Hey I hate Bush, but I'm also have retirement accounts and have a house I want to sell next spring. Let's hope the economy turns around. I do think low interest rates are helping. I certainly don't think the tax cuts aimed at the higher income groups has done it. I haven't got even a small check yet, but I guess from above some people have. The thing with interest rates, housing at perhaps a bubble type high worries me.
Once again, it looks like the liberals here are pulling for a recession. They know that'll be their best chance for a different president come '04. Sorry chumps, ain't gonna happen. Read the better than expected GDP figure and unemployment data and weep. At least you can still focus your efforts on hoping bad things happen in Iraq.
Once again, it looks like the liberals here are pulling for a recession. They know that'll be there best chance for a different president come '04. Sorry chumps, ain't gonna happen. Read the better than expected GDP figure and unemployment data and weep. huh? You realize we had a quarter last year with 3.0% growth too, right? This is just dumb: <I>Spending on defense, much of it to support the war in Iraq (news - web sites), shot up at a 44.1 percent rate -- the strongest since 110 percent in the third quarter of 1951 -- after falling 3.3 percent in the first three months of the year. That accounted for much of the unexpected surge in GDP expansion. </I> Basically, the US government borrowed a bunch of money and spent it and we think this shows long-term strength in the US economy?! Uhhhh, no.
Prediction: Whoever is the next president will preside over a recovering/growing economy. Both parties will try to take credit for it and blame the other for why it took so long. Truth: Neither party (nor the president) has much control over the economy. The best they can do is increase spending and reduce taxes to put more money into circulation. The economy is like the weather. It works predictably sometimes but not all the time. It's just WAY too complex
Where does this theory come from? I believe its quite the opposite. They lower the rates to stimulate buying. If nobody is buying, then there is obviously no competition, which would result in lower house sales. Trust me, im working on purchasing my second rental house and my annual salary is very small. Your mortgage rate will be much more than the difference in your property tax. A house at 100,000 @ 4.75% @ 30 years = Initial Mortgage =100,000.00 Intrest paid = $ 87,787.71 Total after 30 years = $ 187,787.71 A house at 100,000 @ 8% @ 30 years = Initial Mortgage = 100,000.00 Intrest paid = $ 164,149.32 Total after 30 years = $ 264,149.32 You would have paid $76,000 more according to your theory. Im not sure how you would have dished out more property tax during that 30 years. And this is at 8% intrest, which is still considered good for most people. I don't see how people can say the economy is in bad shape. The economy was in bad shape 5 years ago when everything was inflated. This is investors heaven right now.
You two are saying the same thing. When rates are low, as they are right now, home prices skyrocket due to lots of people out buying homes. There is some validity to RIET's claim that home prices will decline when rates are higher, but I do not think it is anywhere near a 1:1 relationship (ie bond prices). As rates move higher, the economy will have improved, creating a wealth effect from a better economy and presumably increased stock market levels, with people looking to spend $$ on new homes again. I do agree with RIET though that home prices are at very high levels right now, and they will come down as rates rise. I think the best thing going right now is E*Trade's mortgage they offer that you can use on a DIFFERENT home in the future. So basically you're locking in an interest rate for a long, long time, yet you still have the flexibility of switching homes. The rate is not as low as you would get with a traditional mortgage, but it is still a sweet deal considering where rates are right now.
