Southern California real estate prices never go down. Never, ever. This is just a mild correction. There's plenty of jobs in California. The state is filthy rich, low unemployment, extremely low crime rate, low taxes, no labor union controlling government, great public schools with lowest dropout rate, the industrial and manufacturing capital of the nation.

That's why hordes of people are arriving daily to California. For the time of your life, Come to California!

You must be thinking of the 1960's. CA is broke, crime is high and taxes are outrageous. Time of your life - sure if all you care about is the sun and the beach

The middle class is being exterminated, their real income has dropped over 14% in the last 5 years, no Jobs no increase in wages, giant increase in health care costs, food, utility's, and worse of all nothing being done, no plans to attempt to stop or even slow down this collapse of America working class, Washington wake up look at the riots overseas, do you believe we are immune !

If property prices are continuing to gown down, plummet in the next year, why do the property taxes not follow that trend? My property taxes have not gone down at all, and if my house is not worth what it was in the past, why do the taxes not reflect that?

Home prices are still a bubble compared to historic norm. According to Case Shiller index, we are still 20% above long term averages. Typical bottom comes at 20% below average. But this is not your typical recession. This is a deflationary crash. This is Great Depression material. These averages themselves are based on a money supply that was inflated by borrowing for many decades. When the money supply deflates, existing prices and salaries cannot be sustained:

www.kondratieffwavecycle.com/housing-bubble-bust/

We are following the foot steps of Great Depression. Stock market just turned down. Head and shoulders in place. 2000 is left shoulder, 2007 is the head, 2011 is the right shoulder. Stocks are a leading indicator. If Great Depression repeats, DOW is going to be 400. Then all this talk about under valued / over valued cities will not mean a thing. Beware! It has happened to past generations. Do not think we are immune. Today the debt problem is much much bigger than the days of Great Depression.

Whatever you do, do not get into debt. If you want to buy, buy cash down. Even if prices do not fall, in many cases, rent is cheaper if you consider mortgage interest, property taxes, condo fees, maintenance, lost interest/investment income...

Yeah, I just got out of high school this past summer, so looks like I'm in for a big treat... And yes, I don't plan on getting into debt at all. That's the last thing I want to do to myself...

If you think its bad now, wait until the middle of the winter when people start to get cold.

Alpha_Link - You just made one of the wisest decisions you will ever make, which is "planning on not incurring any debt". I am not sure all of what life has in store for you, but with sound decision making like that to start with I am sure you will do just fine.

Obviously a resident of Disneyland....

....and we don't live where you do so.........

Your ignorant. Just incase you didn't know it one state affects the next, and we are united, except where you live.

You're so cool. I bet you have few if any people in your life who care about you, which is why you project your putrid apathy onto the world around you. Take a deep breath and go have a cupcake you ignorant twit.

"....and we don't live where you do so.........

Your ignorant. Just incase you didn't know it one state affects the next, and we are united, except where you live."

If YOU'RE going to accuse others of being ignorant, please choose YOUR words more carefully.

Thank you.

BTW, "incase" is, actually, 2 words.

If you are dumb and enjoy throwing money away it's the perfect time.

Homes are still overpriced, jobs still in limbo, and you would be incurring this years property taxes.

You should buy a home when you need a place to live; not as an investment.

You should rent a home if you just need a place to live. Owning is an investment weather you like it or not and major one at that. Buying a home is likely the biggest purchase you will make in your life and it needs to be part of a larger plan. All investments have some risk, and you should never risk more than you can afford to lose.

If you can afford to take the risk this might be a good time to buy in certain parts of the country that are starting to recover.

Interest rates are at historically low points and if you are going to stay in your home for a long period of time, Now is the right time to buy a home. The housing market will recover eventually. I remember we sold our home back in the day of the saving and loans crisis, my dad sold our home for 10 thousand less then he paid for it after making over 10 years of improvments. The home since then has increased in price to four times to what he sold it for. Now its only doubled but still the market will recover. Days of flipping are over, but why pay some other person's mortgage, that is STUPID!

I agree. Renting right now is the best thing to do unless you can find a nice home for way less than 'current' market value. Rent and let the landlord take care of repairs and paying the taxes. If you want to buy in the future, IF and WHEN the economy turns around, then save for at least a 20% down payment.

You should buy a home when you need a place to live; not as an investment.

Imho.. You never really buy a home ( think so? stop paying the taxes on it after it is supposedly paid for and see what happens ! ) but i know what you mean and i agree.

