Who cares about and the state of the economy and the livelihood of our citizens when I have gay people to hate?

Signed,

Bobby Sue

You're pretty funny Thomas. *Snicker*

Kevin - I just finished reading John Brady Kiesling's new book, "Diplomacy Lessons...for an unloved superpower" and think it's right up your alley. If you don't recall, he's the foreign service officer whose resignation letter protesting the Iraq war was reprinted across the world. Check out his book:

http://www.bradykiesling.com/thebook.htm#Advance Praise

Why is the crash in the housing market a bad thing? A lot of us don't own homes and were wondering if we were ever going to be able to.

Joyner's observation that this is a softening rather than a bubble bursting stems from the fact that he is, correctly, focused on the fact that he sold his house for 140% of what they bought it for three years ago. From a seller's perspective, this is a great turnaround, even if they could have gotten 13% more a year earlier. Similarly, the people who sold him his new house made a terrific profit.

We will know if the housing bubble (if that is what it is) has burst if people are forced to sell at a loss. Right now, the only people hurt by the drop would be someone who bought a year ago and hope to flip the property now. Someone who bought say three years ago on an interest only ARM may get hurt because of higher rates but even if that forces them to sell, the market would have to drop 40% (to use Joyce's data) before they were actually taking a real financial hit. If an when that happens, then we can start talking about bubbles.

10-15% drop over last year matches what I've heard about just about EVERY formerly "hot" market (from SoCal houses to Chicago condos to DC townhomes).

That said, I'm not sure that this is the end of the world. It is not uncommon in a bubble situation to claw back 12-18 months of gains immediately upon it becoming common knowledge that a bubble was out there. This doesn't mean that this pace of depreciation will continue for any extended period of time. Just that everyone realizes that the price increases of AT LEAST the last year or two were unreasonable, and the new market starts back at the previous prices.

Now, THIS doesn't mean that housing values AREN'T going to drop significantly. Especially in a few markets (see the above examples), I wouldn't be surprised to see a return to 2000 or 2001 prices--so, indeed, a 40-60% drop. On the other hand, I also wouldn't be surprised to see a bona fide "soft landing" scenario where prices stabilize after this initial 10-15% drop or perhaps tumble 5-10% more, but it takes a LONG time to sell your house.

In any event, buyers that bought in the past 2 years or so are screwed if they need to sell. Seriously, seriously screwed. To the point that if I was advising someone that bought a condo in 2005 and (1) could no longer afford the payments and (2) couldn't get anywhere close to their outstanding balance back on the open market, I would tell them to pack up their stuff, rent a cheap apartment, and then call the bank and tell them that they are just giving up on the place. At the very least, it will save them four months of foreclosure hell.

I'm with Hacksaw, and to tell the truth, don't feel a lot of sympathy for flippers that get caught out. That's capitalism and the free market for you. I also think the impacts on other people will be somewhat muted as most people will simply decide not to sell or move if that move or sale was an optional one. There will be some people who are forced to walk away, but that's life.

I agree with Hacksaw and Joe: anybody who bought in the last two years is screwed if they're trying to flip, but I hope that isn't too many people and, given that there's no secret there's a bubble on, I don't feel terribly sorry for them.

I only know one person who's bought in Manahttan since 2003 and we all told him he was buying at the top of a bubble. His attitude was, I know, I don't intend to sell, I'm locking in a low interest rate for 30 years and I need the tax benefits.

Actually, James is right about a 5-7 year ARM; most people will move before they feel the bite.

Unfortunately, from what I understand, most ARMs are 3-year ARMS, and the low teaser rates are starting to expire, putting marginal buyers in big trouble.

If 30% of home purchases were by speculators, that means that same amount of demand has completely disappeared. If the speculators should all decide to sell at the same time, then house prices should fall that far, too.

One thing that never seems to get mentioned in discussions of the housing bubble is the effect it's having on the rental market. As a new arrival in DC, I'm looking for an apartment, and I've been told that rental rates have gone up in a huge way over the last year or so because no one wants to buy right now. The demand for rentals has gone way up, and so have the prices, meaning the lower-middle and working class folks who couldn't afford a house in the first place are taking it on the chin too. Never hear that talked about though. Just kind of annoying.

Why aren't we talking about the crisis in Baluchistan which is more than a little likely to lead to the downfall of the Pakistani gvmt?

Zac,

It could be a bad thing because thousands of construction workers, suppliers, realtors, financial folks and others could be out of work. And then they don't buy cars or truck or what you make. And you get laid off along with thousands of auto workers. But housing prices would come down, and you could buy one, if you only had a job.

Why is the crash in the housing market a bad thing?

Because escalating home values against which people can borrow ((and have been, quite freely) have been providing much of the spending power that's kept the economy afloat despite falling real incomes of all but the top segments of the economy during the Bush Administration.

If home values fall broadly, it could trigger drastic cuts in consumer spending and, through that, a general economic slowdown.

It seems like the main bubble you are talking about is the market for flippers. If you are going to hold on to a house for more than a year, the trend is still up and will likey always go that way, especially in coastal areas. Of course, when the oil runs out, those McMansions in the 'burbs will tank, but that's not such a bad thing. Anybody want a 1982 Lincoln Continental?

Oh, and we also need to outlaw stem-cell research and abortion. Thank you.

"Why is the crash in the housing market a bad thing? A lot of us don't own homes and were wondering if we were ever going to be able to."

This is lots bigger than that. The US economy over the last few years has been propped up by the housing/construction bubble.

When that pops, (we are now the early stages thereof) I really don't know what's gonna hold the economic ship afloat.

Watch for the economic ripples to spread as banks and S&L's feel the pinch and go under... (just like last time).

I have the sense that this is going to be a 'Perfect Storm'. Housing collapse, massive budget deficits (Iraq + tax cuts), skyrocketing energy costs and an overwhelming trade deficit are all coming home to roost at once.

Fasten your seat belts.

Of all the annoying verbal shorthand, *Snicker* is by far the gayest.

You know if they continue to run things, the Republicans you blindly support won't let you marry your boyfriend, don't you Al?

Kevin,
Can I borrow your crystal ball if you're done with it? Mine's broken and yours always seems to spot everything with such amazing accuracy that I just know I'll be a kazillionaire if I use your crystal ball.

Please?

Kevin,

Sure, the prices are down from their peak. But they're way up compared to two, three, or four--let alone ten--years ago.

The longest I've stayed in the same house as an adult is four years. I've either relocated entirely or had different needs after that.

Lets see if I understand James. If James climbs to the top of a cliff and jump off he can say that he is higher than he was when he started climbing all the way to the bottom. Morevoer it is the end of the drop that is painful. The rest of the way down, everything is fine.

Growth depends on the frame of reference doesn't it? Compare today's price with the price in 1970 for bigger gains.

And growth since 1870? Blistering!

cmdicely,

falling real incomes of all but the top segments of the economy during the Bush Administration.

Real incomes have not been falling for all but the top segments of the economy during the Bush Administration.

"If home values fall broadly, it could trigger drastic cuts in consumer spending and, through that, a general economic slowdown."

So we'll be more like Europe. Isn't that what you liberals want?

Joyner's observation that this is a softening rather than a bubble bursting stems from the fact that he is, correctly, focused on the fact that he sold his house for 140% of what they bought it for three years ago. From a seller's perspective, this is a great turnaround, even if they could have gotten 13% more a year earlier.

What about people who bought houses a year ago ?
They just lost 13%... What about people who build\sell\finance houses for a living ? How much are they losing with the 13 % drop ?

People who just bought houses have lost nothing. They will only lose upon sale.

It would be accurate to say they'll lose if they sell but those who maintain their homes have lost nothing.

Lets see if I understand James. If James climbs to the top of a cliff and jump off he can say that he is higher than he was when he started climbing all the way to the bottom. Morevoer it is the end of the drop that is painful. The rest of the way down, everything is fine.

What an absurd misrepresentation of what James said. Most homeowners did not buy their first home within the last year or two. Most homeowners have reaped the benefit of a long period of rising home values. Therefore, even if there is a significant drop in values, most homes will still be worth more than their owners paid for them. That is the point.

"Real incomes have not been falling for all but the top segments of the economy during the Bush Administration."
Posted by: GOP on August 28, 2006 at 1:40 PM

I guess it depends on how you define "top segments." I don't have it in front of me and I read the article early this morning (and have read several related articles sence), but as I recall today's New York Times article indicates real incomes have been falling for the top 90% of wage earners.

If you think the New York Times is too liberal you might want to read http://money.cnn.com/2006/08/28/news/economy/real_wages/

Excuse me, the bottom 90% of wage earners (not the top) have seen real wage declines under Bush. The top 10% have been doing OK, what with their tax cuts and all.

I welcome the crash. I'm a renter in the DC area who wants to own. I cannot wait for the crash. It means I'll finally be able to afford my own place.

Leading indicators (my wife and all her architect / contractor friends) tell me that the DC crash has already begun. People just don't know it yet. Contracting jobs are vanishing, "orders" for new developments and new homes are being cancelled, and banks are turning away from funding new projects.

And don't give me an interest rate argument: real intrest rates are awful. Great, I can get a 6.2% rate, but my month-to-month payments are beyond my reach because I have to take out a loan on half a million to get anything I can stay in for a while.

All that said, this is an issue that is affecting a very small part of the country. Pittsburgh won't feel a thing.

