Southwind winding down...

[NDizona]

http://www.rpapc.com/download/southwindabsorption.pdf

The subdivision is a microcosm of whats been happening with all housing developments in the area.  Someone asked me to show proof that the Omaha area market is faltering...

http://www.rpapc.com/download/southwind.pdf

I think its a well designed subdivision and should rebound with the rest of the market.


http://www.rpapc.com/download/omahamls.pdf

[Brad]

Are you serious.  LOOK BEYOND THE MOTHER |expletive| NUMBERS!!!!!!!

The prime lots are gone?  This Sub has been around for several years!  Housing development always slow down towards the end....  If you are basing Omaha's housing market off of this one LaVista Development, you have a problem

You are So So negative Ndzona.....!!!!!!?????******

[joeglow]

Cimarron just got foreclosed on (the subdivision across 96th Street)

-As in Cimarron Woods?  What happened?   Does this mean you could have more leverage in negotiating a lot price??

[NDizona]

Sorry - actually only Cimarron Woods East was foreclosed on....Lots 381-505 in Cimarron Woods.

-As in Cimarron Woods?  What happened?  I know someone looking to buy a lot in there.  Does this mean they could have more leverage in negotiating a lot price??

Cimarron Woods - without taking into account Cimarron Woods East

Sell out - Lots 1-380 without looking at lots 381-505

2004 (not complete year) 27 Lots sold 7%
2005 133 lots sold 35%
2006 70 lots sold 18%
2007 27 lots sold 7%
One sale in 2008

I would say go in armed with that information and NEGOTIATE.  Long term I think this is a great location - I obviously don't know if the developer would be willing to negotiate - lately they have been contempt to be foreclosed on before lowering the sale price.  (generally speaking)

KNOWLEDGE IS POWER.

I am always amazed people go into the largest investment of their lives without researching the subdivision or the home sales first...

Or you can Listen to Brad and buy the lot at a premium because Omaha is not effected by the national housing slump...

[joeglow]

What is the best way to research the financial health of a subdivision???

[Brad]

Or you can Listen to Brad and buy the lot at a premium because Omaha is not effected by the national housing slump...

Whats you deal.  Omaha has a slight downturn yes, but if you area a financially responsible American you would not have to worry about a downturn in the housing market because you would be out buying house now taking advantage of the slightly slower market.  Its not my problem that Americans live up to they eyeballs in debt, buy houses they can not afford, then furnish it by maxing their credit cards and then |expletive| when the bank takes the house and they have nothing left.  Also if you listened to me... you would never build a new house, you get more for your money on an older house in a neighborhood with character.  Just like I never buy a new car.  I wait for the money wasters to lease it for two years then I get it at a steel!

As far as south wind,  The lots an the tree lined streets are full the lots by the park and metro are full most of the lots by the trees are full, so unless you want to live by a rail line or backed up to 96th street you might just go look over at portal plaza or other similar neighborhoods in the area.

[NDizona]

What is the best way to research the financial health of a subdivision???

Hire an appraiser of course!...I know one you could call.  Alot of the data you can find by simply doing the research at the court house/websites or with the premium service - the rest you get by making phone calls and researching historical records.

Whats you deal.  Omaha has a slight downturn yes, but if you area a financially responsible American you would not have to worry about a downturn in the housing market because you would be out buying house now taking advantage of the slightly slower market.  Its not my problem that Americans live up to they eyeballs in debt, buy houses they can not afford, then furnish it by maxing their credit cards and then |expletive| when the bank takes the house and they have nothing left.  Also if you listened to me... you would never build a new house, you get more for your money on an older house in a neighborhood with character.  Just like I never buy a new car.  I wait for the money wasters to lease it for two years then I get it at a steel!

First you said Omaha wasn't suffering from the housing slump now its just "Slight".  I work with builders and developers daily and its upsets me off to see them not doing well.  The real estate business is not for the faint of heart.  Being able to survive the slow times and have cash built up to acquire properties is what separates the winners from the foreclosed.  

Doesn't matter if you don't like new homes - bottom line is when the population grows new homes need to be built.  

As far as south wind,  The lots an the tree lined streets are full the lots by the park and metro are full most of the lots by the trees are full, so unless you want to live by a rail line or backed up to 96th street you might just go look over at portal plaza or other similar neighborhoods in the area.

The available lots are scattered throughout the subdivision  -  I chose this subdivision to talk about because its one I picked to be a winner but just hasn't sold out like I thought it would.  It has averaged 10%/Year (including Southwind 2) but now its @ 6%...

