US house prices in freefall -- redux

[Patroklos]

Well Kid, you go ahead and hold your breath for your free house.

I am going to work hard and SMART and buy my own.

Let me know how your approach works out for you

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Well Kid, you go ahead and hold your breath for your free house.

I am going to work hard and SMART and buy my own.

Let me know how your approach works out for you

More hyperbole. I never said I wanted free houses. It's sad really, that hyperbole is all you guys can bring.

[Patroklos]

What is sad is you are still posting in this thread

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Patroklos
What is sad is you are still posting in this thread

You can use hyberbole all week if you like, and I'll stick around to point it out everytime. It's the best indication that you have nothing important to say.

[Patroklos]

Kid, ever since people started addressing anything remotely sorced to you any post was by definition unimportant.

Did you get your house yet?

[rah]

I don't think everyone is entitled to a home. Besides all the negatives of housing projects, if everyone is entitled then there is no guarentee of pride of ownership. The result is run down projects. I much prefer the mixed income housing model where pride in ownership results in proper upkeep. You must have a stake in it. Being given something doesn't convey the pride of earning it.

The last results of your every one is entitled methodolgy has been torn down in CHicago, and I hope no one ever recommends that model again.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Kidicious
I never said I wanted free houses.

That said (again). I'm not against public housing, but that's not the same as owning a house. I really don't know why anyone brought it up in the first place.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Patroklos
What is sad is you are still posting in this thread

QFT. All of us at the office are laughing our tails off! I just had to show this thread off. Amazing the depth of the lack of understanding being shown here.

I'm done. Come have the last word with me Kid!

[Ben Kenobi]

That's too simple. Choices have to be made. You can't just pretend like you aren't making choices.

I am. I believe liberty is the most important thing. Why do you have doubts in liberty? Liberty means that bad **** happens, but at least you have the means to get to the good.

I'd rather be free and poor, then rich and shackled.

Choosing profit over people needs is.

Again, you cannot provide for poor people, unless you have wealth and prosperity. Thus profit is essential for the betterment of poor people.

That's got nothing to do with what is going on here. People are supporting a specific policy because they want to profit from it. It got nothing to do with honest work.

It has everything to do with honest work. Where does the subsidy come from? The pockets of all your neighbours.

That would be great if the free market worked like you are claiming that it does, but it doesn't. My proposal is in the best interest of society as a whole. The only ones who oppose it seek to profit from the alternative.

I would profit more from your scheme. I'd get a house before you got one Kid.

Thanks man.

I oppose your scheme, because it would either bankrupt the builders, which means no houses are built, lead to ruinous taxation (think 80-90 percent), and the collapse of civil society in general.

A house is nice, but only so long as it can be kept in good repair. A house is useless if everything else falls apart.

They certainly are.

In what planet? People have the basic need of shelter. Owning their own house!=shelter.

Who taught you that you were entitled to a house?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I am. I believe liberty is the most important thing. Why do you have doubts in liberty? Liberty means that bad **** happens, but at least you have the means to get to the good.

I'd rather be free and poor, then rich and shackled.

You just can't understand what's being said, can you? It's not a choice between freedom and imprisonment. That's too simple. The choice is more complicated than that. That's what you never understand. This is just hyperbole.

It would suit you better not to use this type of rhetoric.

Again, you cannot provide for poor people, unless you have wealth and prosperity. Thus profit is essential for the betterment of poor people.

That's just BS. I doubt you have any evidence to this. You can provide for poor people at least just as well with lower profits. Taxes for example go to fund all kinds of programs for poor people.

It has everything to do with honest work. Where does the subsidy come from? The pockets of all your neighbours.

When something is good for the economy, it pays for itself.

I would profit more from your scheme. I'd get a house before you got one Kid.

Thanks man.

I oppose your scheme, because it would either bankrupt the builders, which means no houses are built, lead to ruinous taxation (think 80-90 percent), and the collapse of civil society in general.

A house is nice, but only so long as it can be kept in good repair. A house is useless if everything else falls apart.



In what planet? People have the basic need of shelter. Owning their own house!=shelter.

None of this is worth a response.

Who taught you that you were entitled to a house?

I was taught the same thing that you were. I've just never bought into it. Just because you are taught something doesn't mean it's true.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I am. I believe liberty is the most important thing. Why do you have doubts in liberty? Liberty means that bad **** happens, but at least you have the means to get to the good.

I'd rather be free and poor, then rich and shackled.

You just can't understand what's being said, can you? It's not a choice between freedom and imprisonment. That's too simple. The choice is more complicated than that. That's what you never understand. This is just hyperbole.

It would suit you better not to use this type of rhetoric.

Again, you cannot provide for poor people, unless you have wealth and prosperity. Thus profit is essential for the betterment of poor people.

That's just BS. I doubt you have any evidence to this. You can provide for poor people at least just as well with lower profits. Taxes for example go to fund all kinds of programs for poor people.

It has everything to do with honest work. Where does the subsidy come from? The pockets of all your neighbours.

When something is good for the economy, it pays for itself.

I would profit more from your scheme. I'd get a house before you got one Kid.

Thanks man.

I oppose your scheme, because it would either bankrupt the builders, which means no houses are built, lead to ruinous taxation (think 80-90 percent), and the collapse of civil society in general.

A house is nice, but only so long as it can be kept in good repair. A house is useless if everything else falls apart.



In what planet? People have the basic need of shelter. Owning their own house!=shelter.

None of this is worth a response.

Who taught you that you were entitled to a house?

I was taught the same thing that you were. I've just never bought into it. Just because you are taught something doesn't mean it's true.

