but let's just say it was enough to
take some time off and figure out what to do next. (Nor will they say much
about Zillow's finances, except that the company still has half of its VC
money and that an IPO is probable, but not this year.)

Now they're taking on the wobbling, punch-drunk world of real estate. "When
we were doing focus groups on Expedia, consumers would tell us they could
hear the tap-tap-tap of the keyboard when talking to a travel agent, and
they wanted to jump through the phone and look at the screen," says Barton,
sitting in his office in the company's Seattle headquarters. "Expedia was
about satisfying that impulse, and that's also what we're doing at Zillow.
The hunger for information about real estate is infinite, at least among
adults."

"There are a lot of parallels with Expedia and Zillow," adds Frink, who
plays the technical guru to Barton's visionary. (Frink was hired by Bill
Gates at 14 - not a typo - and his first big project was coding the DOS-
based program Doodle.) "In the real estate industry you have tools and
systems built for the professionals. We're trying to build something for
consumers."

Until recently Zillow was read-only. But now Barton, Frink and their 133
employees are introducing new features to keep people coming back and, in
the process, protect the site from downcycles in the real estate market. In
September, Zillow opened the site to enable visitors to edit home records
for everyone to see.

In December the site began accepting listings from homeowners and agents,
and unveiled an intriguing feature called Make Me Move. Everyone has heard
the heartwarming tale of the newlyweds who luck into a dream home while
driving through an idyllic neighborhood. They get out of the car and slide a
note under the door: "If you're ever interested in selling, we can offer
you x. We promise to love your house. Please call." Two days later an
elderly woman phones to tell the couple their timing was impeccable and the
price is right. The couple buys the home, raises a family and lives happily
ever after. Make Me Move - which, as it sounds, lets Zillow users post the
figure that would cause them to pack up and go - is intended to make that
fairy tale a lot more common.

We all have our price. Judging by some of the Make Me Move listings that
have cropped up in a few months, that price is often ridiculous. But Zillow
officials say the average Make Me Move figure is just 17 percent over the
Zestimate. That's a relatively modest premium, so users are clearly taking
the feature seriously. Which got me thinking. My wife and I have entertained
thoughts of moving. We're not restless enough to go through the stress of
interviewing agents, listing our home and opening it to visitors. But if
someone made the right offer, sure.

I've paid attention to the market since we moved into our 101-year-old two-
bedroom, two-bath Victorian in San Francisco, so I had an idea of what our
house could sell for. I looked at the Zestimate, sized up my place against
comparable homes, factored in the hassle of finding a new place to live and
came up with my own Make Me Move figure. Sure enough, it was pretty close to
17 percent above the Zestimate. Not wanting to sell myself short, I nudged
it up and put my house on the market in the most passive-aggressive way
possible. All in the name of research. My price? A cool $1 million.
A transparent market

The real estate industry is based on what economists call information
asymmetry, which simply means that one party (typically the seller) knows
more about a product than the other (the buyer). It's an opaque market that
encourages obfuscation and leads to flawed pricing.

The big idea behind Zillow is to make real estate more like a stock exchange
, a transparent market where all information about every property is readily
available, and as a result pricing is perfect. The problem with building
such a system, Barton explains, is that "the best information about the real
estate market is locked up in people's heads. It's happening in
conversations in backyard barbecues."

For a buyer, the best way to root out the true value of a property is to tap
into that communal knowledge, interviewing neighbors about how well the
home has been cared for, barking dogs, loud buses, crime, buzzing power
lines. For a seller looking to price a home properly, the key is knowing how
many people showed up at every nearby open house for the past six months,
analyzing overbids and price reductions, knowing the average time on the
market and walking through every comparable home that has sold recently.

Doing all that legwork is unrealistic, of course, which is why we use agents
. If Zillow does what Barton and Frink say it will, however, all that
information will be as readily available as the number on the mailbox.

Needless to say, Zillow has a tendency to put real estate people on edge. "
There is something really quite scary," reads a post from last summer on
0DotZero, a real estate blog, "about the fact that Joe and Jill Consumer [
are] perfectly willing to give their frikkin' cell phone numbers to Zillow.
com, when they wouldn't even be willing to accept a cookie from my Web site."

The blogger, who claims to oversee interactive technology and marketing for
a large unnamed commercial real estate agency, sees trouble ahead for his
business. "He who holds the primary customer relationship controls the
customer," he says. "From that perspective, Zillow is well poised to control
the customer."

Both founders have heard this type of angst endlessly, and they swear they'
re not trying to obliterate the middleman. (They're much more intent on
stealing one of the last great cash cows of newspaper advertising - like
Craigslist with a profit motive.)

"At Expedia we were the agent," says Barton, whose mother was a real estate
broker. "With Zillow we're not. There's speculation that we're going to
charge commissions and sell houses. That is not what we're doing." He goes
on to say that a broker is less like a travel agent than an attorney. You
have access to every bit of legal information that a lawyer does, but none
of the training - would you really choose to represent yourself?

It's clearly in the company's short-term interest to maintain the current
power structure. Brokers, agents and developers spend upwards of $8 billion
in advertising a year. By 2010 a greater percentage of that money will go to
the Internet than to newspapers, according to the media consultancy Borrell
Associates.

So Frink spends his time convincing the professionals that their ads on
Zillow will attract new clients. "If you have a good agent, they'll say, 'I
know about the barking dogs,'" says Frink. "If we can get the agents to
share that kind of information with the public and they get a benefit from
it, they'll get more clients and gain more trust."
Agent outreach

For the most part, Frink's outreach seems to be working. The site is getting
more ads from agents every day, and the National Association of Realtors is
sold on the concept. "Zillow is lighting up the imagination of consumers,
getting them engaged in the real estate process. If you're marketing
anything, it's good to have an interested user base," says Mark Lesswing, a
senior vice president at NAR. "Many realtors don't fear Zillow anymore. They
use it as a way to show how their services are more valuable than something
you can get for free on the Web."

If Christopher Guest ever films a mockumentary about real estate agents, he
could do worse than to make the trip to Phoenix and get a load of Brett
Barry. With a George Michael beard, bleach-white teeth, perma-tan and a
smattering of gold jewelry, Barry darts around his office in a strip mall,
his face lighting up whenever another human comes within shouting distance.
Home challenge: Make me move!

Specializing in a planned community near Scottsdale, Barry lords over his
territory in a canary-yellow Porsche Boxster whose vanity plate reads
SAYSOLD. "It's a realtor thing," he says, half apologizing for, half drawing
attention to his chariot. Locals tell me today is the coldest day of the
year in Phoenix, but that doesn't dampen Barry's enthusiasm. "Let's put the
top down!" he calls out as we get in the sports car for a tour of his domain.

Barry is skeptical of Zillow's valuations, especially in a market like
Phoenix, where so many properties are languishing. If the Zestimates are
based on sales, then Zillow is missing a whole lot of data. He points at a
stack of pages from the MLS (for Multiple Listing Service, the nationwide
database of properties for sale). "Look, 213 days, 353 days, 529 days," he
says, referring to how long each house has been available. "There's a lot of
fat in the market. Prices are still too high."

For any homeowner looking to sell, it's a gloomy message: These are the
worst of times. Not long ago, Phoenix was the nation's fastest-growing
market. The median price rose 55 percent in 2005. Agents were closing deals
on the hoods of cars; investors flipped homes without ever moving in.

Fast-forward to early 2007: Throw a rock in any direction, and it'll bounce
off a FOR SALE sign. "There are 45,000 listings in the Phoenix MLS, and that
number hasn't changed in six months," Barry says as we cruise among
lookalike stucco homes. With every passing week, the number of houses on the
market rises, increasing the downward pricing pressure. "It's like a
freeway pileup."