I really thought this area with SouthPort and Shadow Lake would sell out in 6 years...

I will concede that you probably know more about Omaha than I do - but I got you on this topic.  Simply put - its worse than "slight"...

[Brad]

Whats you deal.  Omaha has a slight downturn yes, but if you area a financially responsible American you would not have to worry about a downturn in the housing market because you would be out buying house now taking advantage of the slightly slower market.  Its not my problem that Americans live up to they eyeballs in debt, buy houses they can not afford, then furnish it by maxing their credit cards and then |expletive| when the bank takes the house and they have nothing left.  Also if you listened to me... you would never build a new house, you get more for your money on an older house in a neighborhood with character.  Just like I never buy a new car.  I wait for the money wasters to lease it for two years then I get it at a steel!

First you said Omaha wasn't suffering from the housing slump now its just "Slight".  I work with builders and developers daily and its upsets me off to see them not doing well.  The real estate business is not for the faint of heart.  Being able to survive the slow times and have cash built up to acquire properties is what separates the winners from the foreclosed.

Ask either of the other two mods, my business is directly involved in the housing market.   I think in Omaha it became a matter of over supply that a downturn.  In the early and mid 2000's home builders were just throwing up houses left an right and the bigger places like Benchmark that had even more money and built more.  People were using the interest only mortgages, the adjustable rate loans and once rates started to go up, people could not afford them anymore, so is it a downturn or did we have an inflated market to start with and now we are coming back down to reality?

As far as south wind,  The lots an the tree lined streets are full the lots by the park and metro are full most of the lots by the trees are full, so unless you want to live by a rail line or backed up to 96th street you might just go look over at portal plaza or other similar neighborhoods in the area.

The available lots are scattered throughout the subdivision  -  I chose this subdivision to talk about because its one I picked to be a winner but just hasn't sold out like I thought it would.  It has averaged 10%/Year (including Southwind 2) but now its @ 6%...

I really thought this area with SouthPort and Shadow Lake would sell out in 6 years...

Exactly.  if it was going to sell out in 6 years that would be almost 17% a year, and it was only averaging 10% when the market was booming a few years back?

[NDizona]

Ask either of the other two mods, my business is directly involved in the housing market.   I think in Omaha it became a matter of over supply that a downturn.  In the early and mid 2000's home builders were just throwing up houses left an right and the bigger places like Benchmark that had even more money and built more.  People were using the interest only mortgages, the adjustable rate loans and once rates started to go up, people could not afford them anymore, so is it a downturn or did we have an inflated market to start with and now we are coming back down to reality?

This problem is so much bigger than just

A - Over supply - builders are stupid for building as much as they did

B - Banks handing out loans like candy

Its just so much more complex - Oversupply is a SYMPTOM - not a cause

Banks handing out loans appears to be a cause but in actuality its a symptom of a much greater problem.  The problem is (in my humble opinion)

PEOPLE ARE |expletive| STUPID.  Just because something can be bought doesn't mean it should.  This is financial Darwinism at its finest.  I have talked to home owners that lost their home and didn't understand what an ARM was - yet they signed papers.  I talked to someone in CB that bought a home on a land contract for 2X what it was worth - and of course lost it (he was able to find an appraiser and a bank...)

People have been getting away with being stupid for far too long - this correction is needed to get people renting some of the properties I am buying.

[Brad]

This problem is so much bigger than just

A - Over supply - builders are stupid for building as much as they did

B - Banks handing out loans like candy

Its just so much more complex - Oversupply is a SYMPTOM - not a cause

Banks handing out loans appears to be a cause but in actuality its a symptom of a much greater problem.  The problem is (in my humble opinion)

PEOPLE ARE |expletive| STUPID.  Just because something can be bought doesn't mean it should.  This is financial Darwinism at its finest.  I have talked to home owners that lost their home and didn't understand what an ARM was - yet they signed papers.  I talked to someone in CB that bought a home on a land contract for 2X what it was worth - and of course lost it (he was able to find an appraiser and a bank...)

People have been getting away with being stupid for far too long - this correction is needed to get people renting some of the properties I am buying.

We can both agree that there are too many financially irresponsible people and businesses.

