Housing recovery a ways off

**Markus Keller** · 10-06-2010, 06:52 PM

So I went to a fundraiser shin dig last night. Spoke with someone from Chase. Person stated that their operating plan for dealing with the housing market is based on things not getting better/back to 'normal' for 10 years. Thought I'd pass that tidbit along.
I've been thinking 3-5, maybe 5-7 on the outside. 10 years is a long time. I don't think the general public is ready for that.

Similar Threads:

**Dub Smith** · 10-06-2010, 07:42 PM

There will always be sellers and buyers, that is the only constant in the housing industry, the variable is the appraised value (what the bank thinks it's worth) and the market value (what the buyer is willing to pay for it). Either way, when the home sells, that is where we come in....so maybe the housing recovery is not quite so bleak for us.

Ted Menelly · 10-06-2010, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by Markus Keller

So I went to a fundraiser shin dig last night. Spoke with someone from Chase. Person stated that their operating plan for dealing with the housing market is based on things not getting better/back to 'normal' for 10 years. Thought I'd pass that tidbit along.
I've been thinking 3-5, maybe 5-7 on the outside. 10 years is a long time. I don't think the general public is ready for that.

Capitalism at its worse or best which ever way your thinking may be. Capitalism has to be cut loose once again. Yes in a better managed way but the strings have to be cut. 10 years....forget about it. This country cannot survive for ten years at this rate. Sustaining growth or a little better is one thing. Stopping growth and building more debt is quite another.

**Matt Fellman** · 10-06-2010, 10:51 PM

We're into our 4th year of a declining, piss poor market in my area and it's generally slower than it's ever been right now. Another 6 years doesn't seem too hard to believe. If you're waiting for the market to be the way it was in 05/06 I have some bad news.... like the word "never".

**Nick Ostrowski** · 10-07-2010, 02:45 AM

I don't think anybody is expecting 2005/2006 again but what would be considered "back to normal"?

**Michael Thomas** · 10-07-2010, 04:27 AM

The housing bubble was not uniformly distributed across the country, and some markers will recover much faster than others, but if you look at the bubble as a national event, the picture remains pretty ugly:

**Markus Keller** · 10-07-2010, 05:17 AM

I see 'normal' as Pre-2002 at the least. Roughly 2000-2006 was not normal at all. The insanely increasing home values every 6 months or less, house gambling and refi's were not normal.
As much as people may want to complain about government manipulation/intervention etc, the reality on the street level is that there is no other money to deal with many of the housing issues facing communities.
When homes sit vacant they become targets for criminal activity. Dealing with the consequences of those issues costs municipalities lots of money they already don't have.

Ted Menelly · 10-07-2010, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by Markus Keller

I see 'normal' as Pre-2002 at the least. Roughly 2000-2006 was not normal at all. The insanely increasing home values every 6 months or less, house gambling and refi's were not normal.
As much as people may want to complain about government manipulation/intervention etc, the reality on the street level is that there is no other money to deal with many of the housing issues facing communities.
When homes sit vacant they become targets for criminal activity. Dealing with the consequences of those issues costs municipalities lots of money they already don't have.

The street thinking is this. There is no more money from the gov (us) We cannot keep printing/borrowing/taxing. Taxing one increase costs from everything you buy because they are making up for their taxation. in reality we get taxed teice for every tax we get. Once out of your pay at the end of the year and then every single place you buy goods and services.

Dealing with the consequences is pretty much what is going to have to happen and with less municipal workers than there are now ...because...... there is no more money for them either. Tax higher to keep or grow municipal workers. Less gets spent into the economic engine from you. There is no money for municipal workers unless you cut them a check. Oh yeah, decrease 50% earnings and benefits of the upper half of the pay scale for municipal workers.

We also have to think of the millions out of work. No, it is not you but it is your neighbor or the guy down the street. At the rate we are at now it means that all those folks out of work.....will remain out of work for a very very long time. GOv spending has to not only stop increasing but must reverse what it did over the prosperous years. It must come back into reality which means a serious cut in pay for millions of workers as well as their benefits.

Sorry, but have you noticed the amount of threads similar to this and growing. Yes everyone is thinking about it.

I really, really, really do not like to rant no matter how it may seem.