GOP

I don't know what planet you live on, but here in Red State America lots and lots of people have refinanced their homes over the last few years. They have taken money out for all the normal reasons, to pay for college, to pay medical bills, to pay off credit cards, to take advantage of low interest rates. There are very, very few Ozzy and Harriett types who have just sat on their mortgages. A bursting housing bubble means that many of them are or will soon be upside down in their mortgages. Try to refinance that ARM if you are upside down. Forclosures, and lots of them, are on the horizon.

"Real incomes have not been falling for all but the top segments of the economy during the Bush Administration."
Posted by: GOP on August 28, 2006 at 1:40 PM

Funny thing... Census data (http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h06ar.html) shows both real median and real mean household income have fallen every single year since 2000. This means at least half the US population is making less money every year.

I think the common sense thinking is that it will be bad for marginal borrowers, people who cashed out equity on variable rates to buy a ski boat, speculators and some builders. Otherwise the rest of us have to have a roof over our heads and so what if my place that went up X% in the last two years is now worth X% less, it's where I live. It will be nice not to have the conversation a every dinner party turn to real estate gains.

Now the macro impact might not be so good and I think we're certainly looking at a down turn next winter. Although the middle class never really saw the last upturn, so it will just feel like more of the same. So much for trickle down right.

140% in 3 years is a 11.9% annual rate, while 238% in 10 years is a 9% annual rate. While the total is impressive, neither of the annualized rates are that amazing. This means that a drop of 13% or 21% wipes out more than a year of growth.

"Real incomes have not been falling for all but the top segments of the economy during the Bush Administration."
Posted by: GOP on August 28, 2006 at 1:40 PM

GOP is actually right... its not the top segments that are doing well, its the top segment. Measured in real dollars, the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th quintiles has seen declines in their income since the year 2000. That is also true of the bottom of the top 5% of all households. (http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h01ar.html)

Boffo economy there, GOP.

It's all the Republicans moving out in anticipation of the next 2 elections.

The peak price in this boom throughout the country was 90% above the inflation- and quality-adjusted average price of houses over the past century, or, roughly 75% higher than the inflation- and quality-adjusted average price since World War II. Since bubbles usually overcompensate, we could see a number of markets that have 40-60% drops in house values in the center of the country and 50-70% drops in the superbubble cities.

Freedom Fighter -

I know you fight freedom and all, but do you ever pay attention to actual economic indicators or is that too much like having freedom for you.

There's a reason that the Euro has appreciated 30% against the dollar.

"I think the common sense thinking is that it will be bad for marginal borrowers"

If by "marginal borrowers" you mean 60%+, then maybe. The thing that would make this downturn a lot worse than previous ones is the fact that so many people got ARM loans with $0, and they (1) can't afford the payments when the teaser rate expires and (2) owe a good bit more than their house is currently worth after a "healthy" 10-15% market correction. Number 1 means that they can't sit on their current mortgage, and #2 means that they can't refinance or sell. This conundrum (can't sell, can't not sell, can't afford payments, and can't refinance) of the current slump has never really happened before.

Compounding all of this is the fact that the places that saw the biggest bubble--and face the biggest correction--were the ones where you saw a huge number of young families borrowing way more than they could afford (thanks, ARMs!) with the thought that "nobody lives in the same house for more than a few years anyways." Well, they do when housing values drop, and guess what? They're now dropping.

Why is the crash in the housing market a bad thing?

Falling home prices are good if you did not purchase a home before the dramatic rise in the slope of increasing prices of two years ago. If you bought at the peak last year, however, it means your mortgage is more expensive than the new selling price, which means you cannot refinance or sell without selling for less than you purchased. The new home owners from last year are now upside down. I think the people purchasing now will be upside down next year.

Ron Byers,

I guess it depends on how you define "top segments.

Do you think those making the median wage qualify as the "top segments of the economy?"

but as I recall today's New York Times article indicates real incomes have been falling for the top 90% of wage earners.

What article would that be?

One thing I haven't seen mentioned in these discussions is property taxes.

My property taxes have almost doubled in the last 5 or 6 years. If you "own" your home (the bank really owns your home) and you live in an area where selling prices for homes are accelerating rapidly, your property taxes will go up. Sure, if you sold your home you would make a profit on it, but as long as you stay in that home you are essentially taking a loss.

Also, if you sell the home and buy another more expensive home, you will be paying more in monthly payments and property taxes than you were for the previous home. The only way you actually really make a profit is if you buy a less expensive home.

I do realize that there are people who buy on spec and hope to sell higher a year or two later. Those people are hurt by a drop in prices for homes.

OTOH, for people like me who don't plan to sell, a drop in evaluations for homes will mean my property taxes decline and this is an advantage to me.

If prices drop dramatically and far fewer new homes get built, this does have a cascading effect on the economy, and I feel sorry for those in the home-building business, contractors, carpenters, electricians, etc. If I worked in one of those businesses, I would specialize in remodeling rather than building new homes.

My ideal would be a long and gradual decrease in housing prices, eventually to the point where police, firefighters, teachers, nurses, etc., could actually live in the communities where they work. I mean where housing prices have gone so high. I realize that there are communities where these types of workers can also live, but this is not true of many places on either coast, or in some of the other larger metropolitan markets.

Over the last decade the housing bubble has driven up home assessments here in Jesusland, the cradle of the Confederacy and home to Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell.

Will a 10-15% drop in home resale values lead to lower home assessments? Not likely. Once Governor Jim "Happy" Gilmore cut our car taxes eight years ago the state and localities became addicted to taxes generated from higher assessments to balance school budgets & maintain essential services. Assessments have been driven up 20% from FY05-06.

So who benefits? Hummer and Ford truck drivers from the outer suburbs, who clog our roads, erode our roadbeds and pollute our air while the rest of us pay disproportionately for their kids' education.

GOP read my cite. It will take you to the New York Times article.

In fact read the posts following mine. They are filled with citations blowing giant holes in your position.

Of course, facts do have a definite liberal bias.

can't sell, can't not sell, can't afford payments, and can't refinance

Let's hope your mortgage is nonrecourse, that'll save you a little time in bankruptcy court.

Measured in real dollars, the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th quintiles has seen declines in their income since the year 2000.

The table you link to does not support this claim.

1. The most recent year for which data is provided is 2004. It's now 2006.

2. The data provided is the upper limit by quintile, not the median or average of each quintile.

3. The data represents income by household, not by person. Household size has been decreasing, meaning that income per person (member of household) may rise even if household income falls.

4. The constant-dollar numbers were calculated using the defective CPI deflator, which has been found to overstate inflation, and thus understate growth in real income, on the order of 1 percentage point per year.

GOP,

"I guess it depends on how you define "top segments."

Yeah, well, apparently actual data would indicate that those whose real income has dropped has included the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th quintile of households, plus the bottom end of the top 5% of households. That leaves... well, it leaves the top, doesn't it?

Don't be lazy - look at the data (second table): http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h01ar.html

Then tell us all how things have been so great for almost everyone since GW took office.

In my market, July sales were down 30% from last year's July.

But prices are up 5.1%.

WTF?

"The most recent year for which data is provided is 2004. It's now 2006."

Sure... why the administration is holding back data from 2005 is anyone's guess.

"The data provided is the upper limit by quintile, not the median or average of each quintile." Ah yes... if the upper limit of the 2nd quintile is down, and the upper limit of the 3rd quintile is down, we can assume that everyone else in the third quintile is making off like a bandit.

"The data represents income by household, not by person. Household size has been decreasing, meaning that income per person (member of household) may rise even if household income falls."

Real income per person has also fallen every year since 2000. (http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/p01ar.html)

"The constant-dollar numbers were calculated using the defective CPI deflator, which has been found to overstate inflation, and thus understate growth in real income, on the order of 1 percentage point per year."

Two comments to that:
1. cite?
2. how come that doesn't seem to have had the same effect at other points in time? Even with this defective deflator, real income per capita (you wanted per person, right) rose every single year during the Clinton administration. And dropped every single year per person during GW's.

"In my market, July sales were down 30% from last year's July.

But prices are up 5.1%."

Classic stalemate. Sellers aren't willing to come down, and buyers know that paying asking prices is silly. There are still a few buyers who *have* to buy (not really, but who wants to rent after owning?), which explains the noise and the slight gains. But in general, the two sides are waiting each other out.

This has happened before. For what it's worth, buyers always win. A huge drop in volume with stagnant prices almost always is followed by drastic price reductions.

We might be facing the paradox that the bubble bursting might hit a lot harder in the red states than in the blue, notwithstanding the fact that the blue states got far more overpriced. Here in Manhattan, despite the absurd prices, the bubble may well have been limited by co-ops not accepting ARMS and the amount of land available for condos. Add in the fact we're less affected by increases in gasoline and all the foreigners happy to arbitrage the strength of their Euros by scooping up those marked-down condos, we might be O.K.

Which means, of course, another clusterfuck for the Bush supporters who moved an hours' drive out to the McMansions they could afford only with interst-only mortgages in the first place.

BTW, the fact that everyone who's waiting to buy is renting is BIG news here in Manhattan, just not nationally. Right now it has led to a resurgance of a scam in which a rental broker signs an "exclusive right" to rent an apartment, doesn't do anything to show the apartment, waits for the owner to rent it on craig's list (which can happen in day, the NYC rental market's so tight)and then demands his fee from the owner, pointing to the fine print of the broker's agreement which required the owner to refer all offers to the broker. Easy money, indeed. Some of these "real estate professionals" deserve not just to be out of work but in jail, in my opinion.