[Big E]

This problem is so much bigger than just

A - Over supply - builders are stupid for building as much as they did

B - Banks handing out loans like candy

Its just so much more complex - Oversupply is a SYMPTOM - not a cause

Banks handing out loans appears to be a cause but in actuality its a symptom of a much greater problem.  The problem is (in my humble opinion)

PEOPLE ARE |expletive| STUPID.

Well, considering we (people) were smart enough to work our way up to apex predators, I don't think we can blame it on just that.  The real problem is people's maniacal adherence to some pipe dream about free markets.  Trust me: no one wants a truly free market, jsut like no one wants a true democracy.  They just think they do.  The federal government needed to step in 4-5 years ago and put an end to the bullshit loans that were being handed out like candy, which pointed to absolutely NOTHING other than the current meltdown we're staring at now.  Builders needed to recognize that this business model was going to fail, and people needed to realize they couldn't afford what they were buying.

Now, we're ALL staring down the barrel of a recession because of it.

-Big E

[joeglow]

PEOPLE ARE |expletive| STUPID.  Just because something can be bought doesn't mean it should.  This is financial Darwinism at its finest.  I have talked to home owners that lost their home and didn't understand what an ARM was - yet they signed papers.  I talked to someone in CB that bought a home on a land contract for 2X what it was worth - and of course lost it (he was able to find an appraiser and a bank...)

People have been getting away with being stupid for far too long - this correction is needed to get people renting some of the properties I am buying.

-This sums up almost EVERYTHING that is wrong with our society.  We are a selfish nation that thinks if someone else has something, I am entitled to it.  For example, we are seeing a political push for national healthcare.  I agree that this is a necessity.  However, if it is such a necessity, why do so many poor people seem to have so many luxuries (LCD televisions, home theatres, internet access, etc.)?

Same thing here.  People arrogantly think they are owed their dream home.  If there is any way they can secure it, it is their God given right to do so.  THEN, if it falls apart, the government needs to bail them out because all they did was go after what was owed them.

Sadly, expect this problem to happen again and again and again and again, etc.  It just won't always manifest itself in the housing market.

[Big E]

Not sure I'd consider internet access a luxury any more.  High speed wireless access, maybe...

-Big E

[joeglow]

Not sure I'd consider internet access a luxury any more.  High speed wireless access, maybe...

-Big E

If you are concerned about health insurance and where next month's rent, it is a luxury.  I know a number of people who get by without a computer, cable or internet.

[icejammer]

Just to steer the discussion back towards statistics....

Consider the number of single-family permits issued since 1990 in the tri-county area (Douglas, Sarpy, Pottawattamie):

1990 2033
1991 2301
1992 2593
1993 2687
1994 2390
1995 2398
1996 2955
1997 2879
1998 3118
1999 3739
2000 3335
2001 3514
2002 4122
2003 4879
2004 5066
2005 5380

If you take a trendline from 1990-2002, and extrapolate that through 2005 and look at cumulative builds, you'll see that in that 3-year period (2003-2005), the market overbuilt by over 3100 units.  I'm pretty sure if you put in 2006, that number would climb to over 4000.  I wish I had numbers going back prior to 1990, it would be interesting to see how the long-term (i.e. 25 or more years) trend compares.

(just as an interesting sidenote, looking strictly at Pott. Co. numbers, the market actually underbuilt in that 3-year period, which may be why permit numbers haven't declined quite as much as in the other 2 counties lately....)

[Big E]

Not sure I'd consider internet access a luxury any more.  High speed wireless access, maybe...

-Big E

If you are concerned about health insurance and where next month's rent, it is a luxury.  I know a number of people who get by without a computer, cable or internet.

I guess I meant a luxury on the level of LCDs and home theaters, where you grouped it.  Everything's a luxury if you don't have money for rent, like real butter and clean skivvies.

-Big E

[NDizona]

Well, considering we (people) were smart enough to work our way up to apex predators, I don't think we can blame it on just that.  The real problem is people's maniacal adherence to some pipe dream about free markets.  Trust me: no one wants a truly free market, jsut like no one wants a true democracy.  They just think they do.  The federal government needed to step in 4-5 years ago and put an end to the |expletive| loans that were being handed out like candy, which pointed to absolutely NOTHING other than the current meltdown we're staring at now.  Builders needed to recognize that this business model was going to fail, and people needed to realize they couldn't afford what they were buying.

THE LAST THING WE NEED IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FIXING ANYTHING.  Their solution is building a bridge downtown and handing us $600 -

We can both agree that there are too many financially irresponsible people and businesses.