I built my wife's dream home not as a investment but because the lady wanted it after a lot of traveling for Uncle Sugar , she is happy and i would not change a thing.

Our society is changing. It used to be people worked for the same company for 40 years. Today people are changing careers, companies, etc... regularly. The statistics show that people who own a home and lose their job take longer to find a new job - one reason being that they cannot easily relocate.

So regardless of how "stupid" some think that it is to rent, it actually makes a lot of sense for many of us due to the reality of employment today.

People are getting lay-off left and right. There's little job security or income stability. How can any one sign a 30 year mortgage when he can lose his job tomorrow? There's just not enough secure jobs in USA to support high real estate prices. Even with government guaranteed loans, there is no comfort knowing you might lose all your down payment.

Real estate will no longer be the same. Prices will go down to reflect the precarious employment condition.

Only the sleazy scum bag real estate agent will tell you otherwise.

People are getting lay-off left and right.

They are also hiring Right and left 4 million every month.

People are getting lay-off left and right.

"They are also hiring Right and left 4 million every month."

Yep, some of those that are being laid off at 80K are lucky enough to find 40K or less jobs.

and some of the 40K laid off are getting 50-60K jobs.

Auto 101:

If what you say is true, then in less than one year, America will have an unemployment rate at less than 3% from the current 9.7%.

Therefore, there should be no foreclosure, no need for 99-week unemployment extension, no need for government "Stimulus," no need for QE1,2, and no need to worry about "a jobless recovery. "

What planet are you on?

Auto 101:

If what you say is true, then in less than one year, America will have an unemployment rate at less than 3% from the current 9.7%.

Evidently you don't know how the numbers are played. The fact is this is how the numbers work. They have NEW unemployment assistants clams of about 400K every week if that is try then in the last three years we have lost more than 62 million jobs and we have 62 million people unemployed.

This is how it is done You have jobs lost and jobs gained and you have people moving from one job to another. you have lets say 1,000,000 lost their job last month they hired 4 million with a jobs increase of about 100,000 that is not enough to cover everyone that is on the unemployment roles but it does cycle throw them. This is why in some months you had the jobs increases of 200,000K and have the unemployment increase.

This leaves politicians to change the numbers to show what they want.

Correcting the still overblown housing prices is the one good thing happening... or do you want your kids and grandkids living in your basement? As you mentioned they will have it bad, at least maybe they will get to see the ability to purchase a home on average wages... something that disappeared over the last 20 years.

This country is no longer great, it WAS great before our political system became corrupted and an utter failure. It is unfortunate but America has plenty more tough times ahead as the country drives into the ditch. Thank the billionaires and corporations for looting the treasury and trashing the economy. It's too late to change now...

pjam09

Average wages are approaching Walmart wages. I don't think that will be enough to keep the kids from living in your basement.

All of the money is being extracted from our economy by Wall Street bankers. It will be a long long while before we see light at the end of the tunnel with the Congress we have today.

@TheOverlord. Its not just the political element that has become 'corrupted'. Greed from the private sector is primarly reponsible for the problems in the economy. From the unions expecting rediculous wages and benefits for their employees, to the crooks in the banking industry and on Wall Street. Everybody wanting a BIGGER piece of the pie. Well, that pie is getting smaller, but the ones doing the eating still want the largest piece.

"raymagnumx

Well that's just great....stock market uncertainty, high taxes, high oil prices, unemployment high or if you are employed minimal or no raises & now the housing market is plummetting even further. I hope things start to get better or this great country is going down fast!!!!"

Taxes are at a historical low, so you can drop that problem from your rant.

What is your suggestion for solving the problems? More tax cuts for the rich?

Although I am, and have been greatly disappointed in our economic situation, and the political party currently leading the country the system is actually working as it always has. Democracy is often a slow messy process of working out just how do we the citizens want our country to be ran. As a small government with more local governing authority, and a robust private enterprise system, or as a large centralized government which believes the government is the best means to provide jobs.

We the people in this immensely complicated system chose in 2008 that we were not happy with our then President GW Bush. Unpopular unfunded overseas wars & entanglements, a growing dissatisfaction with his spending, and a tanking economy mainly although not exclusively driven by the housing crisis drove a majority to give the Democrats a try.

After 2 years, and a host of big government efforts which failed to boost, or stimulate job growth, along with an obvious out of control national debt the Republicans won the House, and narrowed the Democratic edge in the Senate. The American people were telling us all something. Since then the battle between these two opposing philosophies has waged. Big verses smaller government.