Ron Byers,

GOP read my cite. It will take you to the New York Times article.

Your cite takes me to an article on CNNmoney.com, not to a New York Times article. There is nothing in that article substantiating the claim that real incomes have fallen for "all but the top segments of the economy during the Bush Administration." First, the article discusses wages, not incomes. Do you understand the difference? Second, the time period discussed is "the last three years," not "during the Bush Administration." Third, the real wage claims are based on calculations made using the defective CPI deflator, which overstates inflation and understates real wage growth.

Try again.

wolfdaughter,

If you "own" your home (the bank really owns your home) and you live in an area where selling prices for homes are accelerating rapidly, your property taxes will go up.

Not in California, which is one of the prime examples of the hot hot hot real estate market.

GOP at the bottom of this message is link to a New York Times Article you might want to read.

According to one very telling passage in the article:

"Average family income, adjusted for inflation, has continued to advance at a good clip, a fact Mr. Bush has cited when speaking about the economy. But these gains are a result mainly of increases at the top of the income spectrum that pull up the overall numbers. Even for workers at the 90th percentile of earners — making about $80,000 a year — inflation has outpaced their pay increases over the last three years, according to the Labor Department.

“There are two economies out there,” Mr. Cook, the political analyst, said. “One has been just white hot, going great guns. Those are the people who have benefited from globalization, technology, greater productivity and higher corporate earnings.

“And then there’s the working stiffs,’’ he added, “who just don’t feel like they’re getting ahead despite the fact that they’re working very hard. And there are a lot more people in that group than the other group.”"

Emphasis added.

In short, the really rich are doing really well. The rest of us are really taking it in the shorts. Of course, the Republicans don't notice the pain of the bottom 90% of the population. They aren't part of the riff raff.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/28/business/28wages.html?ei=5090&en=ea4fce3d527e44a0&ex=1314417600&adxnnl=1&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1156790137-gIiTxDLX+V3qu1HxU6wAXg

The CPI deflator does not overstate inflation. If anything, it understates inflation. It's defective because the OER (Owner's Equivalent Rent) component, which is approx. 30% of the CPI calculation attempts to make housing prices into a rental factor. It totally failed to pick up the increase in home prices that occurred in the 90's and early part of this decade. Thus, while housing prices were going up at double digit rates in many prices, CPI was showing increases in the 1-2% range, which was totally ridiculous.

See comment above, in the last sentence "many prices" should have read "many places."

Note to self, use preview button in the future.

Another observation from the DC area.

A friend of mine tried to sell a condo in Adams Morgan she bought in summer of 2004. She's not a flipper, her fiance just got a job offer across the country. After 5 months on the market she pulled it off, because the only offer she got was $20,000 less than the price she paid in 2004. They are going to live apart until they figure out what they can do about the shortfall.

Another friend who bought a downtown condo 10 years ago made a killing. However, he took all the equity out (he retains it as a rental property) and bought a $700,000 fixer-upper after bidding out all other bidders in 2004. He's done at least one cash out refinancing since then to pay off credit cards.

I don't know anyone who bought in the last three years who didn't use an adjustable rate mortgage, a piggyback loan, and an interest only option mortgage, usually all three.

Since there's usually an age bias in the anecdotal evidence (i.e. people tend to buy homes at a certain age, most of our social circles tend to sample heavily from the distribution right around our own age) let me state that I'm a DC professional in my early thirties, so I do know a great many first time homebuyers.

cactus,

1. cite

The 1996 Boskin Commission concluded that the CPI overstates the rate of inflation, and thus understates real growth, by more than 1 percentage point per year. Subsequent research has confirmed the Boskin finding, and indicates that the CPI still overstates inflation despite adjustments to the CPI made by the government in response to Boskin.

See, for example, the paper from this year, The Boskin Commission Report: A Retrospective One Decade Later.

Quote:

"This retrospective evaluation suggests that the Boskin bias estimate for 1995-96 should have been 1.2 to 1.3 percent, not 1.1 percent. Current upward bias in the CPI is estimated to have declined from the revised 1.2-1.3 percent in the Boskin era to about 0.8 percent today. Yet the Boskin report, like most contemporary studies of quality change, failed to place sufficient value on the value of new products and on increased longevity. Allowing for these, today's bias is at least 1.0 percent per year or perhaps even higher."

And also, the 2003 paper Measurement Error in the Consumer Price Index: Where Do We Stand?

Quote:

"We survey the evidence on CPI bias and provide our best estimate of its magnitude. We also identify a 'weighting' bias that has not been quantified previously. We estimate that the CPI currently overstates the rate of change in the cost of living by about 0.9 percentage point per year."

2. how come that doesn't seem to have had the same effect at other points in time? Even with this defective deflator, real income per capita (you wanted per person, right) rose every single year during the Clinton administration. And dropped every single year per person during GW's.

Huh? It did have the same effect at other points in time. Income growth during the Clinton Administration was also probably higher than the official numbers indicate, because of the effect of the defective CPI deflator used to calculate those numbers.

"I don't know anyone who bought in the last three years who didn't use an adjustable rate mortgage, a piggyback loan, and an interest only option mortgage, usually all three."

[Raise my hand.]

Young 30s professional in Chicago. I bought an old but livable SFH in an "up and coming" (read: lawyers and doctors are buying out all of the old blue collar Irish people) about 4 miles from downtown. It's a 9 minute commute with no traffic; 35 minutes door-to-door if I walk up and take the El. I paid about $350k. It is my first home.

I paid 20% down and took out a 30 year fixed mortgage for the rest. With my credit, my mortgage is less than 20% of my net (i.e., takehome) pay. I kept a $25k cash cushion for repairs or unexpected costs (it's since grown to about $45k, but I need a new roof and I'm going to gut the basement in the spring, so that is going to be dwindling soon). I was able to afford that by living like a pauper on a very nice salary for five years. Heck, I would have just as soon waited another year or two until prices come down in the city, but family circumstances (baby and wife's job) required a house in the city for the next several years.

Which means, of course, another clusterfuck for the Bush supporters

Allah akbar!

The Boskin Commission==ALL_ECONOMISTS_EVERYWHERE_FOR_ALL_TIME!!

Because it uses an implicit rental component. the CPI deflator is likely to overstate inflation during this downturn in the housing market. More demand for rental housing will increase rent, but not help homeowners one bit.

"The 1996 Boskin Commission concluded that the CPI overstates the rate of inflation, and thus understates real growth, by more than 1 percentage point per year. Subsequent research has confirmed the Boskin finding, and indicates that the CPI still overstates inflation despite adjustments to the CPI made by the government in response to Boskin."

Subsequent research has shown nothing of the kind. The so-called hedonic adjustments, i.e. the adjustments made for quality of goods, have been well incorporated into the CPI data. Some experts (Bill Gross of PIMCO fame) have opined that the hedonic adjustments have been over-implemented. And the OER component has not even come close to estimating the impact housing has had on inflation in the US.

All real estate is local, so national trends are somewhat irrelevant. As with everything else in economics, it all comes down to supply and demand. A place like DC, where demand is always fairly strong because it is the nation's capital and the center of much political and business acitivty should have a relatively soft landing.

Places like Phoenix and Las Vegas, on the other hand, where there are few physical constraints on the creation of new supply, will likely get crushed.

We live in Seattle, and bought our house in July 2000. Since then we have seen approximately 9% annual growth and after six years, our house is now worth about 70% more than what we paid for it. Places like Seattle and San Francisco, where demand is strong due to job growth, and supply is limited by physical constraints (mountains, water) should do fine, since supply will always be very limited and these are highly desireable places to live. Up here, we never really had much of a bubble (9% annual growth is fairly moderate, although above historical norms), so when things do slow down, it will likely be in the form of a few years of flat to minimal growth, as opposed to price decreases.

The key thing is real estate as in everything else is to be smart financially...don't buy more house than you can afford, build up equity, and don't use your house as a cash cow.

People who have managed their money wisely will be fine no matter what real estate prices do; people who have not will get killed. We bought our house with the standard 20% down, have refinanced twice and are now on a 7/1 ARM at 5% that does not adjust until 2011, have not tapped our equity, have no other debt, and will be just fine no matter what.

However, we have friends in the Bay Area who took out an interest only loan two years ago and are now in a negative equity situation and are really hurting.

Everything comes down to each person's individual situation.

Since both houses appreciated handsomely (nearly 50% and 24% per year, respectively) the small decreases look to be just seller overestimation of the current values of their houses.

Am I the only one here old enough to remember the last housing market downturn?

In 1992 I sold an apartment in NYC for 25% less than I paid for it in 1988. Today that same apartment is worth two to three times what I sold it for.

What's the point? Real estate markets are cyclical, even though the long term trend is up. There's nothing particularly surprising or noteworthy about this.

DBL

I am old enough to remember the last real estate downturn and the one before that. You are right, nothing about this downturn couldn't have been anticipated by anyone with a brain. The differences this time are (1)the dracoian bankruptcy code and (2) the bizarre financing tools that have become popular during the last few years. Interest only ARM, give me a break. An invitation to disaster.