Agreed...Blame the idiots that took the loans - not the banks for allowing them to be financial idiots.  "I didn't understand the rate would go up with my ARM"

[Big E]

It would be one thing if the financial irresponsibility only affected the people that were financially irresponsible.  The problem is that there are no controls on this sort of thing, like limits on how much the stock or commodity markets can swing in a day.  (It's no coincidence that those rules were enacted some time after 1929.)  And of course, I obviously mean that effective legislation on the federal level is needed, not "lets let the bosses in DC figure it out for us while we dance in the streets".  I firmly believe it is a government's responsibility to give its citizens a stable and safe environment in which to operate freely.  (Not "think of the children" safe, but "planes not crashing into buildings safe", and "railroad and oil tycoons can't own people" safe.)

I'm not talking about the fed govt coming in and bailing out everyone (which I think is the worst thing that the fed can be doing right now).  I'm talking about actually making it illegal for banks to loan more money than people can ever expect to repay.  There's a big difference between someone making $250,000/yr being stretched thin and someone making $35,000/yr being stretched thin.  The problem is, there are a lot more of the $35K/yr types, and those are the ones (by and large) that are |expletive| up the housing market right now.  Of course, we can say "people are stupid and shoould know better".  I agree.  Looks good on paper, doesn't it?  But in practice, you're not dealing with anything other than horribly irresponsible banking practices, that we are only beginning to see the effects of.

Imagine if the federal government didn't have collusion laws.  You think the banking industry would be fighting over competitive interest rates?  heck no.  The system would be so rigged in favor of the wealthy (more so than now) so that only the wealthy could borrow money at a reasonable rate, so as to keep all of the money in the hands of the wealthy.

Imagine the country with no Sherman Anti-Trust Act.  Have fun buying everything you eat, wear or sleep in at WalMart - who also owns ConAgra, which would make every ounce of food you ever eat in your entire life.  Imagine being able to buy any car you wanted - so long as it was a black Ford Model T.  Imagine an internet and airwaves wholly controlled by Microsoft - along with all air traffic control systems, emergency response systems, and everything else under the sun.  Imagine there being ONE oil company on the planet.

The fact is, we NEED government intervention in a free market to maintain anything resembling a free market.  History has proven again and again and again (Microsoft, WalMart, Ma Bell, and dozens of others) that a free market will only last so long until someone becomes the dominant force, and then kiss the free market buh-bye.

-Big E

[NDizona]

I agree we need laws to keep free trade flowing and not monopolize industries but I don't think they should regulate banking anymore than we have.  Restricting sub prime will do nothing because it was government that encouraged it in the first place.  "A home for every American".... We have Americans that can't find America on a map - and we expect them to own a home and understand an ARM?!  

Just let them fail, starve, and be turned into glue.  That's the answer.

[joeglow]

The problem is it screws over honest people like myself who were responsible.  We experienced an artificial increase in demand (from people who should not have qualified for loans) that drove up real estate prices.  While this was going on, I bought my responsible 30 year old, 3 bedroom, 2 bath, split entry with a 30 year fixed mortgage.  Now that my family may be looking to upgrade because we can now afford more house, we find prices are artificially high.  However, the market appears to be correcting itself, meaning the price for the house we would want will become more in line with what is reasonable.

In step the government to help these “poor” people who were “tricked” into these loans.  Now, not only do I get to foot the bill for bailing these people out, real estate will stay artificially high and I can no longer afford that bigger.

Can you see how our government ultimately punishes the responsible, rewards the irresponsible and encourages the latter?

[Big E]

In step the government to help these “poor” people who were “tricked” into these loans.  Now, not only do I get to foot the bill for bailing these people out, real estate will stay artificially high and I can no longer afford that bigger.

Can you see how our government ultimately punishes the responsible, rewards the irresponsible and encourages the latter?

My entire point is these types of loans should never have been allowed in the first place - or at least not to the extent they were handed out.  I also think I stated that I am against the govt stepping in to bail these individuals and lenders out.  I know we're talking a little bit of chicken/egg here - can we really be expected to guess what the stupidest people might do? - but to not put something in place to prevent this from happening to this extent in the future is just as irresponsible as allowing it to happen in the first place.

From the group that likes to trumpet "national security", I think allowing the public (lenders and borrowers) to completely undermine our economic integrity should be near the top of the list of things the govt should be tracking.