In the next election we the American people will hopefully sort this out at least for a few years by deciding which view will create jobs, and restore our country to the exceptional nature we all believe it engenders. Is it a messy affair ? Most assuredly, but to date the best the world has come up with to run a country of this magnitude. Lest we forget our whole history has encompassed a very messy, noisy, and fear mongering political debate on just how should this country be run.

Up to now as awful as the system appears to be the citizens generally get it right. Be patient the process of diverging views is working itself out as we write these posts, and as serious as the various obstacles are that we face, the American political process is working splendidly.

It's supply and demand. Areas that support the housing prices that you cited obviously have sufficient demand to justify those prices. If they didn't their homes wouldn't sell at all. Any possession, whether it is a house, rare stamps, or whatever, is worth whatever people are willing to pay for it. People need a place to live. Believe it or not, in some places like san francisco, northern nj, manhattan, etc., the local economy does support those home prices. In those places, the demand is coming from people moving to the area who need a place to live. The prices in these areas are not inflated due to speculation, they are inflated because there is no vacant land left to build a new house.

No it is not supply and demand, havent you seen the vacant houses ? Its simply that prices were artificially inflated when housing was an investment instead of shelter. I watched house prices rise by 400 and 500% in a matter of 3 years , all based on speculation. Until you bring housing back to Pre Speculation prices, the market will remain severely depressed

Supply and demand is NOT a fair reason to raise the price of anything. You walk into a grocery store and there's one egg left for 50 cents. You reach to put it in your basket, but before you do the manager walks over and slaps a $2 price on it. Fair? Only in the minds of the greedy.

Common Sense: You're sort of mixing metaphors there. Most would agree that once you've put the egg in your basket the seller cannot change the price. When you pick up the egg and put it in your basket with a marked price in mind, you have essentially made a contract to buy the egg at that price and the seller has agreed (by posting the price) to sell the egg at that price.

However, if the seller realizes that 100 people are likely to come into his store looking for eggs before you get there and he changes the marked price to $200.00, that's his prerogative. It's your prerogative not to pick the egg up and put it in your basket at that point.

If the buyer can afford it, it is foolishness on his part, if he can't it is greed on his part too.

Housing is no longer overpriced. Hasn't been for a good year. In many places with average unemployment, steady pay rates and normal growth, prices have reset back to what they were 10-11 years ago. The boom began in 2004 so tell me how prices falling the extra 15-20% below pre-boom levels means that housing is overpriced? Is it because a person earning minimum wage can't buy? Let me tell you, if you haven't invested enough in yourself to land a job paying more than minimum wage, you aren't prepared for the biggest financial investment in most American's lives.

Once upon a time...waaay back in 2009, we had foreclosures resulting in homes sold to people not prepared to tango with professional sharks. This, combined with the sudden halt of all commercial and residential development resulted in a domino effect of unemployment, with more homes being lost. Then, because foreclosures were forcing prices down, the next stage in foreclosures began. This is the stage that brought home values to a point below appropriate equilibrium: the abandonment of good homes by able but immoral mortgageholders simply because they felt that they shouldn't pay more than the home is worth. Many of these households with more than enough income to continue paying their mortgages have done the old buy-n-bail, buying homes all the way across town then leaving the 1st home to the bank, which forces home values down even more. The problem is that their new neighborhood is full of homes where the same thing happened, so prices fell even more and even though the home they bought 1-2 years ago is half what they bought the last one for, its still worth less than they bought it for because of all the buy-n-bailing that occurred. There is currently plenty of housing stock out there, probably just about equilibrium, but, because so many occupied residences are housing multi-generational families, i.e. Mom & Dad + 25 y.o. son and/or 28 y.o. daughter and her family of 3, and/or grams and gramps, there will be too many vacancies, forcing prices ever lower. The ONLY thing that will end this will be job security and steady payraises. People need to see a steady and increasing financial stream in the future before they move out and get the residential market moving again. This requires manufacturing being moved back home, health care costs under control, energy price spikes to be neutralized and restoration of consumer confidence. None of this is being addressed by anyone in Washington. We should have cut foreign spending and began instituting import tariffs 2 years ago. If it had happened, real jobs would have already begun sprouting here - not $9/hr retail jobs that we are seeing now.

Miker -- No matter the supply or demand - the egg is still an egg. You are not talking about the value of the egg. You are describing the ability to profit from inflation.

