I can’t predict the effect of this on those areas or even to all of SoCal, but it will certainly be another value-depressing effect (in addition to the thousands who are hurt or killed).

Simply put ladies and gents of this tiny but could be mighty blog….who are the real bank owners…the real $$$ movers behind the corp names, foundations and organizations??????????????????????????????

the internet is great for researching and getting info…while always considering the source and agenda of those who post the info…again $$$ buys the best cover including gov’t officials as in the deregulation of the markets banks etc…if you don’t think this all was planned …you are very ignorant….if enough people get mad enough and have the —– just maybe we can expose the greedy bustards!

New mess: The first month of the return… our rental house was robbed – only about twelve hundred dollars of computer, camera, and I-pods were taken, but after a few days of inspection, our pass-ports, social security card, and credit, and banking statements were taken. I quickly took the money out of the bank and placed it safely into the stock market… good thing, someone could have stolen all our money. In order to buy a house in Palmdale which is all I can afford now… I need to take the 50 percent losses due to the recent market woes, pay taxes on the withdrawal lower my over-head by two hundred fifty dollars…. Oh yea, I suppose to find out at the end of this month whether I have a job or not.

The criminal bail-out: – What Wall-Street, the oil companies, the executives at banks, car companies, and government officials do not understand is that…. they maybe helping breed the next in-house generation of terrorists! -The next 9-11 event maybe done by just a few angry tax payers….

…….And I had my concerns about the Klan

The number one answer I get from friends and family about why they choose to live in SoCal is weather, access to “culture” and big box stores. Does that outweigh the numerous hassles abound?

I agree with SoCal homes being priced higher due to the weather. I would definitely pay more for better weather. But point being: HOW MUCH are you willing to pay? Is is worth triple or quadruple what a similar house would cost 500 miles away in a less congested, less polluted environment, and that likely has great seasonal weather? That is up to the person, some people have more dollars than sense (cents, ;-P). Additionally, there are much higher taxes, in fact the second and soon to be the highest taxes in the country. Then there is traffic, crowds, water shortages, illegal aliens and other social problems. Time is money. The less time you spend in your car, them more time you could be doing productive activities or spending it with your family. That’s not for me.

What do I know? I have lived in SoCal twice, Hawaii twice, Alaska twice and Washington State once. Finally at 38 YO, I have settled down in the beautiful Kenai Peninsula of Alaska. This is the crappiest weather, the most beautiful and the best State I have ever lived in. I guess there will always be a tradeoff.

(sorry for the life story again Chuck P., har, har, just letting the readers know my from where my point of view comes from: a SoCal export)

Who doesn’t like nice weather, but at what are you willing to pay for it? Living the paycheck to paycheck lifestyle, or anywhere near it, is not worth it to me.

Now and then I still try to get inside their heads to understand what they were thinking. I grew up in the beach communities amongst the spoiled kids, yet I was very middle class. I know the stereotypes well. My fathers side of the family fit that mold, yet are only now barely upper middle class in SoCal Standards (ie. 100-150k a year there does not mean you are even close to being wealthy or really even well off).

So here goes another theory of mine, of why prices were so out of touch with other areas of the country.

It has a lot to do with the pride of superfluous ownership (lack of better words). To convey that thought a little better, its about making something more attractive only because it is expensive. Certainly not a new revelation, but just in case you need it, here is an example.

Example: two hot sports cars roll off the assembly line one behind the other. They are identical in every way, even color. A dealer walks over with two window stickers, one for 80k and the other for 130k, and slaps one on each car.

Now the dealer walks over to YOU, with the keys and says: “take one, its yours”. Which one would you take? (Me, I would probably take the one with the shortest walk to the driver side door, but you know how the mind thinks).

Looking at a row of house, people see the price tag as a big part of the ‘value’ disregarding what it is worth. Then one day money comes pouring out of the credit machines, and the price is almost irrelevant when it comes to actually paying for it. “Just grab the expensive one”, throw a little bolstered SoCal ego in the mix, and there goes the neighborhood.

The NAR and their many associates feed on this behavior, literally. Is it really a wonder that so many bought into their mantra?

Subprime has always been a component of housing, perhaps even, as you state, 30%. Although official statistics pegged it at less than 25% of overall fundings at the peak of activity in 2006, and a significant portion of that was due to the compressed reset schedule most subprime loans had (2/28) vs 3,5,7,10, and 30, so they were more likely to be a larger portion of transactions than of the housing base. Still, my point was that it the problem could not be explained simply by that effect. Perhaps if I said “Subprime, maybe” instead of “Subprime, no” the sentence might have read slightly different, but had similar meanings. Any way you slice it, subprime alone could not have created the bubble. For example, most of the rest of the developed world had a housing bubble too, but very few countries had an equivalent “subprime lending”. It all came down to an increased appetite for risk lulled away by excessive optimism.

Chuck Ponzi

But you are right, people have some very unrealistic ideas about housing. On the various RE forums I read, at least once a week someone pops up declaring what a great investment buying a house is. Never mind that studies have proven this to be untrue. All they would have to do is look at a chart of inflation adjusted home values to see that they are as likely to go up as down, and that’s not even counting in the interest payed, taxes, upkeep.

LA was badly overpriced even before the boom and then just got insane. I wonder how low it will get now.