GOP,

Do you mind identifying your source or did you just make it up. There is no identifier on the chart.

The word (in DC, anyway) is that the condo market is doing really well. In part because there are an awful lot of (a) people who can't afford the housing market, and (b) a TON of retirees that are looking to downsize and stay in the DC area.

It's tempting to buy in DC (although, I don't have enough money saved and I am paying nearly 50% of the going rate for a rental. so there's no hurry.) but I think I'll wait.

Careful economists understand that the CPI understates inflation if anything.

Therefore, real wages have been falling, of course.

I've never had sex with a woman.

GOP - your Boskin Commission's findings were based on the FLAWED PREMISE that;
Since features and quality of goods were increasing, that they goods were being undervalued (example: A $500 TV today has better picture quality, etc. than a $500 TV 5 years ago).

The FLAW in that premise is the idea that people can eat a TV.

The DC housing market crash is fairly evident out my way in Montgomery County. I bought a year ago and similar townhouses in my neighborhood now go for 10-15% less.

The spambots are out, so this thread should close. Too bad. It was a good conversation.

I'm late to comment but, I live about 30 miles outside of DC. Houses for sale in my neighborhood have been sitting here for months, and it's a nice neighborhood with 1-5 acre lots...

If only the Democrats had stayed constant to the moderately socialistic economic views of FDR and LBJ during the last 26 years, they would be in a fine position to make major corrections to the increasingly unfair economic model that has by default monopolized the arena of debatable thought in this country for so long. As things stand, when the iceberg is sited it will be far too late to turn the ship around. If you cant hold to your principles during the tough times, what good are they?

Ha ha ha ha ha. Your link doesn't cite any "economists" at all, let alone "careful" ones.

Wow, you're pretty pathetic. The guys who make money watching other people's money believe the CPI understates inflation - based on economic observations, not politically convenient boilerplate, but since I said "economists" and not "money managers" you're going to stick your fingers in your ears and ignore their argument?

Well, I can't help you there. Seems like a problem with your early childhood development.

There are plenty of good economists out there who've see through the mistakes in the Boskin report, although you don't have to be an economist to see them, just honest. Start with Mason Gaffney and John Williams.

Until then, here's some more guys who invest for a living who see the obvious:

Once again, inflationary pressures failed to show up in the CPI data. This is in sharp contrast with market measures (gold and commodity prices) and anecdotal evidence (ISM Index) which indicate that inflationary pressures remain elevated. While gains in productivity and cheap goods from overseas are helping to hold prices down, we continue to believe that the CPI understates actual inflation. For example, the CPI's measure owner's equivalency rent is up just 2.5% in the past year and has averaged only 2.9% annualized gains over the past five years. If this measure was accurate, talk of a housing "bubble" would be hard to sustain. Most anecdotal evidence points to much more rapid growth in home prices. The median price of an existing home is up 11.6% in the past year, while the median price of a new home is up 6.7%. Other measures of healthcare and education costs are rising faster than official CPI estimate. As a result, it could be that inflation is being understated by as much as 1% on an annual basis. Even with this underestimation services prices, excluding energy services have climbed 3% at an annual rate in the past three months and we believe this is much more indicative of true inflation. As a result, a neutral federal funds rate is likely near 5.5%.

http://www.ftportfolios.com/Retail/research/viewresearcharticle.aspx?id=33

GOP

This thread is about the bursting housing bubble, so great job of creating a red herring, but let us assume the current economy is performing for the average Joe or Jane just as you have said (even though nobody believes it is doing that well.) The "increases" you suggest are pretty thin beer by just about any measure. They are certainly nothing for the President to point to with pride, at least not by historic standards. In any event as near as I can tell you are just about alone in claiming the average person is doing better now than when George Bush came into office. Most Republicans just make excuses like 9/11 changed everything, we are fighting a war, Bill Clinton got a blow job, or its all the fault of social security. Assuming for the sake of argument that the average American is just about where he was when George Bush became president, experience teaches me that treading water means your closer to drowning than to reaching the shore.

Explain to me just why hasn't your party done anything to improve the lot of the Americn worker? Why are so many countries gaining on us? On what economic basis should anybody outside the upper 5% even consider voting for your candidates? Do the average Joe and Jane really need more of what you would argue is a stagnant standard of living, and more likely a declining standard of living? What are you going to do to improve the economic lots of the bulk of Americans?

So you're claiming that measures of inflation are only meaningful if they're based on price changes in things you can "eat," are you?
Posted by: GOP on August 28, 2006 at 4:29 PM | PERMALINK

An "Inflation Metric" intended to be used as an indicator of "How Economically Well Off We Are" better damn well be heavily weighted with necessities. You know, like housing, food, energy - the things that are generally omitted from CPI.

Luxuries like DVD players and SUVs with stock spinners should figure in only peripherally.

Americans are less able to cover expenses, less able to make ends meet, less able to buy housing, less able to pay for the gasoline to get them to work, less likely to get raises, more likely to work unpaid overtime, more likely to get laid off, more likely to get their pensions yanked, less well off - by any measure except your Boskins-computed CPI. If the measure doesn't match the reality - guess what that says about your measure?: it's been defined and twisted into uselessness - except that it's very useful for administration flaks trying to paint a rosy picture of the shithole they've dug us into, just so they have an excuse to keep digging.

anonymous,

There are plenty of good economists out there who've see through the mistakes in the Boskin report,

What "mistakes?" What "economists?" You haven't named even a single one. You haven't cited any research rebutting the conclusions of the Boskin Report. Or the study by Robert Gordon I cited. Or the study by Lebow and Rudd I cited. Gordon, Lebow, Rudd, and the members of the Boskin Commission are distinguished economists with special expertise in prices and inflation. If you think you think have expert opinion and research that refutes their conclusions then produce it.

Start with Mason Gaffney and John Williams....

Ha ha ha ha ha! Who the hell are they? What claims do they make? What research is those claims based on? What is their area of professional expertise, if they even have one? Do you have anything or don't you?

Kevin: Go read Nouriel Roubini's latest take on the fate of the housing bubble. It's a hair-raiser!

Here in Denver, there were some neighborhoods that lost 80% of their value when the oil bust collided with the S&L crisis in the early to mid 1980s. If you bought just before the peak, you'd have to sit on your house for almost 15 years before you could recover your "investment." All those foreclosed properties that were sitting on the banks' books and then the bank ended up at auction dumped more properties onto the market than the market could bear.

As a country, we're heading for something similar. I'm renting and I'm saving (only able to sock away $300/week) up for when there is blood in the streets. And a 10-20% "correction" isn't enough. I'm waiting for 50-80% off. Several of the houses on my block have been on and off the market several times (they're "REO" which means the bank owns them).

osama,

An "Inflation Metric" intended to be used as an indicator of "How Economically Well Off We Are" better damn well be heavily weighted with necessities. You know, like housing, food, energy - the things that are generally omitted from CPI.

You don't know what you're talking about. Food and energy are not included in the "Core CPI" because of their price volatility, but they are included in the CPI-U and CPI-U-RS deflators used by the BLS to calculate real wages.

The perennial topic is back. So, 1) housing is inflation-neutral over the long run. Some markets are way ahead of themselves and have a way to go before they fall back in line with historical valuations. 2) A large chunk of US housing is poorly situated (commutes, water supply, etc.) and energy inefficient.

Ron Byers,

let us assume the current economy is performing for the average Joe or Jane just as you have said (even though nobody believes it is doing that well.)

I don't know what "performing for the average Joe or Jane" is supposed to mean. I have been rebutting cmdicely's false claim that "incomes of all but the top segments of the economy during the Bush Administration" have been falling, and other false claims I have seen here about wages and incomes.

In any event as near as I can tell you are just about alone in claiming the average person is doing better now than when George Bush came into office.

If you think you have evidence demonstrating that the average person is not doing better now than when George Bush came into office, then produce it. You haven't provided any such evidence so far. The median earnings data I gave you shows an increase every year from 2001 to 2004, even using the defective CPI deflator that understates real wage growth. And wages and salaries are just one type of income. And income is just one type of economic benefit.

Explain to me just why hasn't your party done anything to improve the lot of the Americn worker?

My party has improved the lot of the American worker.

Why are so many countries gaining on us?

They're not.

On what economic basis should anybody outside the upper 5% even consider voting for your candidates?

Because my candidates are better for their economic status than your candidates.

Do the average Joe and Jane really need more of what you would argue is a stagnant standard of living,

No, they need more of what I would argue is an improving standard of living, which is what they're getting.

What are you going to do to improve the economic lots of the bulk of Americans?

Pursue policies that are conducive to growth and prosperity.

I'm just sort of amazed at how Kevin, who lives in California of all places, can (i) keep posting on this topic as if housing prices are, as a matter of fact, dependent upon some political act, and (ii) at the same time ignore the radical difference between the various markets in the country.

Its especially ironic considering how much abuse is heaped (and IMO rightly so) on those who ignore, for example, the collective experience of Western Europe w/r/t provision of health care. I mean, gee whiz, its not as if its only poor Mexicans who do anything to get into this country. How about the rich Iranians in Beverly Hills? Or the rich from the entire world in Manhattan? For the wealthy, the desirable neighborhoods in this country is still perhaps the least expensive of the entire first world.

What's even more entertaining is the "on-cue" ramblings of GOP who attempts to convince someone, anyone, that real wages or Klingon wages or Martian wages have actually increased, as if the question of what you can buy with those wages is somehow only of academic interest.