But Barry's not glum. The way he sees it, his services are even more
valuable in a down market. (He says he made $100,000 more last year than in
2005, the height of the boom.) And he's taking me along on his rounds to
show me why that's true. At each place he quickly identifies shortcomings,
punching numbers into his cell phone calculator and revealing that a house
is overpriced by $25,000, $40,000, $90,000.

Scouting trips like this one give Barry valuable knowledge. Same for the
kibitzing he does with fellow agents, telling stories, listening to what
types of properties are moving. Add such anecdotal data to his access to
professional valuation services, his intuition on how much to discount a
house that backs up to a road instead of a golf course, and his presence in
the community, and you get an agent who has repeatedly ranked in the top 1
percent nationwide.

And yet even Barry has problems persuading clients to follow his advice.
Homeowners too often become emotionally attached to the price they could
have fetched at the top of the market - especially if they've taken home-
equity loans.

"You look out on the street and see five to ten houses for sale, but many
people still don't believe things have changed," he says, shaking his head
at a dirty carpet. "The average seller says, 'I need to get this much out of
our house to move up.' But the market doesn't care."

By giving consumers real-time updates on the value of their homes, Zillow
intends to improve the dynamic between homeowners and agents like Barry. "We
're going to change the nature of the communication," says Frink. "When real
estate agents are talking to clients, it's going to be more of a two-way
conversation."

Improving accuracy

The first step on that road is improving the accuracy of the Zestimates.
Overall, Zillow has Zestimated the value of 57 percent of U.S. housing stock
, but only 65 percent of that could be considered "accurate" - by its
definition, within 10 percent of the actual selling price. And even that
accuracy isn't equally distributed.

For example, 85 percent of homes in Los Angeles have Zestimates, and two-
thirds have been accurate. But only 53 percent of homes in metropolitan New
York have Zestimates, and only half of those are accurate. In Louisiana,
where one in 50 homes is listed on Zillow, the site is just about worthless.
(In at least one case, questions about Zillow's accuracy have taken on a
political charge: A community activist group, the National Community
Reinvestment Coalition, accused the site of discriminatory valuations in
minority neighborhoods. "A lot of people have thrown rocks at us," Barton
says. "Have we been sued yet? No, but I'm sure we will be.")

Squirreled away five floors below Barton's office, the company's VP of data
and advanced analytics, Stan Humphries, is trying to improve those
percentages. Each night his formulas churn through two terabytes of data,
comparing every home with similar nearby properties and factoring in newly
reported sales.
Zillow home 'values' rile consumer group

"When you want to see comparable homes - when you ask, 'What homes are like
this house?'' - realtors do that with intuition," Humphries says. "We do it
with machine learning. You can infer information. If one house always sells
for more than everything around it, we might be able to infer that it has a
view. This is a really hard problem to solve, but at some point in the next
year we are going to produce valuations that people are going to be
completely stunned by."

Barry remains dubious. Zillow has Zestimates for 99 percent of all Phoenix
homes and claims that 72 percent are accurate to within 10 percent. But
Barry tells of a family who recently came to him believing their home was
worth a lot more than it was. Zillow told them it would sell for $505,000;
Barry and another agent each independently put the figure at $440,000. He
doesn't discourage clients from looking at Zillow, but he definitely
suggests they take the numbers with a grain of salt. "It's a tool," he says
dismissively. "These folks said they looked at Zillow, but after seeing the
Zestimate, they knew they wanted someone with knowledge of the area to see
their house."
Finding the fairy tale

Back to my million-dollar pricetag. By now, it's early January, almost a
month since I first visited Barton and Frink in Seattle. I haven't heard a
peep about my Make Me Move price, and suddenly, just as I'm wrapping up this
article, an e-mail hits my in-box. It reads, "Hello, we are neighbors of
yours, looking to buy a home in Potrero Hill. In an effort to not waste your
time, we are wondering if your million-dollar price quote is at all
flexible. We are able to buy in a range close to there, but not quite there.
Thank you very much in advance for your time."

Whoa. Now what? My wife and I discuss whether we have any wiggle room and
decide that the first order of business is to call the woman and see if she'
s serious. The following morning, that's what I do. She is. As it turns out,
the potential buyer and her husband are perfectly suited to play the role
of the house-seeking couple in the fairy tale. They love the neighborhood
and have been frustrated by their inability to buy. With the help of an
agent, they've made three offers in three years, only to be outbid each time
. Oh, yeah, and she's pregnant. They want a place to raise their family and
are sick of going through the usual routine. "I've seriously considered
putting a note up at Farley's," she says, referring to the local coffee shop
, "or writing a form letter and putting it in mailboxes."

She's been a fan of Zillow since she found the site several months ago and
immediately identified Make Me Move as a great way to draw a bead on houses
before they go up for sale. Scouring the site, she found six pricetags in my
neighborhood and inquired about mine and one other. As soon as she talked
to the other guy, he decided it would actually take more to make him move
after all, and he chickened out. I remain convinced that my number is fair.
But she can't get there.

So I propose an idea that'll take $60,000 right off the top: Let's cut out
the middlemen. She's torn. She feels loyalty to her agent but is not sure
how much he's really worth. "We're doing 95 percent of the looking and all
the legwork. He really just comes in when we're ready to make an offer," she
says, adding that she'd be nervous about not having a pro to see the
process through to the end.

Ultimately, the buyer and I decide to chill, think about how we could make
the transaction happen, and pledge to strike up the conversation anew in the
spring. Which is fine by me. With a buyer on hold, I'm able to begin
scouting a dream property for my family. Just five years ago such a search
would have started in a newspaper and ended in the office of an agent, where
we would have probably competed with dozens of other bidders. Today I might
be able to hop on Zillow and buy a house that's not even on the market -
without dealing with open houses, bidding wars or buyer's remorse. Or even
an agent.

In an opaque market, where the closest approximation of the value of a home
lies in the head of a knowledgeable broker - say, Phoenix circa early 2007 -
an agent can easily be worth the standard 6 percent commission. But in a
perfect market, where the true value of a home is crystal clear to all
parties and the fairy-tale note on a napkin comes in the form of an
anonymized e-mail, 6 percent begins to look an awful lot like a luxury. Kind
of like a canary-yellow Porsche.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 22:04:55 2007) 提到:

路透社:

NEW YORK (Reuters) — Mortgage applications dropped last week, reflecting
weaker demand for home purchase loans even as interest rates fell, an
industry trade group said Wednesday.

The Mortgage Bankers Association said its seasonally adjusted index of
mortgage application activity, which includes both refinancing and
purchasing loans, dipped 0.2% the week ended Feb. 2 to 630.1.

Applications, however, were 1.7% above their year-ago level. The four-week
moving average of mortgage applications, which smooths out the volatile
weekly figures, was down 1.6%.

Phillip Neuhart, economic analyst at Wachovia in Charlotte, N.C., said the
housing market is going through a "rocky stabilization" right now.

"The weather was certainly a factor in December, particularly housing starts
, but that artificially inflated activity," he said. "Also, builder
incentives were helping sales."

While the largest impact of the cooling housing market on U.S. gross
domestic product was in the fourth quarter, it will still have a big impact
in the first quarter and will remain a negative throughout 2007, he said.

"Builders still have a lot of inventory on their balance sheets," he said. "
We think there is some weakness ahead."

Borrowing costs on 30-year fixed-rate mortgages, excluding fees, averaged 6.
23% in the latest week, down 0.06 percentage point from the previous week
and the first drop since early January.

Interest rates were slightly below the average of 6.25% in the same week
last year.

The MBA's seasonally adjusted purchase index, widely considered a timely
gauge of U.S. home sales, fell 0.8% to 404.7. The index was below its year-
ago level of 425.1, a fall of 4.8%.

