In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article et,
Maxprop wrote:

America has sold herself out by not having the foresight to change
with the changing world.

America can compete nicely with just about anyone, but some changes are
necessary. To compete with one's competitors, one must at the very least
emulate them. Better yet one should create a cost advantage for the same
quality, or create a quality advantage for the same cost. The US is
capable
of doing either, or both.

Yeah, but you don't. Instead you try to either convince your market
that an inferior prodict is somehow better via clever advertising,

No one with even a modicum of intelligence is buying that anymore. That's
why the companies building such products are struggling.

Some of the power tools coming out of China really aren't too bad for
the price. I bought a 4 1/2" angle grinder for $25. It vibrates a bit
more than my 5" Metabo but that one cost 10X the price. Ditto with
circular saws - I bought a cheapie to use with a metal cutting blade. I
figured I'd destroy the bearings on the job and I did. Better a $59 saw
than my good $200 one. Besides the cheapie had a 2 year home handyman
warranty so I just took it back & got another one. I was upfront on
what I'd being using it for; the shop guy said the distributor just
replaces them without question. That gives me some idea of the markup
between manufacturer and me.

There's a place for lower quality stuff provided the price reflects it.
You're right tho - people have woken up to the advertising cons.

And CEOs and other top-level execs are going to have to face the fact
that
multi-million dollar annual salaries and golden parachutes aren't
compatible
with the world economic markets of the day.

Yeah, I agree. The cost of screwing up a business needs to be brought
home to those responsible. At the moment it seems that the stock
holders lose, and employees lose, but senior management are immune due
to their payment structures.

It only takes a few years at $20 million per, plus a golden parachute to
feather one's nest rather plushly. Again, it sucks, but what's a mother to
do?

Make misfeasance a civil offence and strip them of the protection of
bankruptcy laws. You could apply a floor so that the law only applied
to people running companies with more than $X capitalisation and in
receipt of more than $Y salary/bonuses/stock options.

Possibly pay them in stock options exercisable only 5 years after they
leave the company.

Lots of possibilities to concentrate their minds.......

My take? Neither side will give an inch before the whole thing collapses
into a ruined American economy. I hope to be sailing somewhere in the
Caribbean with my money in offshore banks by then.

I plan on being in a nice 3rd World country with a good climate.
Fortunately for me NZ is only a week's sailing away. OTOH right where I
am is pretty good, too.

I bought a piece of just-off-the-beachfront land on a small island a year
ago. You have to understand that in the Caribbean, the higher up on the
hill, the more expensive and desirable the property. So mine is at the
bottom of the food chain, so to speak. But a small dwelling with a good,
solid roof will do me fine. And a boat--gotta have a boat.

This is why I returned to Oz from Arizona. Got my waterfront place on a
few acres, got a small boat and a bigger one is on the list. Moderate
sized nice city with good facilities is 30 minute drive away. Modern
large city is 1 hour flying time - Melbourne - or 2 hours flying time
to Sydney.

I built my own house and a big shed/barn for all the tools is next.

PDW

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
Katy, with the exception of waterfront property, there is probably no
real
estate in the state of Michigan that's significantly overvalued. Even
the
waterfront property, probably. Agreed, the real estate market in
Michigan
is
fairly poor, but there's the economy again. Now soCal and soFla are
another
story entirely. I've read recently that some areas may be overvalued by
as
much as 40%.

John Cairns

Have a conversation with our realtor. He sends us gobs of articles
about it every week...I ahte realtors...wish we didn't have to use
one...

No such thing as overvalued or undervalued in a free market, except in
someone's perceptions. It's worth what you can sell it for, when you
want to or have to sell it. Period.

What a person paid for it is totally irrelevant.

I agree with you about changes in use driving up prices to where some
activities are no longer economic. Sydney, where I used to live, has
almost no industrial waterfront left because the yuppie scum all wanted
waterfront apartments and then didn't want their view disturbed by
industry, or their peace & quiet disturbed by power tools.