[Ben Kenobi]

You just can't understand what's being said, can you?

What's so hard to understand about what I said. I'm making a logical point. Of course, it's better being rich and free then poor and shackled, but that's hardly significant.

What is significant is how you weigh things. There is a fundamental difference between us. I value freedom more then wealth, whereas for you it's just the opposite. You don't care where the wealth comes from, so long as you get it, whereas, I'd rather not have the wealth if it means taking from someone else.

This is just hyperbole.

And you've missed the whole point I was trying to make. The point is which do you value more, wealth or freedom?

That's just BS. I doubt you have any evidence to this.

If everyone was equally poor, how could they help each other out? It's the same problem as the man on the bank being a bad swimmer. You need profit to pull people out of the water just as you need to have learned to swim. Inequality is not necessarily a bad thing, it is essential.

You can provide for poor people at least just as well with lower profits. Taxes for example go to fund all kinds of programs for poor people.

Thanks for confirming my point. You need profits in the first place before you can give any away. No profits = no programs. Rich and wealthy nations tend to have better social systems then poor ones.

When something is good for the economy, it pays for itself.

Exactly, which is why government programs are not, because they do not fund themselves.

None of this is worth a response.

IOW, I have no argument to refute these statements. Thanks Kid.

I was taught the same thing that you were. I've just never bought into it. Just because you are taught something doesn't mean it's true.

No, but again, where did you come up with this brilliant idea that you are entitled to a house? I know other people who think the same, and they tend to ***** and moan about how unfair the world is that other people are doing better then them, and how you have to drag them back.

I even wrote an article on these people.

Here's a statement of truth kid. You are 40. You have maybe another 40 years ahead of you. Nobody owes you jack ****. You are not entitled to a good job, a house, you are not entitled to anything beyond the basics that you need to survive.

The sooner you realise this, the better off you will be, because you will recognise the need to provide for yourself, and that the only one who's going to get a house for you is the guy who's head is on your shoulders.

I am surprised you've made it to 40 without realising this, and I bet it's been damn hard on you. You are a good person kid. It's time to drop an ideology that is doing crap all for you and for your family.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
What is significant is how you weigh things. There is a fundamental difference between us. I value freedom more then wealth, whereas for you it's just the opposite. You don't care where the wealth comes from, so long as you get it, whereas, I'd rather not have the wealth if it means taking from someone else.

That's absolutely not true, and few people viewing this discussion would agree that you truly hold such a value in freedom judging by your view on other issues. This is just propaganda pure and simple. You are trying to make yourself appear to be for freedom and me against it. I'm not against freedom at all.

You know, you haven't presented an argument worth a piece of **** for as long as I can remember. All of this is nothing but propaganda.

If everyone was equally poor, how could they help each other out? It's the same problem as the man on the bank being a bad swimmer. You need profit to pull people out of the water just as you need to have learned to swim. Inequality is not necessarily a bad thing, it is essential.

Wealth can be created by working together as equals, not just in working so that others can get rich. In fact, more wealth is spread out amongst people who truly deserve it when people work together for a common good for all. Your path results in inequality, war and a lot of suffering.

Thanks for confirming my point. You need profits in the first place before you can give any away. No profits = no programs. Rich and wealthy nations tend to have better social systems then poor ones.

The profits themselves are not that important to helping people, as they are to the capitalist system at certain periods of social transition. But profits mostly make more profit instead of benefits for regular people. To really benefit people you have to invest that money to do what you want to do with it.

Also, too much profit makes the economy crash. That's because profit tends to either go into investment or be tied up in cash. The stability of the economy depends on people to make purchases regularly. Too much profit creates an imbalance.

Exactly, which is why government programs are not, because they do not fund themselves.

Nonsense. Government subsidies paid for themselves regularly. There's education, roads, transportion and all kinds of things that government invests in that pays off. You know, it's a pity, but I know that you will continue to insist on this, and it only goes to show how much propaganda you are just spewing.

No, but again, where did you come up with this brilliant idea that you are entitled to a house? I know other people who think the same, and they tend to ***** and moan about how unfair the world is that other people are doing better then them, and how you have to drag them back.

I even wrote an article on these people.

Here's a statement of truth kid. You are 40. You have maybe another 40 years ahead of you. Nobody owes you jack ****. You are not entitled to a good job, a house, you are not entitled to anything beyond the basics that you need to survive.

The sooner you realise this, the better off you will be, because you will recognise the need to provide for yourself, and that the only one who's going to get a house for you is the guy who's head is on your shoulders.

I am surprised you've made it to 40 without realising this, and I bet it's been damn hard on you. You are a good person kid. It's time to drop an ideology that is doing crap all for you and for your family.

I don't think I've ever said this to anyone, but you are truly mean spirited.

You know I'm a veteren of this country. I've worked hard my whole life. I'm a good citizen, and a good person. How dare you talk to me like this. You aren't even an American.

Also, don't talk about my family and ****. Don't even talk about me. I'm about ready to put you on ignore or not even come back to this website you people here don't start making better arguments instead of crap like this.

[DanS]

After a month when price declines moderated, July showed a reaccelleration of price declines. Down 0.88% from June.

Denver, Atlanta, Boston, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Dallas bucked the downward trend.

Poor Las Vegas. It's still getting hit with a ton of bricks. Down 2.75% on the month. So are Phoenix, LA, San Diego and San Francisco: Down 2.68%, 1.63%, 1.81%, and 1.85%, respectively.

New York looks like it might start decaying rapidly, what with the financial district influencing the real estate market. It was down 0.76% on the month.

[Patroklos]