Inflation 'creates' money from thin air - with supply/demand as the justification. The localized example of the egg only affects that local economy. Apply the same inflation to the entire economy (as was done with housing) - irrespective of supply/demand and the asset switches from real value to 'ability to inflate prices'. Housing was capitalized on inflation - not any true supply/demand value.

Nerm: I'm not arguing your point, which is a valid one, but I'll simply point out that what you describe is no different than what happens in the stock market every single day. The price of a given stock has almost no basis in real value - it's all psychology, greed, panic, and fear. But, at the end of the day, all of that goes into creating - or killing - demand. When the bell rings, the price reflects what people are willing to pay for a piece of a finite pie. Which is true supply and demand in action. The fact that people got suckered into wanting more house than they needed or could afford or that they truly believed they could sell the house for more later is largely irrelevant; the demand was there, so prices went up. Supply and demand doesn't care what creates the demand or what affects supply. It just is. Like gravity.

Seller's perogative to raise the price = greed. Plain and simple. It did not cost him any more to produce the egg - such as increase in chicken feed, transportation costs that were passed on to the seller of the egg. Nothing has changed about the house except maybe - with low interest rates - more people may qualify to buy it. Therefore, raise the price? That is greed.

So, let's say you want to sell your house - and let's say it's the house you grew up in and inherited from your parents. How are you going to determine the price you ask? (Don't put this off on "your realtor" - YOU set the price.)

How much?

Come on, how much?

Oh! You want ME to set the price for you? Sure. No problem.

Starting to get it now? Sure, there is a place where capitalism starts crossing over into greed, but it's a broad and very fuzzy, gray area - not a thin, sharp line. "Greed" is subjective. I'm not defending it; that's just what it is. What you consider greedy would probably be considered Amish by someone like Paris Hilton. But, a price is a price. And, regardless of how you feel about it, the price that a seller asks for HIS property is HIS prerogative. You don't have to like it, but you also don't have to pay it. If you do and you later find out that you could have gotten the egg or the house or the car or the bubble gum for less, that's your problem - not the seller's greed.

Very well said Miker. Common Sense, the definition of fair market value is what a willing buyer will pay and a willing seller will accept for a given item. This is not communism - the housing price is not dictated by the government. Nobody twisted the buyers' arms in 2005 and 2006 (except for the other potential buyers).

The issue became a question of value based on the appraisals and the appraisers failed in their jobs.

How many of you have paid 300-500 dollars for a drive by appraisal?

The appraisal plays into taxes paid to the local government.

A home in Las Vegas is nothing but chicken wire, stucco, 2x4's and tile. Construction cost about 80k for a very nice home. Selling price about 4 to 5 times that based on a appraisal.

So think about the appraisal being done and the cost of construction to the value of the loan prior to signing your life away.

Too many make the mistake that oh hey I qualify for a 300k home then that's what I will buy. Now there is no money for vacations or emergencies etc.

Just because you qualify for a certain amount does not mean you should sign the dotted line for that amount.

As for the supply and demand. There are too many homes sitting dormant now in most areas and the cost of a home should be based on the value of the construction.

Miker,

Very well said, Miker. Thanks. I like the way you put that together. What is something worth? It depends upon who wants it and how bad they want it. Each and every transaction you make is very much like an auction with folks deciding what they are willing to pay and folks deciding what they want for the thing.

The whole housing market thing is so so nuts. I paid $18,000 for our house (built in the early '50s) in 1975--it was the last of the inexpensive houses in town. It was a fixer upper and I really have worked hard on it over the years. It is a small but really nice flat roofed house in a really comfortable area of town. Similar houses are selling for astronomical amounts in the area but the homes are on the market for a long time. It seems that the buyers are looking for charming, comfortable homes that aren't too big and are easy to heat and cool.

Many of my friends bought a new house every time they got a raise. I always thought that was a mistake. We bought land instead and stayed in our comfortable home. Now they are retired and paying a huge mortgage. House broke, I call it. Land values have gone up and, now and then, if the buyer wants some land in a good area, I sell a piece here and there. I still think that is the way to go, even in today's economy. But, that's just me.

People who put all their eggs in the basket of their house made a mistake, to my way of thinking.

True Grump. The boom in housing prices actually started taking off just after 2000. By the mid 2000's it was purely insane. Before the actual start of the bubble, decent 4 bedroom homes in decent middle class neighborhoods were selling for no more than $140,000. The same house in the same area is still going for at least $240,000. Still not realistic with jobs and income.

