The S&P 500 is having its worst year so far in six decades.

[Strike 3,947]

Just now, Sean Mooney said:

Real value vs perceived value.

Wat????? 

 

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

Apparently today people want to argue that the stock market does not go up and down and that home values were not inflated the past 18 months.

 

And then claim the other person doesn't understand finance.

WOW. Just WOW. 

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

Just now, Strike said:

Wat????? 

 

Maybe at least read some economics stuff?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

And, we’re entering a bear market. Russia! 

[Horseman 1,509]

1 minute ago, Strike said:

Yeah, he literally just tore a page out of RLLD's book.  Anyone who pays more than those guys think a house is worth is committing fraud.  Yet no one is ever prosecuted for said Fraud.  Maybe those two could take a class on free market economics and get back to us. 

The community college that gave him his teaching certificate was just trying to get rid of him.  They don't want him coming back.  

[Strike 3,947]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

Maybe at least read some economics stuff?

I have.  Apparently you haven't. 

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

4 minutes ago, Strike said:

Yeah, he literally just tore a page out of RLLD's book.  Anyone who pays more than those guys think a house is worth is committing fraud.  Yet no one is ever prosecuted for said Fraud.  Maybe those two could take a class on free market economics and get back to us. 

Where did I ever argue fraud?

Just now, Strike said:

I have.  Apparently you haven't. 

 

It's clear you haven't. 

Taking up the same side as Horseman is just admitting you are wrong from the jump. 

[Strike 3,947]

Just now, Sean Mooney said:

Where did I ever argue fraud?

You didn't.  But you're using the same idiotic arguments RLLD did back during the housing bubble around 2007 where he accused me of committing fraud because I sold my house for what it was worth. 

[Shooter McGavin 589]

18 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Everyone knows you have a sh!t job, a mortgage and a car payment.  You're the example of what not to do.  

Having a mortgage is wrong

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

5 minutes ago, Strike said:

You didn't.  But you're using the same idiotic arguments RLLD did back during the housing bubble around 2007 where he accused me of committing fraud because I sold my house for what it was worth. 

When I say what I said I wasn't saying it was fraud. But if a house is on the market at 300K...and two people come in and through the process someone ends up paying 350K for it- that doesn't mean the house was worth 350K. It means you paid 50K more than the person wanted for it. Some of that- is because people there was a bidding war. Some of that is because people had cash in hand and could go above what their loan was if necessary. That's not fraud. It's the market working in favor of the sellers. But everyone knew that was going to fall apart which is why I asked what is actually dropping. The article itself points out that the median high price is dropping which signifies what is actually paid. It is still 8% above the price it was at last year even dropping. 

[Horseman 1,509]

13 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Apparently today people want to argue that the stock market does not go up and down and that home values were not inflated the past 18 months.

Link to anyone saying either of those things? 

Are you an organ donor?  

[Shooter McGavin 589]

6 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Here comes the reading dummy.  You're like a dog chasing a squirrel out into traffic. You have to read the entire statement together and realize all those things put together is an example of financial disaster. 

its the second time you made fun of Mooney for having a mortgage.  Its a stupid thing to mock someone for.

 

[Strike 3,947]

Just now, Sean Mooney said:

When I say what I said I wasn't saying it was fraud. But if a house is on the market at 300K...and two people come in and through the process someone ends up paying 350K for it- that doesn't mean the house was worth 350K. It means you paid 50K more than the person wanted for it. Some of that- is because people there was a bidding war. Some of that is because people had cash in hand and could go above what their loan was if necessary. That's not fraud. It's the market working in favor of the sellers. But everyone knew that was going to fall apart which is why I asked what is actually dropping. The article itself points out that the median high price is dropping which signifies what is actually paid. It is still 8% above the price it was at last year even dropping. 

None of this supports your assertion that homes weren't worth what people were paying for them.  You ever buy a car below MSRP?  It's the same principle that you just outlined.  The dealer couldn't get MSRP so they lowered the price.  At that point in time that vehicle wasn't worth MSRP.  When I bought my Honda S2000 it was nearly impossible to get one for MSRP.   It's value, at that point in time, was HIGHER than MSRP.  The same thing happened with the housing market.  That doesn't mean the homes weren't worth what they sold for a year ago.  They were because that's what the people looking for homes were willing to pay AT THAT TIME.  It's not a difficult concept but you seem to be having trouble comprehending it.