There never seems to be a serious discussion (which you would expect from this crowd) of the long term implications of what I believe is the inexorable transition from a country with more land than it needs to a country with a shortage of desirable land, like, for example, pretty much all of Europe. You would think that the recent rise of gasoline prices, and their obvious effect on simply building more affordable large homes out in the middle of bumfuck Egypt as some sort of answer would be the first thing discussed.

Instead, this topic is always treated as of short term interst in only a general political sense, rather than the long term city planning issue it really is.

>If you think you have evidence demonstrating that the average person is not doing better now than when George Bush came into office, then produce it.

The poster "cactus" (who happens to be an economist and was smart enough to give up on GOP) has twice given you links to tables that show you are flat out wrong on the facts.

In fact, you indicated that you don't even have an understanding of math when you say "The data provided is the upper limit by quintile". Duh. The upper limit of the quintile goes down when... oh hell, what's the point. Everybody else gets it.

So you got basically your whining about the CPI Deflator, like there is no argument about the Boskin report. You get pointed to an argument against it and again you troll away.

Finally, the other thing you don't seem to realize is those may well be, as in many cases, compensation tables.

Because once you go to take-home pay it's worse. Medical cost inflation has, in the perverse world of economic thought, made us all "better paid" since our employers are struggling to keep up their benefit programs. Or at least can't find a way to cut them fast enough without having a cube farm riot.

Your party's economic so-called ideas go beyond sucky, sorry. And your misunderstandings show us how lost you people are.

Pursue policies that are conducive to growth and prosperity.
Posted by: GOP on August 28, 2006 at 5:43 PM |

What policies? I am sick to death of GOP slogans. You all have had 12 years to pursue policies that are conducive of growth and prosperty. Near as I can tell your policies are conducive of the growth of the Chinese, and Indian economies. They have only improved the prosperity of the very rich. The rest of us are just your suckers paying for your personal prosperity.

GOP If you think you have evidence demonstrating that the average person is not doing better now than when George Bush came into office, then produce it. You haven't provided any such evidence so far. The median earnings data I gave you shows an increase every year from 2001 to 2004, even using the defective CPI deflator that understates real wage growth. And wages and salaries are just one type of income. And income is just one type of economic benefit.

You have spent your entire day trying to knock down the proof. I can't help it if you keep ignoring the evidence presented by lots and lots of folks on this board and elsewhere. The best you have accomplished is demonstrating that the average guy is running harder just to stay in place.

Anyway, you guys claim to be the family values party. You have had 12 years. Where the hell is the economy where one bread winner would be able to support a family. Create that economy and you have created a world beater. Given the almost straight line improvement in worker productivity, it should be possible for Americans to have families where one parent stays home to take care of and help raise the kids. A policy goal of sharing that wonderful productivity improvement would win you elections into the far, far future. It is a fundamental family value you seem to overlook.

hank,

What's even more entertaining is the "on-cue" ramblings of GOP who attempts to convince someone, anyone, that real wages or Klingon wages or Martian wages have actually increased,

I don't care whether you're "convinced" or not. I'm simply showing you the data and other evidence, including earnings data cited by a left-leaning policy institute, indicating that real wages have not declined. You can choose to ignore this data if you like, but it's not in your interests to do so.

People with something to lose, i.e. reassurance that putting all their money into housing was a can't lose "investment," just can't see the size of the trouble coming down the pike. It's a built-in biological safety feature.

There will come a day when people will kill to get back half of what they paid. My wife and I owned a home on Maryland's Eastern Shore for over a dozen years, and it appreciated less than one percent per year (we sold in 2000). That was normal, and everything that's happened since is utter bullshit. The dollar won't be worth a damn anyway after Bush attacks Iran, and that's an even BIGGER wave o' trouble...

Ron Byers,

You have spent your entire day trying to knock down the proof. I can't help it if you keep ignoring the evidence presented by lots and lots of folks on this board and elsewhere.

Ha ha ha ha ha! What "proof?" Proof of what claim? You haven't even attempted to rebut this yet:

Median usual weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers (25 years and older), annual averages (2004 dollars)

2001: $672
2002: $678
2003: $680
2004: $683

Nor have I seen any serious attempt by you or anyone else to rebut the finding of the Boskin Commission and the two academic studies I cited that the CPI overstates inflation.

If you "own" your home (the bank really owns your home) and you live in an area where selling prices for homes are accelerating rapidly, your property taxes will go up.

Not in California, which is one of the prime examples of the hot hot hot real estate market.

Yes, in California, your property taxes will increase if your home value increases. The rate of increase of tax basis value is capped, though (which has an ironic effect in a bursting bubble that, if the actual value of your house falls but not past its current basis value, your taxes can keep going up while your value goes down.)

Plus, while some areas of California have "hot hot hot" markets, lots of places in California are already seeing the bubble burst with rapidly declining values, most notably (though not exclusively) the Sacramento region.

doesn't matter,

The poster "cactus" (who happens to be an economist and was smart enough to give up on GOP) has twice given you links to tables that show you are flat out wrong on the facts.

I suspect the poster "cactus" is also the poster "doesn't matter" (i.e., you) and the poster "_", and the poster "gab."

It's all you, isn't it? You're desperately trying to lend credibility to your evidence-free assertions by repeating them under various different handles. I suspect you're also the same individual who has been showing up in numerous other threads in recent weeks and entering posts under many other names that have never been seen before and that disappear shortly after they first appear. Lame, lame, lame.

GOP

NANA NANA NANA is just not a very good rejoinder. You are going to have to try harder.

You are getting tired. If you want we will be glad to tell your friends at the Heritage Foundation a note that you tried hard.

What about my idea that a true "family values" party would value families enough to insure that jobs paid enough to let one parent stay home with the kids?

Ron Byers,

NANA NANA NANA is just not a very good rejoinder.

Then why do you keep saying it?

Do you have a rebuttal to the earnings data I provided showing an increase in median real earnings from 2001 to 2004, or don't you?

Do you have a rebuttal to the Boskin Commission finding that the CPI significantly overstates inflation, and therefore significantly understates real wage and income growth, or don't you?

Do you have a rebuttal to the studies by Robert Gordon and David Lebow that I quoted and linked to, studies that confirm the Boskin Commission finding that the CPI overstates inflation, or don't you?

Do you have evidence demonstrating that "the average person" is not "doing better now than when George Bush came into office," or don't you?

I keep asking and you keep ignoring the requests.

The economy is great, lalala, there is no housing bubble, lalala, I'm not a bedwetting virgin, lalala, everything I say is true because I say it's true, lalala, to hell with the real world, lalala, I'm a complete moron, lalala...

The world is going to hell, lalalalala, we're all gonna die, lalalalala, I hate America, lalalalala, I'm an ignorant bufoon, lalalalala

I suspect the poster "cactus" is also the poster "doesn't matter" (i.e., you) and the poster "_", and the poster "gab."

Um, no. I can't speak for the other handles you mentioned but I've only posted under this handle, although your paranoia is duly noted.

I decided to let this discussion go not because my assertions were "evidence free," but because I realized that no amount of persuasive evidence was going to change your mind.

I came by this conclusion after realizing that if you were not aware of the growing cadre of economists who believe that the CPI understates inflation (and I referenced two) or their reasons for arguing that (a few were cited in the article I referenced but you should know what they are if you're at all familiar with this issue) -- then you're not somebody who's looking at this matter seriously.

Obviously you've glommed onto an opinion about this for political reasons, and aren't open-minded enough to examine it critically. I've learned from experience that arguing with reactionaries isn't usually a fruitful use of one's time.

Using misleading rental inputs in lieu of actual housing costs, not properly accounting for the effect of rising energy and food costs, overweighting of both the use and influence of big box retailers on prices, buying into the ridiculously fatuous quality changes bias -- these are just some of the the faulty assumptions that render the two studies you mentioned seriously defective.

Here's a link that contradicts myself, and I'm still an unlaid moron---

http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_econindicators_income20050831

Does anyone here actually respect my opinion? I guess I'll have to change my name again, like I did when I was Don P.(aka Pissypants), once I'm completely discredited and humiliated again.
We need to torture more people!

One final thing though, since you seem to be a little lacking in recent economic data.

Why are so many countries gaining on us?

They're not.

They are:

The euro zone grew almost 1 percent last quarter, outperforming the United States, Britain and Japan. The upshot is that the euro zone will likely grow about 2.5 percent this year—up from 1.3 percent in 2005. What's more, Slow Europe is now creating jobs faster than the United States: France and Germany in particular saw strong jumps this spring and summer.

One thing that never seems to get mentioned in discussions of the housing bubble is the effect it's having on the rental market. As a new arrival in DC, I'm looking for an apartment, and I've been told that rental rates have gone up in a huge way over the last year or so because no one wants to buy right now.

The rental runnup, too, will subside.

As more an more unsold (or foreclosed) property gets dumped on the rental market, rents should eventually weaken just like sales prices. Every empty bit of new construction that's "for sale" and awaiting a buyer is essentially new supply being temporarily held in a housing "bank". When this new supply is eventually released, much of it will go directly to the rental market, exerting downward pressure on rents.

I've learned from experience that arguing with reactionaries isn't usually a fruitful use of one's time.