PDW

That's what these fellas are referring to, what the thing is ultimately
worth. Do a little googling and check out real estate prices in soCal.
Houses that would sell for 250k USD anywhere else in the country with the
exception of a few other bubble areas are selling for 750k or more. The
pundits are concerned about what the the 750k houses might be worth down the
road, when the bubble bursts, mainly due to the fact that much of the US
economy is driven by the housing/retail sector. There are a LOT of folks out
there that are apparently living the good life off of the equity in their
houses!

John Cairns

John Said:
There are a LOT of folks out
there that are apparently living the good life off of the equity in
their
houses!



yelp .....and they better get while the gettings good, if it's not to
late.

Joe

"DSK" wrote in message
...
As long as there is a flood of rich retirees with loads of cash keep
believing the advertising, there will be a demand and prices will keep
going up.


Maxprop wrote:
I couldn't care less the reason for the appreciation. And you seem to be
overlooking a simple fact: my view of the Neuse (about 5 statute miles
wide at that point) and Pamlico Sound is spectacular. You call it swamp
land, I call it gorgeous. My neighbors apparently do as well, otherwise
they'd probably not be building half million dollar homes on their land.

Sounds like you're in Janeiro, not Oriental. Dawson's Landing?

Nope. I'm within the city limits of Oriental.

Ah yes, come and join the flood of Yankees complaining that that local
workers are lazy & unreliable & charge too much.

Do you hear that in New Bern? Haven't heard anything of the sort in
Oriental. The locals there are an eclectic bunch of my sort of people. No
snobs or yuppies--just bright, creative folk.


The "original premise" seems to be your advertising-driven conviction that
*your* land will go up astronomically in value forever, and that anybody
who says different is a corn-pone munchin' hillbilly.

For the record, my original premise was that in San Francisco, Miami, and
Chicago (examples, all) the property has risen in value with only momentary
burbles. The long-term trend is always up. My land was simply an example
to contradict something you brought up, which, for the life of me I can't
recall at this late post.


Really? That same waterfront land has been there for how long now? And the
upward trend just started when?

Recently. Coastal NC is roughly half way between NYC and Miami. It is the
last of the Atlantic coastal waterfront to experience the
investment/vacation/leisure boom. And Oriental is on the Neuse, not the
Atlantic. Those areas up river have always been slow to catch on, but they
do eventually. You could buy an acre of land on the Tred Avon River in MD
for about $10K just ten years ago. Today that same acre will cost you
several million dollars. The fact remains that there is a limited amount of
waterfront land. The prime places have been popular for years. The
out-of-the-way places, such as Oriental, have remained below the radar until
recently. That's why I bought there--because it was still relatively
inexpensive, and I have the foresight to see that, like those rivers and
streams off the Chesapeake, the rivers along Pamlico sound will one day be
priced above my ability to pay. You denigrate my purchase, and ridicule
those of us who are perceptive enough to see good RE investments. Beyond
being unkind, you're myopic as well. My investment money has tripled since
January '04. Has your stock portfolio done as well during the same period?
Let's check back in about a decade and see who's ahead then, too.

BTW you should explain how the Neuse River deposited that land there,
without any current and no silt load.

Fly over it sometime, Doug. It's obvious. Despite your belief to the
contrary, the vast majority of land being sold there is NOT filled swamp
land.


Actually, there is a lot of silt in the Neuse nowadays because of upstream
development... what I like to call the bulldozer races... but for all of
history up 'till now, that hasn't been the case.

Then the Neuse and all its tributaries must have just cut through the land
there.

Just a couple of years ago, my wife and I were driving out that way, and
saw a genuine tarpaper shack. A bad reminder of the old days, it's gone
now. When I was a kid, a number of my friends lived in tarpaper shacks and
houses with dirt floors. Now they are all gone & good riddance... to you I
suppose a mobile home is a sign of distressful poverty. To others it's a
big step up in the world.

It's a mistake to make such suppositions. The poverty I was referring to
are homes that have never seen paint or repairs, and undoubtedly belonged to
sharecroppers in the past, if not currently.

Poverty? Let's talk about the South being kept as a 3rd World country up
thru the 1970s, by outside financial & industrial interests, for the sake
of cheap labor & lack of environmental laws.

It's always someone else's fault, isn't it?