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

1 minute ago, Shooter McGavin said:

its the second time you made fun of Mooney for having a mortgage.  Its a stupid thing to mock someone for.

 

It's whatever. Look at his stuff- he is coming after HT's spot on the stupidity ladder here. 

[TimHauck 1,794]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Damn. Missed it by a day. Good work on this Joe. Let’s se if we can get it to, let’s say 27 by New Years. Get er done! 

Taking one out of the Tucker playbook I see and cheering for bad news 

[TimHauck 1,794]

53 minutes ago, edjr said:

US housing recession could send home prices tumbling 20%, economist says

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/us-housing-recession-could-send-home-prices-tumbling-economist-says

 

WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Wait, are you still trying to claim victory on calling a decline in house prices in April 2020?

[Horseman 1,509]

Just now, Shooter McGavin said:

its the second time you made fun of Mooney for having a mortgage.  Its a stupid thing to mock someone for.

 

A mortgage, a sh!t job, a car payment and likely a bunch of other financial mistakes when combined make him unqualified to give financial advise.   Some of the recent posts in this thread disqualify him from giving financial advise.  It's not having a mortgage alone.  Get it now because we can't dumb it down any further for you?

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

Taking one out of the Tucker playbook I see and cheering for bad news 

please, each side cheers for or is happy with bad news when it is at the expense of who they consider the opposition. 

would i have preferred the market stay healthy under Brandon? Absolutely... but it gets to a point where its been so bad for a while with no competent steps taken that you simply have to laugh and cheer him on. Lets go Brandon!

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

1 minute ago, Horseman said:

A mortgage, a sh!t job, a car payment and likely a bunch of other financial mistakes when combined make him unqualified to give financial advise.   Some of the recent posts in this thread disqualify him from giving financial advise.  It's not having a mortgage alone.  Get it now because we can't dumb it down any further for you?

* Advice 

[Horseman 1,509]

1 minute ago, WhiteWonder said:

* Advice 

* They are misspelling triggered.  

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

None of this supports your assertion that homes weren't worth what people were paying for them.  You ever buy a car below MSRP?  It's the same principle that you just outlined.  The dealer couldn't get MSRP so they lowered the price.  At that point in time that vehicle wasn't worth MSRP.  When I bought my Honda S2000 it was nearly impossible to get one for MSRP.   It's value, at that point in time, was HIGHER than MSRP.  The same thing happened with the housing market.  That doesn't mean the homes weren't worth what they sold for a year ago.  They were because that's what the people looking for homes were willing to pay AT THAT TIME.  It's not a difficult concept but you seem to be having trouble comprehending it.

That is a different scenario. What don't you understand about this.

If you wanted to buy an item that was listed at 20 dollars on a store shelf you wouldn't go in and say "I'll give you 34 dollars for it." With cars you almost never pay the MSRP because that is a number set for the car dealership to maximize their profit on the car. There is wiggle room, but there are certain times and conditions where you might have to pay up to or over the MSRP- it doesn't mean the car is worth that though and it means the dealership made more on the sale than they were intending too.

Again- if you list your house on the market for 300K (which factors in many different variables) and 10 days later someone pays 350K for it...that doesn't mean it's suddenly worth that. It means someone paid more than they should've for it. Thankfully for you they made you extra cash. Stupidly for them, they cut into their funds. 

[TimHauck 1,794]

1 minute ago, Horseman said:

* They are misspelling triggered.  

From the guy who always tells people to consult spellcheck or a dictionary…

[Horseman 1,509]

2 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

From the guy who always tells people to consult spellcheck or a dictionary…

wat?

[Strike 3,947]

Just now, Sean Mooney said:

That is a different scenario. What don't you understand about this.

If you wanted to buy an item that was listed at 20 dollars on a store shelf you wouldn't go in and say "I'll give you 34 dollars for it." With cars you almost never pay the MSRP because that is a number set for the car dealership to maximize their profit on the car. There is wiggle room, but there are certain times and conditions where you might have to pay up to or over the MSRP- it doesn't mean the car is worth that though and it means the dealership made more on the sale than they were intending too.

Again- if you list your house on the market for 300K (which factors in many different variables) and 10 days later someone pays 350K for it...that doesn't mean it's suddenly worth that. It means someone paid more than they should've for it. Thankfully for you they made you extra cash. Stupidly for them, they cut into their funds. 