-Big E

[NDizona]

I realized that I simplified this whole thing by blaming those idiots that took out mortgages they could never afford...and to a lesser extent the lenders that handed out the mortgages for a nice commission...

but this SO much more complex.  Its so complex that no one really knows where it ends.  Building costs are at an all time high - labor is at an all time high - land prices are falling - consumer confidence is falling - each of these may in itself be a problem or a symptom of greater problems...

The biggest concern - are the Merryl Lynches wrapping up these houses into securities to sell...who really got screwed on this.  Honestly - I don't know who it is.

Another concern - now that people are electing to give up paying for a house they feel isn't worth their mortgage - WHY PAY OFF THE CREDIT CARD!?

I mean this problem is so big potentially it could change our entire economy.  It bankruptcy laws were like they were 5 years ago - we could be in a world of hurt.

To simply say this problem is the result of

A the idiot home owners

B the greedy lenders

C government not regulating loans

is just short sighted.  

I think all it started with those people that feel the government is here to give us hand outs and the entitlement people.  That in my mind is the cause of just about every problem we have in this country.  Nebraska is a socialists state - our nation is becoming socialists and there is nothing we can do to stop it.  

We have to let people starve - and literally TEACH the people that do not know how to fish.  Handing them a fish only multiplies the problem.  If they can't learn to fish - then teach them to farm...

Bottom line - we cannot keep fixing this with debt spending.  Our people, our government, our future is SOCIALISM...you think things are bad now - wait til we fall like the Soviet Union and our currency literally becomes worthless.  

Having government more involved in lending only leads us closer to Socialism.  I agree with your premise but there are better ways.

[ricko]

It'll be interesting  to see how this latest crisis will be resolved.  The Feds may have no alternative but to intervene, much like they did with the banking crisis in the early 90's.  Banking (more specifically investments made by banks) was deregulated in the early 1980's in order to free them to invest as they saw fit.  Unfortunately, many banks invested in the speculative real-estate market and other risky securities/ventures in which they lost their |expletive|.  The government spent, with your tax dollars, 150 billion to bail out the banking system so that it would not collapse like the house of cards that it had become, and thus risk impoverishing tens of millions of Americans whose savings would have vanished except for that portion covered by the FDIC. Those not covered by the FDIC were just $#it out of luck (some state regulated banks, several in Nebraska, folded completely, and many retirees who had their life savings tied up in one bank lost everything).   The alternative would have been to allow the banks to collapse and risk damaging the economy so badly that it would have led to a government involvement that would have made the bail-out look like a walk in the park.  So, in order to save the free-market system, a little government 'socialism', or whatever you want to call it, may be the only option.

[NDizona]

It'll be interesting  to see how this latest crisis will be resolved.  The Feds may have no alternative but to intervene, much like they did with the banking crisis in the early 90's.  Banking (more specifically investments made by banks) was deregulated in the early 1980's in order to free them to invest as they saw fit.  Unfortunately, many banks invested in the speculative real-estate market and other risky securities/ventures in which they lost their |expletive|.  The government spent, with your tax dollars, 150 billion to bail out the banking system so that it would not collapse like the house of cards that it had become, and thus risk impoverishing tens of millions of Americans whose savings would have vanished except for that portion covered by the FDIC. Those not covered by the FDIC were just $#it out of luck (some state regulated banks, several in Nebraska, folded completely, and many retirees who had their life savings tied up in one bank lost everything).   The alternative would have been to allow the banks to collapse and risk damaging the economy so badly that it would have led to a government involvement that would have made the bail-out look like a walk in the park.  So, in order to save the free-market system, a little government 'socialism', or whatever you want to call it, may be the only option.

We know so little about this problem - its hard to get your arms around exactly what will happen if the government intervenes.  Will people think they can continue to make these loans and be ENTITLED to a home?  The government is not restoring our confidence - in this case they will be bailing out people unable to understand what an ARM is.

This problem is SO unlike anything that happened in the 80s or 90s.  This problem is just as much the government's fault pushing lenders to allow "every American a home".  Also - many people are involved - so many people in fact that no one really knows how many.  

I am not against government intervention EVER - just not when we are unable to understand exactly what should be done.  I will say this - a $600/American is not the answer.  How exactly should the government "bail" out the problem?  Help greedy lenders? duped security owners? idiot home owners?

This case - no one was Defrauded (except maybe the security owners and hedgefund managers) - why bail out people that were just general failures?  Will they bail me out if I fail with my business?