Unfortunately, most people here have already figured that out about me, so I'm mostly just an object of mockery. I think it's someone named Stefan(probably some sort of Soviet spy) leading the plot against me.
Why doesn't anyone recognize my obvious intellectual superiority?

Faulty link, here's one that works:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14533734/site/newsweek/

anonymous,

I came by this conclusion after realizing that if you were not aware of the growing cadre of economists who believe that the CPI understates inflation (and I referenced two)

No, you haven't. You haven't identified even one single solitary economist claiming that the CPI overstates inflation. None. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

Can you cite any economists who make this claim, or can't you? Can you cite any studies refuting the conclusion of the Boskin Commission, or can't you?

Here are the members of the Boskin Commission:

Michael J. Boskin, Ph.D., Chairman
Tully M. Friedman Professor of Economics
& Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution
Stanford University
Stanford, California

Ellen R. Dulberger, Ph.D.
Director of Marketing Strategy
IBM Personal Computer Company
Somers, New York

Robert J. Gordon, Ph.D.
Chairman, Department of Economics
& Stanley G. Harris Professor in the Social Sciences
Northwestern University
Evanston, Illinois

Zvi Griliches, Ph.D.
Paul M. Warburg Professor of Economics
Harvard University
Cambridge, Massachusetts

Dale Jorgenson, Ph.D.
Chairman, Department of Economics
& Frederic Eaton Abbe Professor of Economics
Harvard University
Cambridge, Massachusetts

And here is the author of the 2003 study I cited confirming the Boskin Commission's finding:

David E. Lebow
Chief
Macroeconomic Analysis Section
Division of Research and Statistics
Federal Reserve Board.

And "liberal" economists such as Brad DeLong and Paul Krugman also agree with the Boskin Commission's finding that the CPI overstates inflation.

I'm still waiting for you to identify even a single professional economist who dissents from this view.

Unfortunately, most people here have already figured that out that I'm a lying, name-stealing moron.

What's more, Slow Europe is now creating jobs faster than the United States: France and Germany in particular saw strong jumps this spring and summer.

Yes, but without deep structural reforms, this period of "catchup" for Europ is likely to be like previous ones since the early 1980s: most ephemeral. The Europeans manage to narrow the gap with the US about once every decade or so for a brief period -- usually for a time lasting about 10% or so of the business cycle -- typically when the US is headed into recession.

Unfortunately, the only person who has "figured out" that "Stefan" is stealing my "name" is me, and everyone here knows that I'm one step below a retarded plankton on the food chain.

At least the retarded plankton get laid.

No, you haven't. You haven't identified even one single solitary economist claiming that the CPI overstates inflation. None. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

You must have missed it when I posted this:

There are plenty of good economists out there who've see through the mistakes in the Boskin report, although you don't have to be an economist to see them, just honest. Start with Mason Gaffney and John Williams.

Also see Dean Baker and Floyd Harris.

No, they're not.

Sure they are:

PARIS, Aug 14 (Reuters) - European economic growth took off in the second quarter of 2006, outstripping the United States and Japan thanks the strongest performances by Germany and France since the dot-com bubble burst in 2000. France on Friday confirmed it had done even better with a surge of 1.1-1.2 percent, more than double its first-quarter pace and the fastest since the last quarter of 2000.

For the first time in a long while the national and pan-European figures topped those of the United States, where growth was around 0.6 percent in the second-quarter, and also Japan and Britain where GDP rose 0.2 percent and 0.8 percent respectively on a comparable quarter-on-quarter basis.

I'm not sure what citing a subscription wall is supposed to prove.

So, anyone have advice for an L.A. couple looking to buy? I've been waiting out the boom, but don't want to miss my chance the next time around.

I'm not trying to flip. We just need a place for a couple years and we're sick of renting. Any ideas on when it will be a good time to start looking again?

Thanks

Still waiting for an answer.

You can pretend I haven't given you any names, and you can pretend I have't provided a quick summary of the the criticisms of the Boskin approach by these people, but that's not going to change the reality of the situation.

You wanna know their credentials? Google them! You wanna know their positions? Google them! Why the hell should I replicate all of that here when I've already made it clear I'm not going to waste the effort on someone who's not serious?

You seemed to recognize the anomalous nature of the second quarter figures

There was no claim made about the "nature" of the growth. Someone made the claim up thread that other countries are catching up to us economically -- which is exactly what the Eurozone did in the second quarter -- and you incorrectly contradicted that claim.

You can pretend the growth didn't happen or you can add all sorts of qualifiers after the fact, but once again, it doesn't change the reality.

免费铃声下载 手机铃声免费下载 mp3铃声 免费手机铃声 mp3铃声下载 三星手机铃声 三星铃声 诺基亚铃声 诺基亚手机铃声 移动铃声下载 nokia铃声 波导手机铃声 手机游戏免费下载 免费手机游戏 手机小游戏 诺基亚手机游戏 三星手机游戏下载 nokia手机游戏 摩托罗拉手机游戏 手机小电影 mp4手机电影下载 手机看电影 免费手机电影 手机视频下载 nec手机铃声 联想手机铃声 摩托罗拉铃声 amr铃声 手机彩铃下载 移动彩铃 免费彩铃 炫铃 移动炫铃 手机酷铃 手机电影 夏新手机铃声 联通铃声下载 联通手机铃声 联通彩铃下载 联通炫铃下载 特效铃声 midi铃声 和弦铃声 搞笑铃声 原唱铃声 mid铃声 cect手机铃声 和炫和旋铃声 海尔手机铃声 索爱手机铃声 飞利浦手机铃声 康佳手机铃声 真人真唱铃声 mmf铃声下载 lg手机铃声 诺基亚手机铃声 短信铃声 来电铃声 西门子铃声 小灵通铃声下载 tcl手机铃声 手机图片 手机铃音 手机动画 图铃下载 手机游戏 手机炫铃下载 手机彩信 手机铃声图片 免费黄色电影 最新电影 成人性爱电影 免费小电影 免费性电影 免费成人电影 免费电影在线观看 宽带电影 经典电影 恐怖电影 免费影片 免费影院 最新大片 十八电影网 美女写真 免费电影下载 两性生活 性教育片 两性知识 性爱图片 激情电影 免费电影下载 免费在线电影 看免费电影 免费电影网站 韩国电影 人体艺术 美女图片 美女走光 美腿图片 三级片 强奸电影 美女祼体图片 美女自拍 黄色电影下载 免费色情电影 激情图片 激情小电影 性感美女图片 漂亮妹妹图片 做爱图片 美少女图片 日本av女优 情色电影 同志电影 激情视频下载 明星露点图片 写真电影 阴部图片 乳房图片 明星裸照 性爱视频 偷拍图片 美眉图片 泳装美女 美女内裤 性爱贴图 情趣内衣图片 性生活图片 作爱图片 艳情小说 性交姿势 做爱电影 性福联盟 人体摄影 明星裸照 裸女图片 黄色小说 成人小说 乱伦小说 强暴电影 轮奸视频 性虐待电影 迷奸图片 妓女日记 写真集 全裸美女 淫荡小说 淫乱小说 淫书 舒淇写真 美女脱衣图片 裸体女人图片 人体写真 女性手淫电影 美女波霸 美女淫水 阴户阴道阴毛屁股 美女图库 口交肛交图片

Table A-1 from the 2004 Census report on Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States shows that both median and mean real household income may have been higher in 2004 than in 1984, but the data also show that median income has declined since 1999. In addition to having a lower median income in 2004 than was observed in 1999, a greater percentage of households have incomes level below $25,000 per year. The poor may be better off today than they were a generation ago but they are not better off than they were even five years ago.[ http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2006/03/declining-real-income.]

Most household income gains have been eaten up by higher health care costs

Economy up, wages down

CPI was changed to understate inflation during the Reagan regime in order to reduce the cost of COLA's to the government.

"Any ideas on when it will be a good time to start looking again?
Posted by: enozinho on August 28, 2006 at 9:21 PM"

I've seen this attributed to both Baron Rothschild and Bernard Baruch: "The time to buy is when there is blood in the streets."
Didn't say whose streets though.

Any ideas on when it will be a good time to start looking again?

1. If you mean, where is the trough likely to be, the consensus is 2008, but that doesn't mean that prices will immediately start bouncing back up. My guess (as an anonymous poster on the internets) is you have until at least 2010
2. On the other hand, if you are planning to actually stay put for a while, then now is as good a time as any. You'll have lots of houses to choose from, and won't have to decide in 38 seconds whether to make an offer on any given house.

Economy up, wages down

No, median real wages have increased

Or maybe not

Matilde: After 5 months on the market she pulled it off, because the only offer she got was $20,000 less than the price she paid in 2004. They are going to live apart until they figure out what they can do about the shortfall.

Ummm...she's already had the benefit of living in the condo for 2 years . $20k/24 months = $833.

Now that's an attractive cost of renting this condo from the bank instead of a landlord with the additional benefit of getting the tax code to subsidize it to the tune of mortgage interest deductions and property tax deductions which probably brought her 'real cost' to occupy down to $500/month.

'Gack!' - Bill the Cat

I've seen this attributed to both Baron Rothschild and Bernard Baruch: "The time to buy is when there is blood in the streets."
Didn't say whose streets though.
Posted by: smartalek

I think it was a Rothschild: 'Buy at the sound of cannons."