I live in Portland, OR now. Unemployment was 7% when times were good. Sellers are still trying to get $300,000 for tiny little fixer uppers. There are no jobs or opportunities here... the crash has not set in in Portland yet, but you can bet that it is coming. For now, sales are supported by yuppies who want to live here, foolishly spending their inheritances

Common Sense,

Who is the greedy one? The merchant or you?? If you are not subject to supply and demand you have just entitled yourself to a risk free existence at the expense of the merchant and I assume you want some type of force used on this person so you can exist risk free... people that want to exist at the expense of others are the greedy ones....

beaulieu16,

A small comfortable, well equipped two bedroom house in my area (not too far from the university) is going for $240,000. It is insane. While I am happy that there is a possibility that I could make some money on my house if I were to put it on the market, I know the price of $240,000 is unreasonable.

Those sellers asking for $300,000 might just get what the are asking for. The folks with money are buying those kinds of houses for their kids to live in while they go to university (around here anyway) or they are fixing them up and selling them for even more money (which I think is a really risky proposition just now unless you have the ability to do the fixing yourself).

Miker - Yes, you are describing how the stock market operates. The housing market does not operate that way.

To use your analogy with the $2 egg - would you lend someone $2 using an egg as collateral?

The lending institutions knew what the historical increase in house prices were. The lending institutions knew that the prices during the bubble were over inflated. The lending institutions accepted inflation as collateral. And by capitalizing inflation - the bubble was not seen as high risk by buyers. The banks did not manage their risk and mislead buyers into thinking the bubble was low risk.

Paying an inflated price is your business. If you choose to pay for inflation - go ahead. Lending someone else's money to pay for inflation violates fiduciary responsibility.

First, I had to check the date on this article since it seemed like a re-run from 2008. The fall has been going on for a long time. The bubble burst a long time ago in Florida and California. 247wallst is expounding pure BS in this article as a "new" thing.

Second, many folks are all messed up on the years (Sung Park, Common Sense, and others). The housing boom took off in 1996-98 when the Clinton administration issued rules "encouraging", i.e. requiring, more lending for homes to riskier clients. The financial houses found a way to dump the risk off to others via CDOs so they kept it up without complaining since they made money on the loans, the origination fees, and the CDOs. Since most buyers could make the payments for a couple of years, things looked good and more investors wanted more CDOs. Thus, employment stayed high and loans kept being paid on time.

200-2002 slowing really was not seen unless you were in those few Internet bubble heavy areas where employment took a hit. Other booming areas kept going.

The housing boom became a bubble once so called investors decided that they could make good money flipping homes within 12-18 months. The investors created the bubble by being the last buyers in the market! Many of them were so lost in the run up, they just moved on to another market once one peaked out.

Depending where you are talking about, the bubbles peaked and then burst as far back as 2004 for Las Vegas, mid-2005 into 2006 for Phoenix and late 2006 into 2007 for other areas. The fall was slower in some areas than others so using 2008 as a benchmark (Common Sense) means you were already 50% lower prices in, say, Las Vegas, by then. Most bubble cities are in their 5th year of radically lower values! The rest of the country is just catching up!

People who haven't seen the big falls yet are lucky. No bubble, less fall.

Miker makes a great case explaining basic economics for houses and any purchase. Also, Common, cost is only, perhaps, the minimum starting point for deciding a price. You don't set a price based on cost plus some margin. You set it on what a market (buyer) will pay. Anything otherwise is foolish in any economy! Chavez is figuring that out in Venezuela now.

Portland's prices are artificially high because of the growth limit they foolishly installed. Washington, D.C. is similar. Fake prices due to extremely low density requirements makes houses scarce.

The stimulus was only a D.C. stimulus. It kept one segment of worker employed, the federal worker. Everybody else got scraps. That is why it failed to boost the economy and the current administration seems baffled by that fact. Congress seems equally as baffled as a slug of representatives and senators voted for it when it was obvious to anyone not in D.C. or NYC that it was doomed to failure since it sent no money where it was needed.

All ANYTHING (so far) coming out of D.C. did was slow down the fall and exacerbate the pain like slow torture versus amputation. Now they have spent their ammo shooting in the air, to use a western analogy, and have no ammo left to make any impact. Failing to actually cut the budget immediately was a big mistake and we are all in deep doo-doo because of it. Now, unless we raise taxes across the board (actually do the math you "tax the rich more" proponents), we are in a quagmire.