"Housing seems to have the wind at its back with long-term interest rates,
which were already in the low- to mid-sixes, falling slightly after last
week's Fed announcement, so it's surprising to see that purchase activity
actually tapered in the last week," said Bob Walters, chief economist at
Quicken Loans, an online mortgage lender in Livonia, Mich.

Consumers looking to refinance home loans tend to be sensitive to shifts in
interest rates, which may have been behind last week's modest rise in demand
for that type of loan.

The group's seasonally adjusted index of refinancing applications rose 0.2%
to 1,943.4, up 11% from a year ago, when the index stood at 1,751.0.

The refinance share of applications shrank to 46.1% from 47.4% the previous
week.

"Folks with adjustable-rate mortgages see the opportunity, however, and are
refinancing into fixed-rate mortgages before their existing mortgages reset
to interest rates that are higher than current long-term rates," said
Walters.

Fixed 15-year mortgage rates averaged 5.96%, down from 6.01%. Rates on one-
year adjustable-rate mortgages averaged 5.84%, down from 5.86%.

The ARM share of activity increased to 22.3% from 21.4% the previous week.

U.S. housing industry indexes, in general, tend to be volatile, but a spate
of recent data has shown improvement in the sector.

The MBA's survey covers about half of U.S. retail residential loans.
Respondents include mortgage banks, commercial banks and thrifts.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  iPodApple (爱怕的苹果) 于 (Wed Feb  7 22:16:02 2007) 提到:

是不是谁下了命令要把这个坑挖到一千尺以上:)


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Wed Feb  7 22:24:29 2007) 提到:

欢迎潜水员一起来灌



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  mmnn (mmnn) 于 (Wed Feb  7 22:48:41 2007) 提到:

No way



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 23:24:51 2007) 提到:

our headmaster ah



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Wed Feb  7 23:29:17 2007) 提到:

ket us do it.
欢迎潜水员contribute:)


发信人: iPodApple (爱怕的苹果), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Feb  7 22:16:02 2007)

是不是谁下了命令要把这个坑挖到一千尺以上:)


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Wed Feb  7 23:32:47 2007) 提到:

ding


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 00:02:26 2007) 提到:

add some water.

a few factors affecting bayarea's housing market in the long run:
1. land, 2. population, 3. income, 4. interest rate

a few factors affecting only in short term ( impacts not proven sustainable
):
a. asian's strong will to SC
b. trend
c. relative strength

4. short term interest rate won't change too much. Fed is trying not to
raise it too fast. as long as china's cheap labor remains, inflation is
under control. Long term interest rate is totally up to the treasury rate
and how much demand there is for FRE/FNM's product. Chinese gov is probably
the biggest buyer of those. This part is the bomb under ground.
3. income. with baby boomer retiring, labor's income should increase.
however
the gov is foreseeing this and making movements on regulation. proposed
changes
include adding more H1b workers, guest worker program, etc. income may not
go up as big as we hoped.
2. population will increase for sure. A big percentage of total H1B workers
are coming here year over year.
1. Land. I heard not much left but I have no data.

short term factors are hard to discuss. it's more like stock price movement.
but using indicators like MACD and RSI can tell us a little bit, if anyone
is willing to draw it and post it here.

Looks like hardlanding is not likely without a war, earthquake,
or international economy crisis.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Thu Feb  8 00:12:58 2007) 提到:

hehe. job/job/job.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  chinaberry (~报税*阶段性胜利~) 于 (Thu Feb  8 00:16:36 2007) 提到:

Plus, some analysts expect Fed to cut rate in Aug. //add water



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 00:24:55 2007) 提到:

I don't believe  fed can control inflation to that level.
Rent will up 5%, that affects inflation a lot



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Thu Feb  8 01:39:21 2007) 提到:

看看周围有多少2000年以后入行的新agent,
多少新的建筑画图师,多少翻盖房屋的,你就能知道2000以来,房地产相关行业贡献了
多少就业。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Thu Feb  8 01:43:05 2007) 提到:

1,too long
2. english

summary please



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Thu Feb  8 01:46:56 2007) 提到:

executive summary:
美联储格林斯潘降利率吹这个大房泡不是不小心,是故意的。
目的是把美国的中产阶级的钱都玩到大银行家手里去。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:06:07 2007) 提到:

其实MSJ,凯蒂把你们买卖的经验贴出来,还是很有教育意义的
让大家看看疯狂的牛市,如何抓住机会,说不定这个方法可以用到中国股市上



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:14:04 2007) 提到:

不要,会被你说是鼓动大家入市,好帮地主托市.
想看的去我的blog,也有一篇简单的介绍.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:15:31 2007) 提到:

对不起,您要查看的Blog不存在!




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:22:06 2007) 提到:

美联储是私有的,不是政府机构。最近有篇文章叫“货币战争”大家都看过了?
银行家不怕通货膨胀,只怕没人向他借钱。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  QQMJ (不要告诉偶老公偶是谁。) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:23:18 2007) 提到:

check katie's post ba...



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:34:32 2007) 提到:

WELL, 联储虽然不是100%政府机关,也不是100%私有吧,否则怎么局长被总统任命


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:42:28 2007) 提到:

What is the Federal Reserve System?

The Federal Reserve System, often referred to as the Federal Reserve or
simply "the Fed," is the central bank of the United States. It was created
by Congress to provide the nation with a safer, more flexible, and more
stable monetary and financial system. Over the years, its role has evolved
and expanded.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:44:12 2007) 提到:

但BANK本身是私有的,BANK是个SYSTEM,FED是这个私有系统跟政府的PROXY


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:44:35 2007) 提到:

Haha, you really should read that book. That was how those bankers
manipulated it through Congress.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:45:56 2007) 提到:

FEDS是不是私有,读不读那书没有关系吧,MANIPULATE是MANIPULATE,COMGRESS还
MANIPULATE呢,不能说CONGRESS是私有啊


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:46:22 2007) 提到:

It doesn't have to be wrong. But by the same token, since you buy this
mission statement, you should also buy it that Uncle Sams are doing peace
making in middle east wholeheartily.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:49:08 2007) 提到:

That book is really thrilling. It says the death rate of US presidents is
higher than that of D-Day at Normandy beach. All assassinations, successful
or not, came from that particular president thinking about dismissing the
private central bank.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:49:53 2007) 提到:

LOST了,不知道你们说什么了,这个坑我不能跳了,腻了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:51:31 2007) 提到:

好险,差点push了你的button。:D



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:52:20 2007) 提到:

I was saying, in case blogcity is serious, you can't simply buy ppl's words.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:53:24 2007) 提到:

照你这个说法,美国政府也不是政府了,也是民间的



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:56:03 2007) 提到:

No need to stretch here. I suggest you guys go read that article. Still on
Military board, by the title "货币战争". Warning, LENGTHY!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:56:30 2007) 提到:

这个东西就跟加州电力deregulation以后成立的电管局一样
他不算政府编制,但是头是政府任命,专门监管私营电力机构



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:57:04 2007) 提到:

算了,偷换概念的东西,还长,懒得读了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:58:02 2007) 提到:

美国一共才40几个总统,谋杀死了3个吧,那就算百分之5。诺曼底登陆第一批超过二十
万人吧,百分之5就是1万多,显然没有那么高的死亡律。我觉得这个对比是文学家的耸
人听闻而已,听起来很吓人,实际是蒙事。
后面那个我不好评论,如果都是巧合也很有可能。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 02:59:18 2007) 提到:

什么BUTTON?确实不知道你们说什么了。不是讨论FEDS的性质么?我认为FEDS是个MIX
。因为FEDS得钱是私有的,但他还是一个政府机关


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:01:02 2007) 提到:

我没看前面的贴,我从你说FEDS私有开始看得


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:01:32 2007) 提到:

By that article, more than 3 murderred. Some just didn't die of bullets. And
some assassination attempts failed. The most recent case is Ronald Reagon.
I though you would like it. :D



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:01:58 2007) 提到:

对,你这个对比有些意思,美国政府同样也是被私有财团控制的


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:02:08 2007) 提到:

谈到政治您老容易touchy啊。//take off



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:02:29 2007) 提到:

button大概是按下去你就开吵了,LOL



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  xingprox (Prada) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:03:44 2007) 提到:

怎么那么长啊,读不完啊

强贴留名


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:04:46 2007) 提到:

FACT是FACT,演绎是演绎,我只关心FEDS的性质讨论,我不觉得那些什么惊天发现有什
么神奇的,JFK的死说什么的都有,都腻了,没有证据就只能当FICTION看。难道你看那
文章以前以为美国政府是允公允能为民服务的?你以为FED每次变利率是代表广大美国
公众利益的?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:06:39 2007) 提到:

美国政府里面这样的机关多了去了,什么时候SSN私有化了,也一样成为这类机关。
所谓完全公有的机关有一个很简单的判断方法,里面职员的工资完全是从联邦预算里面
出,否则就不能算公有


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:09:18 2007) 提到:

Before that article, I though Federal Reserve is state-owned organization.
But actually it's a bank, a private bank.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:09:26 2007) 提到:

奥,是遭到谋杀的机率,不仅仅是死亡的机率,那肯定是更高了
里根遇刺,这个我记得,当时很大一件事情,就为了JUDY FOSTER,美国神经病太多了
,但实际上很多真相都被这些八卦给掩盖了,但美国人喜欢信啊,again, it's not
about what is the truth. it's about what u like to believe


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:10:41 2007) 提到:

这个FEDS的性质问题没有太多政治因素吧,你不要跑。你说的那些我并不反对,但那些
是引伸,不是FACT。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:12:16 2007) 提到:

吵这个有什么意思


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:16:08 2007) 提到:

no, central bank is actually not a bank.
就好像你说中国人民银行,其实不是一个银行。国家的中央银行都不是银行因为不提供
那些银行服务


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:18:20 2007) 提到:

Dude,你把美联储理解成中国人民银行了。That's exactly what that article wants
to set straight.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:20:01 2007) 提到:

i think his understanding is closer to the truth.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:20:44 2007) 提到:

conceptually, 美联储就是中国人民银行
the article怎么去解释美联储是the article的问题
比如说有个文章说B W Bush不是人,你看完就真的觉得bush是猴子了?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:22:13 2007) 提到:

我没有把联储和人民银行划等号,中国和美国国家性质当然不同。我是告诉你中央银行
不是银行,所以你恍然大悟后的想法也不正确。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:23:28 2007) 提到:

服了你们了。该文作者据说是在华尔街工作的。我也不是一定要捍卫他的观点。但你们
啥都不看就在这里反击,是不是也那个了点?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:24:12 2007) 提到:

其实关于中央银行怎么运作是很有意思的话题,从前这里好像讨论过,著名ID小A同学
运用她深厚的金融底蕴在这里讲了很多,好像还有YAHOO


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:25:37 2007) 提到:

我们反击的是你搬过来的观点,
没反击那个花儿街工作,bonus 100%,cash买房子,每周工作100hrs,有erection问题
的同学



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:27:06 2007) 提到:

我的观点是啥呀?我在copy而已



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:27:41 2007) 提到:

我没反击他的观点,我只说他说的东西没有什么轰动效应而已。
美国是以一个小政府模式建立的,联邦本来就是一个很松散的政府组织,是历史演变过
程中她越变越大的,所以它的很多机构都有所谓PUBLIC和PRIVATE模糊的地方。
REGULATE和DEREGULATE就是这个过程


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:27:45 2007) 提到:

我学经济的……
the Fed本质上来说就是管美国monetary policy的
任期一次7年,要超过总统任期,就是为了让他们的decision具有独立性
不是国家owned for sure.
in fact, i don't know who owns it.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  mocca (BJXJ) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:28:40 2007) 提到:

当然是美国政府啦。。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:29:14 2007) 提到:

那这么说联邦最高法院的院长阁下也不是国家工作人员了。。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:29:22 2007) 提到:

你在这里说的我都知道,看文章前就知道。看那篇文章让我多知道了一点东西。我甚至
没有说一定正确。你还是不知道。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:29:56 2007) 提到:

我是学CS的,所以我懂的和Bill Gates一样多。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:30:10 2007) 提到:

我觉得你的理解好像从一个极端到了另外一极端。
或者说,从过分政治正确到政治完全不正确


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:31:53 2007) 提到:

其实你们都是在灌纯水。不吵了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:32:30 2007) 提到:

国家工作人员是的。
但是政府的话,觉得不是的。
中国政法总混在一起
美国这边政法分家,很多机构都有独立的power.
总统也不能override



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:33:33 2007) 提到:

GREENSPAN好像不是联邦PAY的


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:33:41 2007) 提到:

the Fed又没什么奇怪的,只要学macro,大一就开始讲。
基本上就是发行发行 bond, 调整调整interest rates.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:34:08 2007) 提到:

他是,纳税人的钱养他


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:35:04 2007) 提到:

SO?就让你多知道了美国有几个总统被谋杀过?我不知道就不知道吧,我不知道的事情
多了,BIG DEAL?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:35:10 2007) 提到:

你们就一点都没有进入角色。That's ok though。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:35:22 2007) 提到:

我是指出saros小花痴的推理错误啊:
任期一次7年,要超过总统任期,就是为了让他们的decision具有独立性
: 不是国家owned for sure.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:35:45 2007) 提到:

Sorry for touching your button, dude.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:36:07 2007) 提到:

我上government的课学得很不好,
现在我也搞不清楚什么nation什么government,什么 state的都有什么区别。

the Fed挺大的,想当一部分人在里面还是搞研究的。难道是postdo?
到底谁养他们,我也不知道。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:36:10 2007) 提到:

这个是你的OPINON,不是FACT,再说我也没跟你吵,如果你认为你叫别人去看什么书别
人不看就是跟你吵架的话,我也没办法


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:36:48 2007) 提到:

同学,你看了点野鸡文章就跟我们推荐,我们不希看啊



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  mocca (BJXJ) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:36:52 2007) 提到:

那是谁PAY?
别跟我说是纳税人



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:37:03 2007) 提到:

FT,你真神


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:37:04 2007) 提到:

i have to say, 国家is a very difficult word to define.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:37:53 2007) 提到:

你先引入这个术语的啊,小花



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:37:57 2007) 提到:

他的意思是说,私有机构,比如BANK啊,公司CEO啊,不需要总统指定,也没有什么任
期限制


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:38:03 2007) 提到:

不希看也不惜唾沫。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:38:32 2007) 提到:

gesus, don't get it personal.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:38:46 2007) 提到:

你还帮她堵漏呢



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:39:02 2007) 提到:

我说完就觉得我说错了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:39:18 2007) 提到:

终于tmd上1000了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:39:41 2007) 提到:

罚你奔一个吧



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:40:16 2007) 提到:

但仔细想一想,诡辩一下,也许没错



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:40:17 2007) 提到:

赫赫,你好像觉得TOUCH谁的BUTTON挺有成就感的,如果是这,就算你TOUCH我的吧。
我觉得你今天婶婶到到的,P大的事情,又TOUCH BUTTON又进入角色的。我的BUTTON,
你可以问TOBE,我想他比你清楚多了。我觉得这个问题比较有意思才正经跟你讨论,你
非要以为我只要严肃说点事情就是被TOUCH BUTTON。。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:41:11 2007) 提到:

FED是一个联邦的系统啊,跟联邦法院一样,分区的,SF城里也有一个吧,门口挺森人的


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:41:34 2007) 提到:

包嫂,请来胳肢胳肢老包



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:41:39 2007) 提到:

你比我不厚道多了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:42:16 2007) 提到:

又来了。别整天这么牛鼻烘烘的好么?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:42:50 2007) 提到:

对滴,i like 联邦的系统 这个词



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:44:23 2007) 提到:

这个跟历史版那些歪说历史的文章一样啊,看看好玩就OK
拿来做豁然开朗状还是免了吧:哟,秦始黄是吕不韦的儿子呢!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:45:25 2007) 提到:

纳税人PAY就是联邦PAY啊,我是说FED首脑的工资好像不是联邦政府BUDGET。这个我不
确定,是听来的


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:45:42 2007) 提到:

换张照片吧,嘴巴不够大。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:46:01 2007) 提到:

老包一般不欺负年轻MM啊


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:47:01 2007) 提到:

不是磨?我还以为他是的。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:47:23 2007) 提到:

其实老包这个帖子popomama的,很nice了,hoho



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:48:40 2007) 提到:

nice是应该的,不nice才是不应该的。right?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:50:09 2007) 提到:

没什么应该不应该的,灌水不是泡妞,不需要照顾别人情绪啊



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:50:12 2007) 提到:

靠,你非要说你TOUCH了我的BUTTON,现在又指责我牛B洪洪,你这不成了女人打架,里
外都是你的理啊,赫赫。
好吧,就算假设我牛B洪洪,你还几次三番非要让我看个破书,这不就是你自己找不痛
快嘛?就好像妇女明知到碰到了流氓,还主动凑过去要感化流氓,结果被流氓侮辱了,
这个不能怪流氓吧



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:50:49 2007) 提到:

报告BM,SF版发现一个流氓,ban了吧



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:51:37 2007) 提到:

豁然开朗也就算了,非要跟别人推荐,跟别人推荐也就算了,别人撇嘴就是被TOUCH
BUTTON。。。赫赫


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:52:53 2007) 提到:

其实这个NICE,才TOUCH我BUTTON了,我才不CARE我对人NICE不NICE,评什么要求我对
你NICE啊,赫赫


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:53:29 2007) 提到:

你说的那是中国
美国的权利机构分工太细了,不好说
你只能说它是个国家机关。
就比如说法院,它也是国家机关,却不是政府机关(一般来说指的是executive branch)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:53:36 2007) 提到:

流氓睡觉了。。。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:53:58 2007) 提到:

我说了件事,你凑过来凑热闹。我解释,你说我不对,开始滔滔不绝离题万里,身边还
有马仔附和。我说你不明白我在说什么,你说别逼你读破书。
其实你整天做这种事情。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:54:27 2007) 提到:

我觉得流氓好像还没开始调戏妇女,反而被妇女狠狠地调戏了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  LieHeart (莱因哈特) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:55:24 2007) 提到:

你扔了砖头,就别惊讶有刀子飞过来。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:55:27 2007) 提到:

对,政策是政府的政策,但利益可能不是政府的利益。。。因为政府不是要赚钱啊,但
广大BANK和金融机关要赚钱



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:57:32 2007) 提到:

you are so wrong.
the Fed is Not 财政部 for sure.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 03:58:27 2007) 提到:

mocca说:我也是学经济的。。blahblah...不过我除了考前基本不看书。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:00:11 2007) 提到:

财政部属于布什的内阁成员
fed肯定不属于啊



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:00:14 2007) 提到:

得,只要你说的事情和是我不能凑过来了?你要能限制这个倒爷挺好的。但你后来还给
我介绍什么什么书?这不是引诱我么?我没有滔滔不绝离题万里啊,我一直在讨论FEDS
是公是斯啊,是你一会儿TOUCH BOTTON一会进入角色的,对吧?什么总统谋杀诺曼底登
陆也是你提的。反倒对于主体你不在说话了,除了让我看那书。
你说不明白不代表我就不明白啊,你说我不明白的唯一理由就是我没看你说的那个宝书
,我已经说了,没什么惊天发现,如果你觉得新鲜那是你的事情。
哈哈,唯一一个比较正面的评论就是2B成了我马仔,母哈哈哈。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:00:40 2007) 提到:

TOUCH BUTTON算调戏么?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:01:03 2007) 提到:

最独立的央行也不是FED,这句不懂


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:01:05 2007) 提到:

PENGPENGPENGPENGPENGPENGPENGPENGPENGPENGPENGPENG



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:02:06 2007) 提到:

马仔好像身份比较低微啊,不过你给我发工资就OK



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:02:18 2007) 提到:

FED当然不会明目张胆赚钱了,我说的是合FED政策息息相关的那些机构,私人的


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:02:56 2007) 提到:

没两样,并不是等于 //又帮一MM


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:04:08 2007) 提到:

这个不够说明问题。FED头脑的命名机制更像联邦法院,但推不出来联邦法院就是公有
或者私有


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:05:44 2007) 提到:

i have no idea who pays for it and what it actually belongs to. though from
the history of economics i took, i kinda know its origins. the banks never
ever belonged to government - though might be state-owned - hard to define.

the only thing i know is that it's independent.
it observes economy and makes its own effort to offset anything that it
thinks might have gone wrong.

it may work for or against the current government's will.

but president clinton apparently had a pretty good relationship with the fed
. they played together and got thing done really well for 8 years.





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:06:00 2007) 提到:

我还是觉得看他从哪拿工资薪水比较合理。如果GREENSPAN的工资是联邦出的,那它就
是政府机关


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:06:24 2007) 提到:

我不是政府机关。。。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:06:27 2007) 提到:

i don't think you can compare the Fed to 财政部。
totally different concepts.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:08:01 2007) 提到:

德意志?德意志BANK是德国的央行么?这个我不清楚了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:09:23 2007) 提到:

这个不了解,让我猜我会说FDIC是私人的,政府不可能银行出事情给每个人掏腰包吧,
那不成了发假钱了?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:10:00 2007) 提到:

没说你不知道啊,我帮你也是因为你知道啊,看来我名声太差了,5555


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:11:33 2007) 提到:

对。公有性质,总统命名议会批准。
所以我说不能根据命名和任期就推出公有私有。否则不就成了,法院如果私有,内阁就
成了私有了?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:11:42 2007) 提到:

fed, occ, fdic這些﹐都是監管機構啦
regulatory agency



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:13:42 2007) 提到:

hoho﹐等下tmm什麼的高手出來說﹐你們一群外行和小under﹐懂個P﹐
我講給你們聽



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:14:12 2007) 提到:

她的论点是FED是政府机关之一,和财政部一样,同样是政府机关。
你然后说FED不是财政部,我只是指出你对她话产生这样的理解好像不对。当然她的观
点对不对是另外一回事


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:17:33 2007) 提到:

yeah, i agree with you on that.
but still, 财政部 to me is really like an accounting dept: taking care of
government spending. and it has a lot to do with politics and morals and
social standards. each president may have their own prefs during their
presidency.

whereas the Fed purely takes care of consumer behaviors in the economy.
whatever small move it takes, the economy will respond right away.

if 财政部is a daily meal. the Fed looks like viagras to me. ha ha





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:18:32 2007) 提到:

但FED这个机构政策变化对太多个人利益产生的影响太巨大了,所以才会产生这么多对
它性质是公是私的质疑。
比如这个股市,FED政策几乎成了一个最重要的晴雨表,就好像总说中国政府操纵股市
一样,这个FED政策很容易被误解成政府行为是政府操纵,其实FED不是这么一个政府智
能机构


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:18:49 2007) 提到:

我不同意是政府机关。
但是是不是国家owned. 我也不sure.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:19:03 2007) 提到:

讲讲还好,不要MODEL,我怕被搞死 //跑


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:19:36 2007) 提到:

等等,这就能说明FDIC是政府机构了?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:20:24 2007) 提到:

那就没什么特殊了,那你说德意志(空格)欧洲央行是什么意思


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:21:13 2007) 提到:

很简单,财政部完全代表本届政府的政策,FEDS不是。财政部的BOSS是总统,FEDS的
BOSS不是


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:21:30 2007) 提到:

?财政部不需要独立吧,就是管理政府的帐务的。




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:22:15 2007) 提到:

yea! 所以最开始我回你帖子我觉得你的观点挺对的。
很难得啊。我们那个时候考试,这可是关键点呢



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:23:22 2007) 提到:

就算是国家OWN,也不是政府OWN,这里的政府是说行政机关,国家是说三权分立的合体


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:25:13 2007) 提到:

i don't think it belongs to the government. but i am not sure what you mean
by government.