"Now that's an attractive cost of renting this condo from the bank instead of a landlord with the additional benefit of getting the tax code to subsidize it to the tune of mortgage interest deductions and property tax deductions which probably brought her 'real cost' to occupy down to $500/month."

I'm usually not this rude, but are you profoundly retarded or just very slow?

In addition to whatever loss a condo seller takes on a place when s/he sells, s/he also has to pay the mortgage, assessments, property taxes, etc. Forgive the sarcasm, but these can be, well, significant.

So add that $500/month (depreciation less tax benefits) to (say) $1500/month mortgage (assuming a cheap place and an ARM), $300 assessments, and $200 taxes. That's $2500/month right there, and it's before maintenance. Oh, and closing costs/broker fees which probably add another $400/month or so.

And yes, some people would consider $2500/month (not including maintenance and recouping closing costs/brokers fees) a fairly steep price to pay for a small, cheap condo that MAYBE could fetch half of it on the rental market.

The Times August 29, 2006

Housing bubble is finally at bursting point
American View with Gerard Baker

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,
8210-2332487,00.html

[Exerpt - emp add - cfs]

"By some estimates all this housing activity has accounted for more than 40 per cent of all the jobs created in the US since 2001. Now, all these new jobs are not going to disappear in a housing slump. But even if residential real estate activity falls by half in the next year or two it will represent a sizeable blow to the labour market that could, if there is nothing else to take up the slack, push unemployment significantly higher, and income somewhat lower.

The much bigger effect of a housing slump, however, is likely to be on household balance sheets. According to the Federal Reserve’s latest figures, the total amount of residential housing wealth in the US just about doubled between 1999 and the first quarter of 2006 — up from $10.4 trillion (£5,500 billion) to $20.4 trillion.

Thanks to a highly efficient housing finance market, Americans have been withdrawing a significant part of this wealth to finance current spending. Exactly how much they have withdrawn is hard to gauge, but the wealth effect of housing on spending has been observed to be substantially larger than traditional estimates of the wealth effect of equities, which is about 1.5 per cent. If the right figure for housing is 3 per cent, that suggests over $300 billion has been taken out in the past six years, about $50 billion a year, or an average of about 0.4 per cent of US GDP. This seems a conservative estimate, as some economists put the wealth effect much higher. "

>>I'm usually not this rude, but are you profoundly retarded or just very slow?

I'm an degreed accountant with a background in tax policy. Admittedly, it was Fiduciary Taxation but most of these issues wash up there eventually in one form or other.

I'll put my IQ against yours any time anywhere.

I oppose absolutely the profound distortions of the mortgage interest deduction, the deduction for local property taxes and, most particularly the deduction for borrowing against equity.

I'm not real fond of the outrageous expansion in the exclusion of gains from housing from capital gains which fail to reflect to, at the very least, the value of 'owner occupancy'.

I don't think any arbitrarily defined group of citizens are somehow entitled to consolidate their gains from inflation tax free over any other group.

The whole sense of upper middle class entitlement - that somehow this person has a claim to profit from her condo - pisses me off.

"The whole sense of upper middle class entitlement - that somehow this person has a claim to profit from her condo - pisses me off."

Fine, but that doesn't change the fact that when you were calculating how much owning a condo for two years cost, you forgot to include the mortgage, taxes, assessments, maintenance and a host of other factors that probably make up 80% or so of the costs.

酷站推荐:您要想寻找标签机信息请到标签机网站，各种标签机信息应有尽有。想要了解标准件/紧固件吗？请到中国标准件/紧固件网来寻找标准件/紧固件的信息。您要想寻找波纹管信息请到波纹管网站，各种波纹管信息应有尽有。上海玻璃钢厂向客户提供玻璃钢产品及玻璃钢服务。上海玻璃瓶子厂向客户提供玻璃瓶子产品及玻璃瓶子服务。中国碧泉不锈钢水箱网，打造碧泉不锈钢水箱领域专业搜索平台，提供全球碧泉不锈钢水箱产品展示。上海步进电机厂生产的步进电机产品质量过关，欢迎选购步进电机。中国彩钢板网，打造彩钢板领域专业搜索平台，提供全球彩钢板产品展示。北京除尘带厂向广大客户提供除尘带产品及除尘带服务。想要了解触点吗？请到中国触点网来寻找触点的信息。想要了解磁力钻吗？请到中国磁力钻网来寻找磁力钻的信息。上海塑钢带厂向客户提供塑钢带产品及塑钢带服务。中国电动螺丝刀网，打造电动螺丝刀领域专业搜索平台，提供全球电动螺丝刀产品展示。上海电机厂生产的电机产品质量过关，欢迎选购电机。北京电梯厂向广大客户提供电梯产品及电梯服务。上海发电机组厂向客户提供发电机组产品及发电机组服务。上海发电机组厂生产的发电机组产品质量过关，欢迎选购发电机组。您要想寻找防爆工具信息请到防爆工具网站，各种防爆工具信息应有尽有。中国防渗漏网，打造防渗漏领域专业搜索平台，提供全球防渗漏产品展示。水处理设备网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的水处理设备,丰富的水处理设备行业资讯助您成交。您要想寻找粉末冶金信息请到粉末冶金网站，各种粉末冶金信息应有尽有。上海钢管厂向客户提供钢管产品及钢管服务。钢制拖链网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的钢制拖链,丰富的钢制拖链行业资讯助您成交。北京管缆防护套厂向广大客户提供管缆防护套产品及管缆防护套服务。中国滑触线网，打造滑触线领域专业搜索平台，提供全球滑触线产品展示。北京黄砂岩厂向广大客户提供黄砂岩产品及黄砂岩服务。中国活塞环网，打造活塞环领域专业搜索平台，提供全球活塞环产品展示。货架网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的货架,丰富的货架行业资讯助您成交。机床垫铁网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的机床垫铁,丰富的机床垫铁行业资讯助您成交。机床防护罩网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的机床防护罩,丰富的机床防护罩行业资讯助您成交。想要了解碳纤维吗？请到中国碳纤维网来寻找碳纤维的信息。金属软管网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的金属软管,丰富的金属软管行业资讯助您成交。北京净化工程厂向广大客户提供净化工程产品及净化工程服务。空调支架网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的空调支架,丰富的空调支架行业资讯助您成交。您要想寻找快速成型信息请到快速成型网站，各种快速成型信息应有尽有。中国快速接头网，打造快速接头领域专业搜索平台，提供全球快速接头产品展示。想要了解快速模具吗？请到中国快速模具网来寻找快速模具的信息。上海冷库厂生产的冷库产品质量过关，欢迎选购冷库。上海滤布厂生产的滤布产品质量过关，欢迎选购滤布。您要想寻找滤布信息请到滤布网站，各种滤布信息应有尽有。北京萘厂向广大客户提供萘产品及萘服务。中国漆包线网，打造漆包线领域专业搜索平台，提供全球漆包线产品展示。想要了解热老化试验箱吗？请到中国热老化试验箱网来寻找热老化试验箱的信息。北京热熔胶厂向广大客户提供热熔胶产品及热熔胶服务。中国日东工器网，打造日东工器领域专业搜索平台，提供全球日东工器产品展示。上海三菱刀具厂向客户提供三菱刀具产品及三菱刀具服务。中国筛网网，打造筛网领域专业搜索平台，提供全球筛网产品展示。北京筛网厂向广大客户提供筛网产品及筛网服务。中国石油过滤网/果汁滤网网，打造石油过滤网/果汁滤网领域专业搜索平台，提供全球石油过滤网/果汁滤网产品展示。上海蚀刻网/激光冲孔网/金属板网厂向客户提供蚀刻网/激光冲孔网/金属板网产品及蚀刻网/激光冲孔网/金属板网服务。您要想寻找水箱信息请到水箱网站，各种水箱信息应有尽有。中国水箱网，打造水箱领域专业搜索平台，提供全球水箱产品展示。上海塑料冷却管厂生产的塑料冷却管产品质量过关，欢迎选购塑料冷却管。太阳能电池网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的太阳能电池,丰富的太阳能电池行业资讯助您成交。想要了解铁塔吗？请到中国铁塔网来寻找铁塔的信息。您要想寻找铁塔信息请到铁塔网站，各种铁塔信息应有尽有。托盘网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的托盘,丰富的托盘行业资讯助您成交。上海无纺布厂生产的无纺布产品质量过关，欢迎选购无纺布。线棒网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的线棒,丰富的线棒行业资讯助您成交。中国线号机/打号机网，打造线号机/打号机领域专业搜索平台，提供全球线号机/打号机产品展示。上海压力容器厂向客户提供压力容器产品及压力容器服务。上海烟囱厂生产的烟囱产品质量过关，欢迎选购烟囱。您要想寻找轴承信息请到轴承网站，各种轴承信息应有尽有。北京轴承厂向广大客户提供轴承产品及轴承服务。诺法钻头刃磨机网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的诺法钻头刃磨机,丰富的诺法钻头刃磨机行业资讯助您成交。