I don't understand why it's so hard for some folks to understand. It's quite simple. If I have the only Widget in town, and people need Widgets, I can charge whatever I want. If I want the item to actually sell, I need to pick a price that an interested buyer might actually pay. That is not greed, that is how the economy works. If people don't really want or need my Widget, or if they can find an alternate supplier of Widgets, I have to lower my price if I really want to sell it. If I lower it too much, I could sell the Widget for less than it is worth, and then I wouldn't be able to afford to buy back the same Widget (or another) if I needed it again. Sure, a buyer can always make an offer that he thinks is more reasonable. If I am really desperate to sell, I may accept the offer.

Trying to get "fair market value" for any item is not greed, it's market economics 101.

Nerm: The market price of eggs is only one aspect I'd have to consider in deciding whether I would loan you $2.00 with an egg as collateral. That's why underwriters get paid to do whatever it is they do. In this case, before I ever considered the market value of the egg, I'd have to weigh your ability to repay the $2.00. That's probably why a mortgage lender will always run your credit before they bother doing an appraisal on the house you want to buy.

This primary step was skipped during the housing boom and this inadequate analysis of the borrowers' ability to repay - not the "greed" of sellers - was what resulted in the collapse.

Only if you like cold winters LOL!!!

Cold in Pittsburgh? Try the area around Augusta ME and then talk cold winters

Yep, I am outside of Philly, so I hear you on the cold, snowy winters.

About real estate, housing prices here in the non-Pennsyltucky side of the state are double what they were in 2000. A guy in a development with a 4 bedroom, three story house told us that he paid $125,000 for it in 2000. Now, houses in that same development are going for $250,000. During the boom of 2006, they were going for over $300,000.

So, in the last ten years housing costs doubled, food costs doubled, fuel costs tripled, medical costs doubled, everything else went up to some degree because of "the economy", wages and benefits went way down, and unemployment at least doubled. That is the state of the economy - the whole darn thing is falling apart!!!

No it is just the rich from all over the world screwing us all by paying more than what places are worth. This will eventually make all the rest of us homeless if it continues.

Gee BW, maybe we should take the rich peoples money and give it all to you.

Since when is Social Security, considered welfare? If you have a legal job, you pay social security taxes into an account that you will draw from at retirement. So lets see if you pay into a stock portfolio, when you cash that out at retirement thats welfare too, or your IRA, or any other retirement fund you have, Social Security is something you pay for, it is NOT free.

So sorry; your payments into Social Security went to support the previous generation. Today's working "citizens" see no reason to continue paying to support the current wave of new retirees. You're on your own. Your 401 tanked? Too bad. Not our problem.

Welcome to the new reality.

It's true that people should be able to get money from the funds that they've invested over a long period of time (in this case, their social security). Except in our case, people maybe drawing more money from the fund than they've put into it. That maybe part of the reason why we are running out of Social Security in the first place. Should people be living off of Social Security for the rest of their lives? Don't think there is a good suggestion beside someone please fix the economy fast or raise the taxes on the top 1% of the richest group of people. Not on working class, we are talking about millionairs and company CEOs. They don't pay nearly as much taxes as their secretary percentage wise.

The main reason social security is becoming insolvent is becuse your government stole from it and put an IOU in there (like in Dumb And Dumber)

You got that right about old people trapped in their houses with still falling values or at least no buyers out there. Would love to sell and move, away from Scottsdale but wouldn't get much net from the sale and wouldn't be able to qualify elsewhere. Thank God for Soc Sec and medicare.

Always curious if you don't mine me asking .. what do you dislike about Arizona or is it just Scottsdale ? I have never been to that state or city.

Shhh! Dont tell the republicans that! Theyve gotten their wealth through hard honest work, no corruption or breaking any laws, and its theirs to keep!!!

Yea, bankers love it when housing tanks and people walk away from their mortgages.

Get over yourself and the obvious "unfairness" of the life you created. Perhaps doing something productive rather than looking for someone else to take care of you.

Theyve gotten their wealth through hard honest work, no corruption or breaking any laws, and its theirs to keep!!!

Considering that most (AS is NOT ALL)millionaires only make 80-200K, never paid more than 30K for a car and have never devorced, are in their 50's, and are first time millionairs. So Yes they did work hard and paid the price. How do you think a person that makes at the height of their life $12 an hour and have net worth 500,000 and sent all of his children to collage on his dime? it is called live below your means and save. So yes the rich will get richer and the dumb will get poorer.

Someone else to take care of me? You mean like social security that Ive paid into my entire life that will be non existent because it was given away to bankers and wall st? That kind of 'unfairness"?

Republican Im guessing with all your self entitled, ignorant, hypocritical non sense.