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:25:56 2007) 提到:

SORRY,我要说职能
就好像你已经说的,央行不能说明什么,因为各国央行性质不同(除了各国央行都不做
商业银行投资银行的业务这点),和政府的关系不同。比如中国,央行就是政府。在美
国,就不是



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:26:23 2007) 提到:

肯定不是私,但是公是哪个公咧?




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:27:09 2007) 提到:

在美国,联邦政府就是这届administration, 要换总统就全换了。government是更广泛
的概念。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:27:38 2007) 提到:

财政的英文是fiscal吧。突然想起来。
fiscal policy can't be independent of government budget ah




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:27:56 2007) 提到:

对啊,不矛盾啊,这样的机构你说算政府么?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:28:05 2007) 提到:

彻底晕了,睡觉去。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:28:37 2007) 提到:

我晕了,一边是独立性最高的,一边说是政府机构。。。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:29:43 2007) 提到:

不是没有先例,根本就不可能啊,谁需要也没用,总统先把你炒了。我当然说的是美国


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:30:23 2007) 提到:

假公济私啊,这就是那本神秘宝书的结论


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:31:11 2007) 提到:

不对么?总统是行政机关的头脑啊


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:31:42 2007) 提到:

第2句你在说美国FED么?如果是,坚决不同意


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:32:44 2007) 提到:

这个广泛的GOVERNMENT没有什么统一政策,只有ADMINISTRATION有自己的政策。我只说
美国,别拿德国中国比。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:33:11 2007) 提到:

难道FED是狭义的?


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:34:31 2007) 提到:

这么说吧,德国议会翻天了,总理换了,经济政策换了,德国央行政策变么?
美国总统换了,政府换了,但FED不应该变政策,that's it


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:36:04 2007) 提到:

这个就是个态度问题了,这样的态度我很不喜欢。学什么不说明什么问题。否则根本你
就没必要花这么长时间讨论。
何况你刚才都承认了你对美国这些并不了解


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:36:18 2007) 提到:

那你肯定错了


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:37:08 2007) 提到:

肯定不是私人的,并不能代表他是政府的,FED就是这么个怪胎。否则我们根本没什么
需要争论的


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:37:57 2007) 提到:

你自己说的,FDIC不是狭义的政府机构,但FED不同,我反问你难道FED是狭义的政府机
构,为什么没有逻辑


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:38:43 2007) 提到:

你没回答我问题,德国的央行政策跟不跟政府换界变化


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:39:23 2007) 提到:

你用其他国家央行性质套美国FED的方式肯定不对,这个我可以保证


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:41:23 2007) 提到:

AGAIN,我说了不了解德国央行到底怎么运作。你说德国央行是政府机构,我可以假设
你是对的,但还是不能从德国央行的性质就推美国FED性质啊,这里面没有必然联系啊。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:42:50 2007) 提到:

看来你的疑惑是这个”政府“,不是FED。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:43:58 2007) 提到:

那我是总理,政府首脑,我要你银行政策变化听我的,不听我的我就撤了你,德国总理
有这个权力嘛?如果没有,我就同样认为它不是政府机构


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:45:58 2007) 提到:

既然肯定不一样,还怎么能套用德国或者别的一个国家央行来看FED呢?
其实绕了这么大圈,我的意思就说,FORGET德意志,就说美国FED。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:46:45 2007) 提到:

没错,不能推出TRUE OR FALSE的,就是IRRELEVANT啊


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:46:59 2007) 提到:

你跑火車啊
FDIC和FED一樣﹐是根據某年某法設立的聯邦監管機構



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:47:55 2007) 提到:

你刚才说了世界各国央行可能都有不同,严格的说,肯定不一样。。。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:50:48 2007) 提到:

狹義governemnt = administration = executive branch of state
廣義政府 = state



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:51:34 2007) 提到:

你这段里面有严重漏洞。。。GREENSPAN是总统任命的,可总统不能免了他,see the
difference here?
跟联邦法院是一样的


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  saros (富贵闲人) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:52:04 2007) 提到:

Greenspan was appointed by the board of directors of the Fed/not the
president.
i do believe that 谁任免,你就听谁 is in general true.

boxster does have a great sense in economics. i have to admit.





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:53:12 2007) 提到:

中国的CASE不一样,中国党中央国务院人大其实都是一条裤子的。。//四面环顾


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 04:58:10 2007) 提到:

我没说FED是三权之一,我只是说FED头目是总统提名参议院确认。。。这个性质和联邦
大法官的认命机制一样



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 05:00:19 2007) 提到:

不觉得更好


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 05:02:15 2007) 提到:

我认为争论的过程就是学习的过程。书也是人写的,跟把你的观点我的观点汇总起来各
出一本没有什么两样,一样debatable.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  BOXSTER (每天赚钱多一些,每天灌水少一些) 于 (Thu Feb  8 05:03:52 2007) 提到:

比如我从你的帖子里学到了德国央行是世界货币政策最独立的央行之一。。。


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 11:06:15 2007) 提到:

hehe.... summary is, I want to dig this deeper....
opinions is not important



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 11:07:14 2007) 提到:

this is true.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 11:10:25 2007) 提到:

hehe... //hand
can't read long articles



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 11:14:14 2007) 提到:

he should not bah
justice system does not belong to gov, at least in theory



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 11:15:45 2007) 提到:

haha... this is your purpose



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 11:17:17 2007) 提到:

//addoil
this thread is going to da moon




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Thu Feb  8 11:57:04 2007) 提到:

既然如此,我也来说说我的感觉。
我觉得所有政府最终都要和有钱阶级,精英阶级一起。在文化低的国家,尤其明显,在
文化高,人民彪悍,人口少的国家就和谐一些,有些民主。想打破,看看文化大革命以
后,多少文化人拿起笔来骂毛主席就知道了:)
美国的政府我觉得效率很高,真是高度资本主义的体现,很多政策的制定和执行都很好
,所以现在中国在各方面都在学习,像媒体,银行,房地产,移民制度,等等。
但是美国不一样的地方是,有钱,所以中国经常涸泽而渔,在美国更多的是剥削,而不
是一扫而空,所以政府和资本家都希望房子涨价,平缓或者不动都行,这样政府有税收
,银行有利息。同时美国政府是世界上唯一可以向全世界剥削的国家,所以但凡有哪些
高科技公司,有哪些石油国家,资本家还可以从中国等国家拿到更多的利润,就不需要
向国内人民开刀。
所以归纳为,除非美国在世界的影响力在经济,技术和军事都降低了,资本家就要开始
涸泽而渔了,历史上发生过几次了,不过那个时候,有房子,没房子,只要是平头百姓
,就是个惨字而已了。
所以在这里的美国人都努力工作,保证技术领先,支持战争。同时大量借钱,把自己绑
在国家和资本家的车轮上,既然没有办法,又想享受,就借钱呗。而且美国最近几十年
发展的就是好。还有人就是住apartment,但是也享受,也行。
因为从钱的角度说,我们是小虾米,从个人的角度说,每个人都是100%,自己身体好,
高兴就是全部。
总之,我不觉得房子能大跌,至于买不买就见仁见智了。如果大跌了,只能说美国的那
些有钱人傻了,或者别的国家崛起了,必须涸泽而渔了:)


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 12:45:07 2007) 提到:

ZAN! this hole is deeper and deeper ah



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:09:45 2007) 提到:

你中学政治白学了
经济周期是资本主义的必然规律。
纳斯达克从5000掉到1100的时候,肯定也有老百姓让记者向政府和资本家呼吁呼吁,不
过没用



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  mapcar (绵掌) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:11:11 2007) 提到:

难道, 中学政治, 不是应该白学的吗?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  tvstar (hehe) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:11:36 2007) 提到:

ft. this thread still LIVE???