[ricko]

I agree with most of what you've said, and you're right when you say that it's hard to get a handle on this, but in cases like this the Fed usually attempts to prop up financial institutions that comprise an industry,  as opposed to rescuing individuals that have made bad financial decisions, unless it has something to do with, maybe, reorganizing debt in order to avert financial doom.  The older I get, the more I've come to realize just how flawed we are.  If you live long enough, you're bound to make some bad decisions sooner or later.  The question then becomes: how do we avoid these disasters in the future?

I've never worked in banking/financial services/real estate, but somehow I sensed, about 5 years ago, that there would be an avalanche of foreclosures surrounding this 'creative financing' nonsense.  The mortgage industry was allowed to sweet talk people, for their own short-term financial gain, into purchasing something for nothing. It got to the ridiculous point that these loans were actually driving the market prices for real estate to such a level that, at least here in the DC metro area, people were actually forced to get one in order to afford a home, since a 30 year conventional mortgage was out of reach for the vast majority of the middle-class here.  Given our boundless propensity for gullibility and our insatiable materialism, this was bound to happen.  Where does the blame lie? To what extent do people need to be protected from themselves?  I work with a guy who's currently sweating nails over his A.R.M. taking off into the stratosphere in a few months.  Was he stupid? Yes.  Was he suckered? Yes.  Are there that many impressionable people out there?   Evidently.  Given this 'not so scientifically valid' information, how does the government respond?  I predict that the current financial mess will be cleaned up by the Feds through a series of regulations/laws designed to avoid this mess in the future, and it will be a bi-partisan gesture as well, since no one on Capitol Hill or the White House wants to suffer the political fallout from this disaster.

[NDizona]

Regulating lending institutions further will most certainly hurt the housing market (of course keeping all other factors the same).

Just about everyone out there looks are property in 3 ways

1st - cost to build - the law states an individual will not pay more for a property when he/she can build the same property in a similar location for less.  At this point the cost to build has been propping up the market because the cost to build has been so high unless you yourself are a contractor.  If you can contract yourself - its a different story.

2nd - Market - no one will pay more for a property when they can buy another similar property for less - this is the aspect that is effected most by lending.  Its also the easiest to understand.  Raise interest rates - less people can afford homes - market drops...

3rd - rent - no one will pay for a property when the cost to lease is substantially lower than the cost to own - ALSO - no one will pay for a property that cannot generate income to justify the purchase - think opportunity cost from economics.



Cost has propped up this market and will continue to - once building costs drop and the lending institutions get over regulated - your house will drop in value -

[icejammer]

I work with a guy who's currently sweating nails over his A.R.M. taking off into the stratosphere in a few months.  Was he stupid? Yes.  Was he suckered? Yes.  Are there that many impressionable people out there?   Evidently.

Now, here I have a problem with the argument.  No one was "suckered", naive perhaps, but not suckered.  Anyone with an ounce of sense in there head that saw that 30-year mortgages were at/near 40+ year lows should have known that the mortgage market wasn't going to head much lower and was more than due for a rise, thereby raising ARM's down the road.  I don't feel one ounce sorry for anyone short-sighted enough to think they were going to cut a fat pig in the arse with an ARM well below market over the life of their mortgage.

[ricko]

Oh, I didn't feel sorry for the guy.  In fact, I tried to talk him out of it. I told him exactly what I thought was going to happen down the road---and it did.  The 'suckered' part is a result of his naivete and inexperience in navigating a hard-sales pitch.  I actually talked to the mortgage banker who sold him the loan (he tried to talk me into a 'vacation home' A.R.M.).  This was one slick salesman.  I didn't fall for the pitch because I have a super-charged, warp-speed BS detector (growing up on the streets of South Omaha has it's advantages).  Most people I encounter here in the 'burbs are fairly guileless/innocent types that grew up trusting too many of the bad characters among us, and are too enamored with other peoples' job titles and such.  That said, I do think that the 'predatory lenders' share some responsibility in the sense that they exploited and sought out vulnerable among us for their own financial gain.  There will always be suckers in the world, as well as those who take advantage of them.

[Brad]

The fed just cut another ½ point, 8 days after its ¾ point cut.  The fed rate is at 3% so a 30 year loan is probably at what? 4.5% to 5%?

[joeglow]

The fed just cut another ½ point, 8 days after its ¾ point cut.  The fed rate is at 3% so a 30 year loan is probably at what? 4.5% to 5%?

My whole comment just disappeared.  Anyway, what I said was that the Fed cut the short term lending rate.  This has a minimal impact on mortgages.