Isn't other people's liberity annoying!!! If only I had the law in my mouth I could make the world such a better place for .....well me and my supporters....how long are we going to keep this arbitrary legal system????? No one should have the law in their mouths not the majority and not the nonmajority. The only law that is not arbitrary is private law. Under private law only agreement is law so it is not arbitrary.

When the majority has the law in its mouth we call it democracy, when the nonmajority has the law in its mouth we call it a dictatorship and when everyone has the law in their mouth we call it anarchy (ie lawlessness - notice how the law has not value when everyone has it in their mouth. The reason being the purpose of the law is to move resources form the laws nonsupports to the laws supporters) and when no one has the law in their mouth we call it agreement. (private law)

Ya lots and lots of crime too!!! Too many latins with attitudes there too and I reside in Latin America.

Yeah right, till you check on what taxes, utilities and insurance are going to cost. Homeowners insurance is out of control. Thanks to the state government telling the insurance companys that they can pretty much charge whatever they want. That is why people buy in Mexico and the Dominican Republic.

Not to mention that America is a banana republic with a corrupt government, broken political system, and an unstable future. Mexico and the Dominican look pretty good by comparison.

'Mexico and the Dominican look pretty good by comparison.'

Dude you don't travel much huh?

Overlord - please take your own advice and leave. Let those of us who love our country work to fix any problems without having useless critics like you in the way.

True,I've been to DR and Mexico, many times, always glad to be back in Miami. I don't see any significant crime in Miami, sorry. Strong security concerns in the "new havens", including Panama City , Panama. When is kidnapping a real concern in US, or Miami? Yet I have such concerns when I am in Buenos Aires, such as their famous "ATM kidnappings". Miami is an international coastal city that is actually underpriced in comparison with other media and finance capitals, but you need to travel outside the third world to see that, including much of Latin America.There is a new theme that people don't want to pay for services, let them move to Iowa, and watch television during the winter.

It's called reality. Are you amazed that 3 years of "recovery" propaganda hasn't changed it?

As long as the whack-job Teabaggers still run the asylum this madhouse will continue to warrant doom and gloom... for the working class anyway.

Overlord - The whack jobs put up a budget more than once. Why didn't the Dems put 1 up? They had the HOUSE, SENATE and ADMINISTRATION and could not pass a budget when they had complete control.

Why? I will tell you why because they love to spend your tax dollars with no accountability, pass closed door deals that benefit a few "you got to pass it to see whats in it". Then of course blaming the other side for not wanting to play together on the Dream act. Lets just let all illegals be legal I mean hey it will increase the voter base on the Dem's side.

But back the the question of blame. So the Dems failed to pass a budget in over 860 days and the Government ran on auto-pilot of spending everything plus. SSI is not SS first off. The government elected officials have been using this as a slush fund to get re-elected since the 60's and has rolled right into the problem we face today. Funny how people like Schumer was around back then.

Vote out all incumbents on both sides and give America a chance to survive.

I'd be interested in your opinion of which areas will be hit worse than those in the article. Regards....

Why blame the banks. YOU are the one that took a second mortgage which I promise is the key reason you have issues.

You either got the house with less than 20% down or you took money out to go on a spending spree.

If you had waited until you had 20% you would have had a lower mortgage payment, no second mortgage payment and most likely no PMI insurance payment. So because you decided to BUY NOW and not wait you want to blame someone else for your poor life choices.

Exactly why should the people who borrowed this money be let off? They borrowed the money and spent it...some one houses and a lot on lifestyles...I don't have sympathy for people who bought a house for $400,000 when less than 2 years previous the same house sold for $100,000 or less...that is just stupidity. And there is not correcting for stupidity.

Your under water. So what? Just keep paying it as you agreed. Nobody wants to take it from you and the market will eventually come back.

I'm not sympathetic to folks who took out second mortgages and are now underwater. Deal with it.

To Darn That Dream...

I am dealing with it. Life goes on, doesn't it? Oh, and by the way, go @!$%# yourself...

You bought something and it's value depreciated and now you want the people who borrowed you the money to say sorry you mismanaged your life here is your money back we'll just accept what you think it is worth. With that type of logic your employer could decide your only worth 10 cents an hour would you be willing to work for 80 cents a day? YOU borrowed the money it is your responsibility to pay it back with interest.

Apparently you don't know where Bethesda, MD is.

Not isolated...they are just still employed. Don't know them for that. It wasn't the government workers who caused the collapse in the economy...it was everyone else who was living beyond their means...and that probably includes you.

