Clue: it happens *everywhere* from time to time. Supply and demand are in
a constant state of seeking equilibrium.


Maxprop wrote:
Viewed pedantically, yes--that's true. From a more temporal viewpoint, the
hot real estate markets are where the term is being bandied about most
frequently. I doubt seriously if the supply and demand of land in Bugsquat,
NC, is of much concern to anyone beyond the locals.


OTOH if land less than 20 miles from Bugsquat NC is being
aggressively marketed to outsiders at huge prices, then all
three parties (Bugsquat natives, outside buyers, and
sellers) all have an interest in the situation.

I'm sure this makes you angry, since you are one of the
outsiders who bought high-priced land less than a stone's
throw from Bugsquat.



... My brother's home in SF, which he purchased in '74 for $58K,
appreciated to over $400K, and then readjusted in a slump to around $275K
back in the 90s. Now it is over $850K and still rising, but he strongly
expects a readjustment somewhere down the road. So the market gurus
speak over "overvaluation."



And people who have strong reasons to sell their homes during these
periods of "correction" get hammered.


Especially those banks who've lent money on interest-only, nothing down
loans. But ultimately they tend to make out okay. They just hold the
repo'd property until the next RE boom takes the prices higher.


It's that long-term thing again. And banks do fold from time
to time.... or get bailed out by the taxpayer.



Did it ever occur to you that prices seek a level relative to inflation?


Before sticking your thumbs behind your suspenders and looking smug, you
might wish to check out the history of RE values in San Francisco, for
example. The net price trend there has outstripped inflation manifold for
the past quarter century and shows no signs of slowing. Same in the other
two markets I mentioned. No one is talking generalities here, so save the
homespun economics lesson for your neighborhood kids. Bore them, not us.


And what is the trend for local wages over the same period,
hmm? What is the overall cost of living relative to other areas?

As long as it is a desirable place to live, real estate will
do well. When does that trend reverse?




Did it ever occur to you that some goods & services experience a permanent
decline in demand?


You mean like land values in the impoverished regions of NC, which encompass
about 80% of the state?


??

You don't know much about current economic trends, do you.
NC is actually doing pretty well, relatively. And we
appreciate the influx of money for swamp land, thank you.


If you think that long term trends are *always* up, immutably &
indubitably, then I have a great investment for you in Acme Buggy Whip Co
stock.


Get with the program, Doug. Who's talking about stock?

I am. Aren't you paying attention?

The value of a stock is tied to the productivity &
profitability of the company, which in turn is tied to the
wages & benefits it can offer it's employees, which is tied
to what those employees can pay for local real estate.




...And I'm not talking
about RE in Buggy Whip, NC, either. I'm talking about San Francisco, Miami,
and Chicago, like I stated in the first place when you rudely had to open
mouth-insert foot and proclaim, while beating your chest as you are wont to
do regularly, that the phenomenon I was describing happened in ****kick, NC,
too.

It's also happening in a number of other places. Maybe you'd
rather pretend that only city slickers like yourself (who
somehow can't seem to follow a topic, and pay money for
swampland) can understand?


... But as long as you raised the point, can you show me that the Dow
Jones Industrials average is lower now than, say 20 years ago? Or 50 years.

Easy enough to look it up. There have been long periods when
the stock marcket indexes were flat or downward.


How about real estate in general--can you show me any state in the country
where RE values are lower than they were 20 or 50 years ago?

You have missed the point. Is the value higher or lower
*relative to what*?

... You really
should give your statements some thought before citing something your Econ
101 professor told you years ago.


Maybe I see what's irritating you. Did you flunk Econ 101?
Or maybe a cute girl in that class turned you down for date?

Sorry to bring up painful memories.


Gee this thread has come a long way. Started out at the ports & worked
it's way inland, I guess.


That surprises you? Are you The Thread Nazi, the one who demands that
threads remain on track in Usenet?


No, I just give them a title which actually reflects what is
being talked about.

DSK