... Even more poignant is that the poverty (and the area income levels)
is irrelevant to such development.

Wrong again.

Developers seek out cheap land because that's where they can make the most
profit.

That's interesting logic, if flawed. The developments I've seen in NC, or
anyplace else for that matter, are typically in the more desirable places to
live. It's difficult to make much of a profit selling lots in undesirable
areas, where there is little or no aesthetic value, an ambience of economic
sluggishness, or both.

That's right, us ignorant hillbillies cain't 'ford no waterfront home nor
nuthin' like a fancy sailboat.

Understood. You buy trawlers. (sorry, couldn't resist)

Get back to me when you've owned land in the area half as long. There have
been cycles of booms & busts (as you pointed out) but no booms as big...
and that leads me to believe that the bust will also be big.

LOL. Okay, Doug. But here are a few facts for you. When we bought our
property, there were literally hundreds of parcels of land, from development
lots to large acreage plots, for sale. Today there are a mere handful. And
the prices have skyrocketed, and have done so since before I bought there.
I receive periodic calls and snail mail from realtors asking if I'd like to
sell. They claim to have buyers waiting for something to open up. 2200 sq.
ft homes (avg.) in similar waterfront subdivisions to mine were listing for
roughly $200K to $300K when we bought. Today the same type homes are going
for $400K to over $600K. Only one factor drives values to double in just a
couple of years: demand. There simply is less supply than demand for
waterfront property. And tidewater NC is still considered "very affordable"
by the RE gurus. I doubt that Oriental property will ever come close to
similar parcels/estates along the Chesapeake, NJ, RI, MA, CT, VA, FL, or WV.
It may not even reach the values of similar properties in Maine or Georgia,
but it most certainly will rise. I have not the slightest doubt about that.
Nor do the potential buyers or investors who would like me to sell them my
land. What's even more ridiculous is I couldn't care less. I like Oriental
and the locals, I like the river and the sound, I like the fishing industry
there. I like the sleepy ambience of the town and the surrounding area.
The only thing I fear is not a RE bust, rather a *boom* so substantial that
the small village character of Oriental disappears in a flurry of big money
and tourism. Oriental has far more to lose than to gain at this point, IMO.



Did you *buy* the entire state, or just a small part of an isolated
locale?

Okay, I'll acknowledge that you just don't seem to follow, and let it go at
that.

My point is that you are a bright shining example of thinking that if it
happens to somebody else, it's an isolated incident in an otherwise
positive trend... and that you also seem to think it can't possibly happen
to you.

Not even close. Economists speak daily about large-scale trends. They use
phrases like "the economic indicators all seem to be pointing to a solid
economy over the next quarter," and such. And during the next quarter,
there will be individuals who go broke, declare bankruptcy, lose their
personal possessions, end up on the street. So are the economists wrong?
Would you have them say instead, "the economic indicators all seem to be
pointing to a solid economy over the next quarter, however the Miller family
in Duluth will suffer a substantial setback when Bob loses his job at the
taconite mill, and Geoge and Henrietta Wellcamp of Denton, TX, will face
foreclosure . . ." blah, blah, blah. Even my example of Chicago isn't free
of such variations. While downtown RE has gone through the roof, the south
side properties have remained relatively stagnant. Some regions probably
have fallen in value. But that doesn't have sufficient force to effect the
net RE market trend. (whew, this is becoming cumbersome)

Really? It seems to me like I have agreed with a lot of what you said,
after being accused of being a xenophobic hillbilly and a Nazi. I am
merely pointing out the places where your "logic" takes a flying leap and
your facts are (shall we say) less veritable.

Jesus, Doug, did you, or did you not, see the Seinfeld episode, The Soup
Nazi????? It was quintessential Seinfeld, and the term "(something) Nazi"
is as common as dirt these days. When my wife takes the TV remote away from
me, she is The Remote Nazi. When I won't let the dogs roughhouse in the
living room, I'm The Canine Recreation Nazi. Get a life.

Just as well. Actually I have enjoyed discussing issues with you, but you
seem to get very upset when people disagree with you.