No noticing required. Data shows that Washington DC is WORKING and unemployment remains low. Same goes for most of Texas.

MM were you born in Texas? When we lived in Houston my son's school I noticed a "map of the United States" Texas occupied 2/3 of the poster and DC was a dot the size of a period while Austin was the size of Maryland (where by the way Bethesda is located for those of you geographically challenged).

I do think that if this country is serious about cutting waste in the fedgov the biggest housing crash is going to be the greater DC Metro area. Then and only then are our so called leaders going to wake up and realize this great nation is going to turn into a great Army and take back the nation in a second revolution. No threat, just sayin!

Bob you really need to reread the article. Bethesda is Washington's primary suburb. It is where a rational person would prefer too live. If you've ever been to our capital you probably noticed that the drive into the mall wasn't exactly what you would be shopping for in accommodations.

Really, not taking a cheap shot at all...

One, 2/3's, really? I don't know which maps you use, but, Texas area wise is just minutely larger in square miles than California. If you put them both together they would still not make up 2/3's of the USA. Don't use false fallacy One.It minimizes your comment and makes you look less than you are. Look up the phrase, I think you'll like it and be a better poster because of it.

Peace out!

DFR-3634868....people working for the government get automatic col and raises every year, they think the economy is great ! Their pensions are locked in stone and they have health insurance forever. They are so far removed from the real world they have no clue as to what is really going on out here.

MM - Most government employees no longer get a pension plan -- they have a 401(k) which they can pay into. The traditional pension plan was phased out at most offices in 2006, with all employees hired after able to invest in a 401(k).

However, senators and other politicians still get their sweet pension and benefits packages. It's time for an overhaul.

No the Federal government pension plan did not change in 2006. (Where are you getting this information?)

The Federal Pension Plan changed in 1987 (when Reagan was president) -- the old plan, CSRS is being phased out -- the last employees covered by it will retire in the next 10 years.

Everyone hired after 1984 is covered by the new plan, FERS -- employees pay into the pension plan, Social Security, and the Federal equivalent of a 401(k) known as the "Thrift Savings Plan."

Federal health insurance is only cushy if you can afford one of the Cadillac plans (that is if you're being paid over $100K a year). Below that (GS 7 and lower), and if you have a family, you take what you can afford -- which means sometimes you don't get medical or dental treatment because you don't have the funds.

Anyone can look at the Federal Government pay schedules, retirement benefits, plus the insurance benefits and cost of same at the Office of Personnel Management's website (www.opm.gov).

Moonflower, you are neglected some 50k+ employees spread around the country at the national labs, which were taken over by respective "national security" firms in 2006.

Those employees are contractees and are not covered by the General Schedule nor OPM.

MM government employees do not get automatic col, for instance Colorado government workers haven't had a raise in three years!!!!!! Health insurance is not forever either unless you pay for it working for the government. Only those dam congress people and presidents get a free ride which should be abolished now immediately!!!!!!

no, gov't workers do NOT get automatic raises for anything.

Government workers are not overpaid. The private sector has seen its wages steadily drop for decades if you take inflation and the continued increase in productivity into account. Just because today's workers get more done for less is not a reason to drag down those who have managed to continue to be paid what they are worth. It means we need to fight to raise the fortunes of everyone else and maybe get a little back from the top levels of management who have been grossly overpaid for a long time.

Get a pet monkey that can throw darts.

Housing markets move slower than stock markets and are a bit easier to predict. Unemployment numbers are a pretty good leading indicator of were housing prices are going since most houses are purchased by working people. A large number of unemployed means more foreclosures on the horizon which are very corrosive to prices.

The government has been subsidizing home ownership for some time (homeowner tax breaks, low interest rates, Fannie,Freddie etc). While this would be a bad time to pull the rug out (the banks are already doing that) it may be wise to revisit the issue once prices stabilize. Perhaps the government should not use tax dollars to prop up housing prices.

You must live in Wilmington. . . I had 3 houses there in the late 80s. Wish to hell I had held onto them!

CA has 37 million legal residents. Bigger economy = bigger risk. Las Vegas is NOT an outlying CA city dude. Not even close.

FL? Well heck you can keep that $hith0le!

A don't think having a negative net worth qualifies as a "bigger economy."

San Berdoo-Riverside... the 909, also known as Valley of the Dirt People

I have been working all life i can afford to see a denist while people get free services to get braces and they dont enough pay a copay.

Jnieto, learn to speak english, and maybe you can get a better job.