There is so much fail in this post I'm not going to waste my time picking it apart.  Have you ever heard of a listing agent purposely listing a house below what they believe it's worth, in order to elicit more people to look at the house and thus starting a bidding war?  Using your logic, despite the house being purposely listed below the expected sale value, the buyer overpaid for it.  Your argument doesn't hold up to logical scrutiny and is in direct opposition to basic free market economy principles. 

[TimHauck 1,794]

2 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

That is a different scenario. What don't you understand about this.

If you wanted to buy an item that was listed at 20 dollars on a store shelf you wouldn't go in and say "I'll give you 34 dollars for it." With cars you almost never pay the MSRP because that is a number set for the car dealership to maximize their profit on the car. There is wiggle room, but there are certain times and conditions where you might have to pay up to or over the MSRP- it doesn't mean the car is worth that though and it means the dealership made more on the sale than they were intending too.

Again- if you list your house on the market for 300K (which factors in many different variables) and 10 days later someone pays 350K for it...that doesn't mean it's suddenly worth that. It means someone paid more than they should've for it. Thankfully for you they made you extra cash. Stupidly for them, they cut into their funds. 

Sorry man you’re wrong here.

If that store only has 1 item and 2 people go to the shelf at the same time wanting it, one person might say to the other I’ll give you $25 for it.   Or a more common scenario is people buying something from the store then selling it online for more, since it’s actually worth more than the store sells it for.

Something is worth what someone is willing to pay.  With housing it’s a little tricky since not everyone is paying in cash (and if you don’t you’re an idiot according to horsecrap), but yes housing absolutely was worth what people were paying in 2021.   Many houses had multiple offers and the buyer wasn’t always paying much higher than the other offers.

[Gladiators 1,903]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

There is so much fail in this post I'm not going to waste my time picking it apart.  Have you ever heard of a listing agent purposely listing a house below what they believe it's worth, in order to elicit more people to look at the house and thus starting a bidding war?  Using your logic, despite the house being purposely listed below the expected sale value, the buyer overpaid for it.  Your argument doesn't hold up to logical scrutiny and is in direct opposition to basic free market economy principles. 

Mooney should stick to guidance counseling.

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

4 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

* Advice 

I guess his "spell check" failed him again.

 

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

3 minutes ago, Strike said:

There is so much fail in this post I'm not going to waste my time picking it apart.  Have you ever heard of a listing agent purposely listing a house below what they believe it's worth, in order to elicit more people to look at the house and thus starting a bidding war?  Using your logic, despite the house being purposely listed below the expected sale value, the buyer overpaid for it.  Your argument doesn't hold up to logical scrutiny and is in direct opposition to basic free market economy principles. 

Yeah....and people were still paying well above what the person would have normally listed it for. 

So much fail in what you post. 

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

12 minutes ago, Strike said:

None of this supports your assertion that homes weren't worth what people were paying for them.  You ever buy a car below MSRP?  It's the same principle that you just outlined.  The dealer couldn't get MSRP so they lowered the price.  At that point in time that vehicle wasn't worth MSRP.  When I bought my Honda S2000 it was nearly impossible to get one for MSRP.   It's value, at that point in time, was HIGHER than MSRP.  The same thing happened with the housing market.  That doesn't mean the homes weren't worth what they sold for a year ago.  They were because that's what the people looking for homes were willing to pay AT THAT TIME.  It's not a difficult concept but you seem to be having trouble comprehending it.

 

3 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

That is a different scenario. What don't you understand about this.

If you wanted to buy an item that was listed at 20 dollars on a store shelf you wouldn't go in and say "I'll give you 34 dollars for it." With cars you almost never pay the MSRP because that is a number set for the car dealership to maximize their profit on the car. There is wiggle room, but there are certain times and conditions where you might have to pay up to or over the MSRP- it doesn't mean the car is worth that though and it means the dealership made more on the sale than they were intending too.

Again- if you list your house on the market for 300K (which factors in many different variables) and 10 days later someone pays 350K for it...that doesn't mean it's suddenly worth that. It means someone paid more than they should've for it. Thankfully for you they made you extra cash. Stupidly for them, they cut into their funds. 

 

It's somewhere in the middle. You both are incorrect, imho. 