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:12:04 2007) 提到:

tell me then why the ratio of the pay to ceo and average joe is from 5-7:1
to 340:1 in States. Why it used to be one worker per family. :-)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  yiran2006 (亦然) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:14:09 2007) 提到:

又睡了一觉,这个坑还在.....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  qaz (得意的飘) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:14:31 2007) 提到:

这坑怎么还没死



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:19:53 2007) 提到:

Naz from 5000 to 1000, 7:1 to 340:1, rmb to 7.73
All of these are 剥削,因为美国还有很多人没有受影响,只是有钱人更有钱了,中
国产品依然不敢涨价,美国人依然有钱。股市上失去的不过是多出来的,同时有人赚钱
了,房地产好就说明人民还有钱。所以只是剥削。
真正的涸泽而渔是取消医疗,退休(房子跌价),失业。中国现在应该很紧张,绝对不
要升值,不然美国的荣景还能因为人民币的升值持续很久。

发信人: easyfm (T-MAC), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb  8 13:12:04 2007), 转信

tell me then why the ratio of the pay to ceo and average joe is from 5-7:1
to 340:1 in States. Why it used to be one worker per family. :-)


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:20:35 2007) 提到:

this keng is so strong yah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:22:09 2007) 提到:

lol, co-wonder
it starts to be a eye sore for some ppl



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:23:43 2007) 提到:

你说得没错,不过中国也没受什么苦,从2000年到现在美国人更有钱了, 但中国人更
更有钱了,in relative term, 美国人not as有钱 as before.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:24:13 2007) 提到:

tongxue, expolite is good thing
without it, we don't have a job




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:24:20 2007) 提到:

偶去看了货币战争
作者几乎是用一叶障目的心态写出来的这篇文章
目的性远远超过客观性
建议大家不要读了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  sevens (七七) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:24:42 2007) 提到:

agree


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:24:54 2007) 提到:

nod. lao mei don't save much
2006, saving rate is -1% 

how much is chinese? 40%



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:25:01 2007) 提到:

其实不行了,我就是起哄,同时表明观点:)
房地产不过是老把戏,我觉得不会跌,10年以后继续涨:)

发信人: lingsu (树叶会啊会阿), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb  8 13:22:09 2007), 转信

lol, co-wonder
it starts to be a eye sore for some ppl



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:25:34 2007) 提到:

这个坑的生命力真顽强啊
我说说精英如何玩大众吧,光吹个泡泡只是这个游戏的一半,另一半是让泡泡破,一拉
一打就像 Internet bubble, 大众的钱就都跑到金融精英的口袋里去了




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:26:57 2007) 提到:

i bet 50/50  //run quick.................




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:27:09 2007) 提到:

实际上美国平民不比以前更有钱,中国平民估计也是如此
这种剥削其实是社会发展的动力
叫劳动生产率



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:28:52 2007) 提到:

同意,所以中国提出“可持续的发展“。
我觉得现在中国人很明白,就是外部的阻力,内部的压力很大。我希望祖国好。

发信人: jajabin (龘), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb  8 13:23:43 2007)

你说得没错,不过中国也没受什么苦,从2000年到现在美国人更有钱了, 但中国人更
更有钱了,in relative term, 美国人not as有钱 as before.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:29:00 2007) 提到:

您老的功劳比MSJ大得多,呵呵



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:32:57 2007) 提到:

另外你说“中国没有受苦“,我不同意,记得初中读了个禁书,“悬崖上的中国“。作
者很明白开始就是靠劳动力密集行业和卖资源。不过对环境的污染太厉害了。当时作者
就预测会有沙尘暴,长江变黑,各种疾病死灰复燃,新的疾病。
现在是不敢整治,就业压力大呀。希望中国越来越好。因为我们已经付出很大代价了。

发信人: fanrf (准备着), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb  8 13:28:52 2007)

同意,所以中国提出“可持续的发展“。
我觉得现在中国人很明白,就是外部的阻力,内部的压力很大。我希望祖国好。

发信人: jajabin (龘), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb  8 13:23:43 2007)

你说得没错,不过中国也没受什么苦,从2000年到现在美国人更有钱了, 但中国人更
更有钱了,in relative term, 美国人not as有钱 as before.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:33:51 2007) 提到:

房坑变成中国坑了?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:34:26 2007) 提到:

hehe.
not so much to say about house after 1000 posts. :)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:35:40 2007) 提到:

中国的劳动人民受的剥削可不轻呢,生活并不轻松。眼光老是放在中国的新兴精英身上
,当然看不到中国的苦。
生产 ipod 的 富士康的血汗工厂只是一个小典型
还有中国的环境破坏的压力也越来越大。
中国老是这样狂买美国国债,人为压低币值,帮着老美剥削中国人的政策是不能持久维
持下去的




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:37:31 2007) 提到:

这个坑没转MM坑,毛坑,装修坑,孩子坑,已经很奇怪了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:37:43 2007) 提到:

中国有一点比以前进步了,就是森林覆盖率增加了,我原来上学的时候只有12%,现在
到18%了,野猪都开始到街上遛弯了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:37:56 2007) 提到:

很简单呀,世界是个大金字塔,人们争取来到顶端--美国,在美国这个小金字塔里是底
层也没有关系。中国发展了,人们就看不起去美国的了,因为距离接近了。
所以这里一个很大的好处就是房子(环境),我就是羡慕大房子,新,大院子,周围是
公园,草地,绿树。可惜买不起,wuwu:(


发信人: Grapes (老葡萄), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb  8 13:33:51 2007), 转信

房坑变成中国坑了?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:38:50 2007) 提到:

房泡和中国真的关系特别密切
很多老美经济学家认为中国的低廉劳动力和巨大的中美贸易赤字是美国可以维持低利率
的最重要的原因,银根太松,这也是为什么房子会吹大泡的根本原因。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:39:35 2007) 提到:

还是没看出来第一段和第二段什么联系



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:40:17 2007) 提到:

key word: he wants a luxury home, but don't want to spend the money.
:)


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:40:50 2007) 提到:

这个坑坚持房泡的中心,很难得。大家的水没有白灌



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:40:54 2007) 提到:

就是亚,我说的多明白亚:)

发信人: jeeves (coala-diving), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb  8 13:40:17 2007), 转信

key word: he wants a luxury home, but don't want to spend the money.
:)


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:41:00 2007) 提到:

你这个总结忽略了第一段啊



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:41:38 2007) 提到:

that's not important at all. just some fei hua 21. :)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:42:41 2007) 提到:

no low rmb rate,
china industry die on piles




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:43:29 2007) 提到:

银行松不是唯一原因,银行只管印钱
钱应该用来扩展多方面BUSINESS,不过全跑房地产市场去了(至少对加州来说)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:43:55 2007) 提到:

ft... now I understand....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:44:27 2007) 提到:

出来混,早晚要还,呵呵


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:44:39 2007) 提到:

中国也不是愿意狂买美国国债, 顺差摆在那里,花不掉。美国要有胆子开放高新技术
市场就不会年年那么多的对华贸易逆差了。 美国现在狂压中国升值是希望中国狂升一
下,因为过了某个tipping point中国的制造业会失去竞争力,可是中国这么慢慢的升
整个就是把通货膨胀转嫁,这让美国很抓狂




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:46:11 2007) 提到:

要产业升级啊,要扩大内需阿,中美贸易不是中国出超越大越好。
经济发展要使普通人得利才行啊



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  lingsu (树叶会啊会阿) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:47:11 2007) 提到:

who is the LZ of this thread ?





☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:47:38 2007) 提到:

77's LG



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:47:51 2007) 提到:

中国人民不花钱,鸦片战争以前就这样
这个民族太TM优秀了,谁和中国做生意结果都是如此
至于那些不开放高科技的托辞纯粹扯淡,开了也买不了多少
没几天中国就自己造了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:49:05 2007) 提到:

普通人除了买房子,很难能从银行贷到大宗的款项了吧?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:49:33 2007) 提到:

我的马甲



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:50:08 2007) 提到:

Katie's LG



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:50:15 2007) 提到:

我们也一样啊.来美国也不花钱(除了买房子).


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:50:52 2007) 提到:

china need domestic consuming.
but damn it, housing/education/medical eat all money.(may beh stock market
soon)  this is so bad/sad.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:51:47 2007) 提到:

that's one of the reasons
不过是钱到市场上,也可以变成BUSINES LOAN



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:51:59 2007) 提到:

扩大内需阿 is most important. the problem is just as I mentioned, those
damns eat up the money via housing/edu/med



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:52:21 2007) 提到:

we are typical chinese....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:53:11 2007) 提到:

who said that!中国人民不花钱
dare not to spend the money!



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:54:19 2007) 提到:

出来混早晚要还,当年为了刺激内需出的政策,
现在把全国人民的消费能都耗在上面了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:54:30 2007) 提到:

because the housing takes too much money, eduication takes too much money.
chinese ppl ( earn good money) in some-low-housing-price areas definitely
also spend a lot on others. man.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  katiezhang (股票暴跌中) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:54:35 2007) 提到:

如果是我劳工,那我对他可要崇拜死了。这么大的一个坑。

以后他再也不用洗碗了。

幸亏不是。所以还得接着洗


发信人: Grapes (老葡萄), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb  8 13:50:08 2007), 转信

Katie's LG



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:55:37 2007) 提到:

一个意思。不花钱是因为没有安全感
祖祖辈辈都没有安全感,所以变成了“中国人民不花钱”这一结论



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:56:01 2007) 提到:

我靠。。。我最喜欢洗碗了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:56:25 2007) 提到:

that is why gov needs improve.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:56:36 2007) 提到:

看来是你本人 //RUN


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  katiezhang (股票暴跌中) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:57:09 2007) 提到:

晕死,还有这种人。

对了,好像还喜欢到垃圾。。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:57:24 2007) 提到:

agree, I always hold that opinion



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  qaz (得意的飘) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:58:34 2007) 提到:

今天怎么不穿m+了?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  goldenrain (金雨) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:58:55 2007) 提到:

中国慢慢升的策略还是对头的
美国的小算盘很简单, 就是吹泡,捅泡,就像东南亚金融危机的时候



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  katiezhang (股票暴跌中) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:59:16 2007) 提到:

FT, 忘记乐



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 13:59:34 2007) 提到:

今天她洗碗trade真身灌水



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:00:36 2007) 提到:

I know chinese people in TX. They have a lot of money but choose to save it
or buy 2nd properties.


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jajabin (龘) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:04:22 2007) 提到:

those people of course have the money to buy 2nd property.

sigh, where is my 1st property.




☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:05:19 2007) 提到:

不要sigh了,我的million house贱卖给你好了
看在BBS灌水这么久的交情上,打5折



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:05:32 2007) 提到:

yeah. after they bought BMW7, benz,boat , travelled alloverall world....
they still have a lot of money,what would they do? :-)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:05:36 2007) 提到:

but they may not make $$ from 2nd property. :)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:05:59 2007) 提到:

进价打5折?成交



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:06:15 2007) 提到:

there are more fancy cars here bah.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:06:22 2007) 提到:

买枪买炮,周末去打鸟炸鱼



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  icarus (戏迷) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:07:32 2007) 提到:

我靠


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:08:02 2007) 提到:

I think if the housing market does not crash, it's their turn now



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:08:07 2007) 提到:

most average joe would drive luxury cars there.
fancy cars here however, mostly for those bizman/ceo....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  jeeves (coala-diving) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:09:31 2007) 提到:

haha, this becomes CA vs. TX lah, haven't seen it for a while.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:10:00 2007) 提到:

bring it on....



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:10:24 2007) 提到:

呼唤黑骨头同学暂时不要喂奶了,拔冗来灌



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:13:02 2007) 提到:

你去把他喊来吧



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:31:50 2007) 提到:

My point was, their saving rate is very high compared to their non-asian
peers.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:31:57 2007) 提到:

金雨,你要是不把这个坑培养起来就辜负大熊了



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  easyfm (T-MAC) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:44:19 2007) 提到:

my point is they earn way more and have way more equity than their non-asian
peers and what they need for a luxury life.
hi, man, just like to say, if you earn consistently 1M a year. what will you
do here? (in term of the dollar value vs house value.)


☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  hetchhetchy (哈欠) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:48:30 2007) 提到:

"non-asian peers" means those who have similar income. I bet those Chinese
who earn 1M a year won't spend 1.5M a year, like many non-asian do on wall
street.



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  showoff (Showoff! Stamp!!) 于 (Thu Feb  8 14:53:55 2007) 提到:

如果查出坑主是谁大熊奖励多少伪币?



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Thu Feb  8 15:45:51 2007) 提到:

有确凿证据我可以chip in包子,呵呵。
(让这个坑变得更深一点吧。。。。)



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Thu Feb  8 15:49:51 2007) 提到:

这么胆大的野猪活不了多长吧。
上次在家附近看见一只兔子,要是搁中国估计早被消灭了。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Thu Feb  8 15:50:54 2007) 提到:

搬德州吧,租一个,花不了多少钱的,HOHO。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  Grapes (老葡萄) 于 (Thu Feb  8 15:56:50 2007) 提到:

空运过来运费太贵



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  equator (大方块-羡鱼) 于 (Thu Feb  8 15:59:22 2007) 提到:

运过去不贵啊,呵呵。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  fanrf (准备着) 于 (Thu Feb  8 16:19:27 2007) 提到:

only need green card:)

发信人: equator (大方块-羡鱼), 信区: SanFrancisco
标  题: Re: goldenrain的观点未免偏颇
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb  8 15:59:22 2007)

运过去不贵啊,呵呵。



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  blogcity (我很老,但是也很Q~~puke吧) 于 (Thu Feb  8 16:20:17 2007) 提到:

你拿了GC一定要请SF版的人吃BBQ



☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
  UOUOUO (毛呀毛呀,毛毛虫) 于 (Thu Feb  8 16:22:31 2007) 提到:

强贴留名



[上篇] [下篇] [同主题上篇] [同主题下篇]
[转寄] [转贴] [回信给作者] [修改文章] [删除文章] [同主题阅读] [从此处展开] [返回版面] [快速返回] [收藏] [举报]
 
回复文章
标题:
内 容:


未名交友
将您的链接放在这儿

友情链接


美国网址大全
中餐美食地图
 

Site Map - Contact Us - Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy

版权所有,未名空间(mitbbs.com),since 1996