Despite what you and Mooron read into my posts, they are almost always typed
with a rather large grin. Nothing, absolutely nothing, about Usenet could
make me angry. Not even Binary Bill, albeit he's come close on an occasion
or two. I tire of putting smiley emoticons or a g behind my comments, but
you could literally assume they are there most of the time.

That said, this thread has deviated into the carnival of the ridiculous, I
think. You may have the last word, should you feel inclined to so do.

Max

In article , John
Cairns wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
Katy, with the exception of waterfront property, there is probably no
real
estate in the state of Michigan that's significantly overvalued. Even
the
waterfront property, probably. Agreed, the real estate market in
Michigan
is
fairly poor, but there's the economy again. Now soCal and soFla are
another
story entirely. I've read recently that some areas may be overvalued by
as
much as 40%.

John Cairns

Have a conversation with our realtor. He sends us gobs of articles
about it every week...I ahte realtors...wish we didn't have to use
one...

No such thing as overvalued or undervalued in a free market, except in
someone's perceptions. It's worth what you can sell it for, when you
want to or have to sell it. Period.

What a person paid for it is totally irrelevant.

I agree with you about changes in use driving up prices to where some
activities are no longer economic. Sydney, where I used to live, has
almost no industrial waterfront left because the yuppie scum all wanted
waterfront apartments and then didn't want their view disturbed by
industry, or their peace & quiet disturbed by power tools.

PDW

That's what these fellas are referring to, what the thing is ultimately
worth. Do a little googling and check out real estate prices in soCal.
Houses that would sell for 250k USD anywhere else in the country with the
exception of a few other bubble areas are selling for 750k or more. The
pundits are concerned about what the the 750k houses might be worth down the
road, when the bubble bursts, mainly due to the fact that much of the US
economy is driven by the housing/retail sector. There are a LOT of folks out
there that are apparently living the good life off of the equity in their
houses!

Yeah, here, too, at least in the mainland capital cities. I ignore it
all. You have to live somewhere and the only people who make money out
of getting others to move house are the RE agents, the financial
institutions and the Govt. Pox on all 3 groups. They tell me my place
in Sydney is worth 10X what I paid for it. So what, it costs that much
to buy an equivalent place so where's the benefit to me? I bought my
land here in Tasmania right at the end of a decade long price slump.
That doesn't make me smart, just very lucky. It was good value to me
and that's all I cared about.

The only way to crystallise so-called wealth is to sell & move
somewhere cheaper. Some of my friends have done that, more are planning
on doing it. Few want to move to Tasmania, thank god. What we need here
is a real estate slump.

PDW

Sounds like you're in Janeiro, not Oriental. Dawson's Landing?


Maxprop wrote:
Nope. I'm within the city limits of Oriental.


Well, thye've expanded "city limits" considerable.



Ah yes, come and join the flood of Yankees complaining that that local
workers are lazy & unreliable & charge too much.


Do you hear that in New Bern?

I hear that pretty much everywhere, most recently in Chicago.


... Haven't heard anything of the sort in
Oriental. The locals there are an eclectic bunch of my sort of people. No
snobs or yuppies--just bright, creative folk.


Good.



The "original premise" seems to be your advertising-driven conviction that
*your* land will go up astronomically in value forever, and that anybody
who says different is a corn-pone munchin' hillbilly.


For the record, my original premise was that in San Francisco, Miami, and
Chicago (examples, all) the property has risen in value with only momentary
burbles.

Duh. Pretty much everything goes up, over the long run. Does
property go up faster than everything else, always & always?


... The long-term trend is always up.

It is if you extend "long-term" to encompass enough time.


... My land was simply an example
to contradict something you brought up, which, for the life of me I can't
recall at this late post.

Then why do you feel you have to contradict it? It's been
clear to me, all along, theat you really don't have much
idea of most of what I'm talking about (yet you claim to
have aced Econ 101).

DSK

"DSK" wrote
Duh. Pretty much everything goes up, over the long run. Does
property go up faster than everything else, always & always?

Not always, but generally, due to inflation and population growth. The latest
"bubble" was predictable when folks with $million and $10 million incomes found
themselves with lower taxes and more dispoable income.