Mooney comparing a fixed price item in a retail store to a car or a home is silly. Car prices and home prices are listed prices intended for negotiation. Only a very dumb person would walk into a dealership and purchase a vehicle without any negotiation.... and only a very dumb person would not be consulting with their realtor on a starting bid (be it under asking price, with closing cost conditions, right at asking price or even over asking price in order to avoid a bidding war and close asap, etc etc etc). 

Where he is correct is that a house is not magically worth what someone pays for it. 

So Strikes point, or at least what I took from his post, that "an item or asset (such as a house) is worth what someone is willing to pay for it" is not always correct. It's a cute saying that a lot of people default to using. This works in a fixed price retail environment. It can somewhat apply to something like housing.... but the truth is, someone can decide to overpay for their dream home. Doesn't make the home worth that much. The value of a home/property is much better determined with an appraisal. Contractors and house flippers pay less than a properties true value all the time. 

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

5 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Sorry man you’re wrong here.

If that store only has 1 item and 2 people go to the shelf at the same time wanting it, one person might say to the other I’ll give you $25 for it.   Or a more common scenario is people buying something from the store then selling it online for more, since it’s actually worth more than the store sells it for.

Something is worth what someone is willing to pay.  With housing it’s a little tricky since not everyone is paying in cash (and if you don’t you’re an idiot according to horsecrap), but yes housing absolutely was worth what people were paying in 2021.   Many houses had multiple offers and the buyer wasn’t always paying much higher than the other offers.

Again- it's real vs perceived value. That's the point I'm making in saying that the housing market was inflated. Of course prices were going to come down- we all knew it would. 

[Horseman 1,509]

7 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

 With housing it’s a little tricky since not everyone is paying in cash (and if you don’t you’re an idiot according to horsecrap).

Link?

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

Just now, WhiteWonder said:

 

 

It's somewhere in the middle. You both are incorrect, imho. 

Mooney comparing a fixed price item in a retail store to a car or a home is silly. Car prices and home prices are listed prices intended for negotiation. Only a very dumb person would walk into a dealership and purchase a vehicle without any negotiation.... and only a very dumb person would not be consulting with their realtor on a starting bid (be it under asking price, with closing cost conditions, right at asking price or even over asking price in order to avoid a bidding war and close asap, etc etc etc). 

Where he is correct is that a house is not magically worth what someone pays for it. 

So Strikes point, or at least what I took from his post, that "an item or asset (such as a house) is worth what someone is willing to pay for it" is not always correct. It's a cute saying that a lot of people default to using. This works in a fixed price retail environment. It can somewhat apply to something like housing.... but the truth is, someone can decide to overpay for their dream home. Doesn't make the home worth that much. The value of a home/property is much better determined with an appraisal. Contractors and house flippers pay less than a properties true value all the time. 

Yes- it is an imperfect example I was using. I will admit that but I also didn't also know how to get through to him because he wasn't getting it. 

But you at least do understand my larger point that the house isn't suddenly worth what that person paid for it.

[Strike 3,947]

Just now, Sean Mooney said:

Yes- it is an imperfect example I was using. I will admit that but I also didn't also know how to get through to him because he wasn't getting it. 

But you at least do understand my larger point that the house isn't suddenly worth what that person paid for it.

Of course it is.  WW is wrong too.  Using his example of a dream home, the fact that it's someone's dream home has a value associated with it.  That value is the amount they're willing to pay above what someone else would.  Whenever a house is sold there is one winning bidder.  By definition they've driven up the value of that home.  If they hadn't won then the next lower bid would have, assuming multiple bidders.  It's the same thing.  They valued that home more than the next highest bidder, therefore setting the value of that home.  Again, it's a simple concept that you're having trouble comprehending. 

[Horseman 1,509]

11 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

 

 

It's somewhere in the middle. You both are incorrect, imho. 

Mooney comparing a fixed price item in a retail store to a car or a home is silly. Car prices and home prices are listed prices intended for negotiation. Only a very dumb person would walk into a dealership and purchase a vehicle without any negotiation.... and only a very dumb person would not be consulting with their realtor on a starting bid (be it under asking price, with closing cost conditions, right at asking price or even over asking price in order to avoid a bidding war and close asap, etc etc etc). 

Where he is correct is that a house is not magically worth what someone pays for it. 

So Strikes point, or at least what I took from his post, that "an item or asset (such as a house) is worth what someone is willing to pay for it" is not always correct. It's a cute saying that a lot of people default to using. This works in a fixed price retail environment. It can somewhat apply to something like housing.... but the truth is, someone can decide to overpay for their dream home. Doesn't make the home worth that much. The value of a home/property is much better determined with an appraisal. Contractors and house flippers pay less than a properties true value all the time. 

C'mon.  You were going along pretty good there until the appraisal part.  Appraisals look at past homes sold and don't take into account future prices. What affects the future price - demand which changes by what people are willing to pay for it.  Appraisals are like looking at the last time you filled your tank to determine the price of gas and we all know how that's been working.  

[TimHauck 1,794]

7 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

 

 

It's somewhere in the middle. You both are incorrect, imho. 

Mooney comparing a fixed price item in a retail store to a car or a home is silly. Car prices and home prices are listed prices intended for negotiation. Only a very dumb person would walk into a dealership and purchase a vehicle without any negotiation.... and only a very dumb person would not be consulting with their realtor on a starting bid (be it under asking price, with closing cost conditions, right at asking price or even over asking price in order to avoid a bidding war and close asap, etc etc etc). 

Where he is correct is that a house is not magically worth what someone pays for it. 

So Strikes point, or at least what I took from his post, that "an item or asset (such as a house) is worth what someone is willing to pay for it" is not always correct. It's a cute saying that a lot of people default to using. This works in a fixed price retail environment. It can somewhat apply to something like housing.... but the truth is, someone can decide to overpay for their dream home. Doesn't make the home worth that much. The value of a home/property is much better determined with an appraisal. Contractors and house flippers pay less than a properties true value all the time. 

IMO the only real caveat to “a house is worth what someone is willing to pay” is a mortgage, because the bank has to agree to lend the money.

But if someone buys a house in cash, I think it’s pretty fair to say it’s worth at least pretty close to that much.  I’m sure there were some cases where 1 person paid way more than all the other offers, but I doubt that was the norm.

The flipper example isn’t really comparable IMO because someone else probably would have been willing to pay more had it been available to them.  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

37 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

It's whatever. Look at his stuff- he is coming after HT's spot on the stupidity ladder here. 

I bet my house is worth more than yours. Lol 

[Horseman 1,509]

6 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

 because the bank has to agree to lend the money.

And interest rates are through the roof which makes the ultimate price (what people are willing to pay) that much higher.  That's driving down the sale price, the ultimate price I'd wager is staying about the same.  

That's the fatal flaw in Mooney's claim that sale prices are dropping to match what the house price is really worth.  

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

Just now, Horseman said:

C'mon.  You were going along pretty good there until the appraisal part.  Appraisals look at past homes sold and don't take into account future prices. What affects the future price - demand which changes what people are willing to pay for it.  Appraisals are like looking at the last time you filled your tank to determine the price of gas and we all know how that's been working.  

c'mon, you were going along good until you compared appraisals to looking at the last time you filled your tank. Appraisals very much take into account current market trends and very recent home sales.  Correct, they do not make predictions about future prices. Why would they? And you're using the term home price which is different than home value. 

You wouldn't determine the price of gas by looking at the last time you filled your tank and you wouldn't determine the price of gas by making a guess about what gas prices will be a week from now. You would look at what the gas stations around you are charging right now.... but it's a very weird comparison because gas is a consumable. I know you just pulled something quickly out of your ass, but not a great choice. Two people are not going to show up at the gas station and start bidding against each other for the next tank of gas because it comes from the perfectly located station in the low crime rate area with all new windows and central air on the attached mini mart

people pay more than a home is worth all the time (and less). You could argue that it's worth it to them, because they got what they wanted, but it doesn't mean the home is that valuable in terms of the general housing market. 

[Horseman 1,509]

Hoe Lee Fuk

Just googled 30-year fixed interest rates.

  Nice work Biden Admin.  

[Horseman 1,509]

1 minute ago, WhiteWonder said:

c'mon, you were going along good until you compared appraisals to looking at the last time you filled your tank.

Link

Quote

 

When this happens, it’s not uncommon for the appraised value of the home to be less than the selling price. Since appraisals look at past homes sold, and don’t account for future price, appraisals will often come in lower than the selling price.

It would be like pricing a tank of gas based on what you paid for it yesterday rather than today’s market conditions.