酷站推荐:反应锅/反应釜网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的反应锅/反应釜,丰富的反应锅/反应釜行业资讯助您成交。想要了解粉末涂料吗？请到中国粉末涂料网来寻找粉末涂料的信息。中国粉末冶金网，打造粉末冶金领域专业搜索平台，提供全球粉末冶金产品展示。中国光稳定剂770网，打造光稳定剂770领域专业搜索平台，提供全球光稳定剂770产品展示。您要想寻找聚氨酯合成材料信息请到聚氨酯合成材料网站，各种聚氨酯合成材料信息应有尽有。铝材网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的铝材,丰富的铝材行业资讯助您成交。您要想寻找铝型材信息请到铝型材网站，各种铝型材信息应有尽有。上海螺旋藻厂向客户提供螺旋藻产品及螺旋藻服务。上海现场发泡设备厂生产的现场发泡设备产品质量过关，欢迎选购现场发泡设备。上海热熔胶厂向客户提供热熔胶产品及热熔胶服务。上海试纸厂向客户提供试纸产品及试纸服务。上海水性聚氨酯厂向客户提供水性聚氨酯产品及水性聚氨酯服务。

酷站推荐:您要想寻找PANTONE色卡信息请到PANTONE色卡网站，各种PANTONE色卡信息应有尽有。办公用品网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的办公用品,丰富的办公用品行业资讯助您成交。办公用品网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的办公用品,丰富的办公用品行业资讯助您成交。上海保险箱厂向客户提供保险箱产品及保险箱服务。您要想寻找笔记本维修信息请到笔记本维修网站，各种笔记本维修信息应有尽有。您要想寻找笔记本租赁信息请到笔记本租赁网站，各种笔记本租赁信息应有尽有。中国餐饮管理系统网，打造餐饮管理系统领域专业搜索平台，提供全球餐饮管理系统产品展示。上海餐饮管理系统厂生产的餐饮管理系统产品质量过关，欢迎选购餐饮管理系统。餐饮软件网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的餐饮软件,丰富的餐饮软件行业资讯助您成交。上海餐饮软件厂生产的餐饮软件产品质量过关，欢迎选购餐饮软件。上海触摸屏厂生产的触摸屏产品质量过关，欢迎选购触摸屏。传奇私服网网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的传奇私服网,丰富的传奇私服网行业资讯助您成交。上海对讲机厂生产的对讲机产品质量过关，欢迎选购对讲机。摩托罗拉对讲机网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的摩托罗拉对讲机,丰富的摩托罗拉对讲机行业资讯助您成交。中国二手笔记本电脑网，打造二手笔记本电脑领域专业搜索平台，提供全球二手笔记本电脑产品展示。上海服装软件厂向客户提供服装软件产品及服装软件服务。中国机柜网，打造机柜领域专业搜索平台，提供全球机柜产品展示。中国机柜网，打造机柜领域专业搜索平台，提供全球机柜产品展示。中国监听器网，打造监听器领域专业搜索平台，提供全球监听器产品展示。美国虚拟主机网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的美国虚拟主机,丰富的美国虚拟主机行业资讯助您成交。中国窃听器网，打造窃听器领域专业搜索平台，提供全球窃听器产品展示。窃听器网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的窃听器,丰富的窃听器行业资讯助您成交。北京手机窃听器厂向广大客户提供手机窃听器产品及手机窃听器服务。北京窃听器厂向广大客户提供窃听器产品及窃听器服务。您要想寻找窃听器信息请到窃听器网站，各种窃听器信息应有尽有。窃听器网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的窃听器,丰富的窃听器行业资讯助您成交。您要想寻找上海笔记本维修信息请到上海笔记本维修网站，各种上海笔记本维修信息应有尽有。上海上海笔记本维修厂向客户提供上海笔记本维修产品及上海笔记本维修服务。中国上海集团电话/上海交换机网，打造上海集团电话/上海交换机领域专业搜索平台，提供全球上海集团电话/上海交换机产品展示。中国手机信号屏蔽器网，打造手机信号屏蔽器领域专业搜索平台，提供全球手机信号屏蔽器产品展示。北京数据恢复厂向广大客户提供数据恢复产品及数据恢复服务。想要了解条形码打印机吗？请到中国条形码打印机网来寻找条形码打印机的信息。上海贴纸相机厂向客户提供贴纸相机产品及贴纸相机服务。想要了解投影机灯泡吗？请到中国投影机灯泡网来寻找投影机灯泡的信息。北京投影机维修厂向广大客户提供投影机维修产品及投影机维修服务。上海文件柜厂向客户提供文件柜产品及文件柜服务。无线点菜网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的无线点菜,丰富的无线点菜行业资讯助您成交。您要想寻找虚拟主机信息请到虚拟主机网站，各种虚拟主机信息应有尽有。上海移动硬盘厂生产的移动硬盘产品质量过关，欢迎选购移动硬盘。

酷站推荐:安利网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的安利,丰富的安利行业资讯助您成交。想要了解抽脂手术吗？请到中国抽脂手术网来寻找抽脂手术的信息。上海除皱方法厂向客户提供除皱方法产品及除皱方法服务。北京尖锐湿疣厂向广大客户提供尖锐湿疣产品及尖锐湿疣服务。减肥网上市场，为您提供质优价廉的减肥,丰富的减肥行业资讯助您成交。北京隆鼻厂向广大客户提供隆鼻产品及隆鼻服务。中国隆胸网，打造隆胸领域专业搜索平台，提供全球隆胸产品展示。您要想寻找美容信息请到美容网站，各种美容信息应有尽有。上海前列腺厂生产的前列腺产品质量过关，欢迎选购前列腺。上海肾虚/肾亏厂生产的肾虚/肾亏产品质量过关，欢迎选购肾虚/肾亏。您要想寻找生殖器疱疹信息请到生殖器疱疹网站，各种生殖器疱疹信息应有尽有。北京生殖器疱疹厂向广大客户提供生殖器疱疹产品及生殖器疱疹服务。上海武夷岩茶厂向客户提供武夷岩茶产品及武夷岩茶服务。想要了解整容/整形美容吗？请到中国整容/整形美容网来寻找整容/整形美容的信息。北京整形厂向广大客户提供整形产品及整形服务。中国整形网，打造整形领域专业搜索平台，提供全球整形产品展示。

婚纱摄影 婚纱影楼 非油品 中石化 网页制作 网页设计 网站建设\ 网站制作 网站设计 设计 北京网站设计 网站推广 北京网站推广 北京网站制作 北京网页设计 北京网站建设 网站优化 yahoo竞价 google推广 google排名 google优化 双线空间 ＰＨＰ空间 ＡＳＰ空间 网站空间 虚拟主机 域名注册 法语 钟表 塔钟 钟表 家用中央空调 格力中央空调 助听器 助听器 助听器 发电机 发电机组 柴油发电机 发电设备 发电机出租 康明斯 发电机 发电机组 柴油发电机 发电设备 发电机出租 康明斯 法国留学 法语培训 进口轴承 skf轴承 nsk轴承 轴承 进口轴承 skf轴承 fag轴承 轴承\ 轴承 进口轴承 进口轴承 直线轴承 skf轴承 nsk轴承 北京装饰|装修 家装|家庭装饰 办公室装饰|装饰公司 装修公司|工装装潢 装饰装修|北京装饰公司 家居装修|室内装修 房屋装修|家庭装修公司 装修设计|室内装潢 家居装潢|家庭装潢 装潢设计|室内装潢设计 充气床 充气用品 充气游泳池 野营用品 户外用品 充气船 气垫床 钓鱼船 帐篷 户外帐篷 瑞士军刀 intex充气床| 中央吸尘 家用中央吸尘 商业中央吸尘 吸尘器 中央吸尘系统 工业吸尘 风灶清洗 通风清洗 中央空调管道清洗 机器人管道清洗 管道清洗机器人 机器人清洗 检测机器人 吸尘机 别墅吸尘 宾馆吸尘| 网站建设 网站制作 网页设计 网页制作 网络推广 网站优化 网站推广 GOOGLE优化 进口轴承|nsk轴承|skf轴承 充气床|充气用品|充气游泳池|野营用品|户外用品|充气船|气垫床|钓鱼船|帐篷|户外帐篷|瑞士军刀| 北京酒店 上海酒店 广州酒店 长沙酒店 张家界酒店 南京酒店 深圳酒店 天津酒店 重庆酒店 昆明酒店 桂林酒店 井冈山酒店 酒店 西藏酒店 宾馆 宾馆预定 杭州酒店 北京酒店 上海酒店 广州酒店 长沙酒店 张家界酒店 南京酒店 深圳酒店 天津酒店 重庆酒店 昆明酒店 桂林酒店 井冈山酒店 网站制作 网站策划 网页美工设计 网站设计方案 网站建设公司 网站制作公司 网站推广公司 网页设计公司 网站设计公司

csLook this http://feti.uprio.com/cum-stockings.html
http://feti.uprio.com/stockings-untitled-gallery.html
http://feti.uprio.com/black-stocking-and-suspenders.html
http://feti.uprio.com/pantyhose-handjob.html
pantyhose handjob
1950 fully fashioned stockings
nylon stocking bondage
pantyhose mpeg
nylonsex
http://feti.uprio.com/pantyhose-tied.html

csIf you have a free time test this urls: pantyhose sex pictures
pantyhose tied
free panty sex
ladies wearing nylons
http://feti.uprio.com/stocking-footjob.html
stocking sluts
chinese pantyhose
http://feti.uprio.com/anal-stockings.html
lesbians in stockings
http://feti.uprio.com/nylon-fuck.html

csMy URLs is oral sex tips for men|http://frfroodick.maturetrack.com/oral-s3x-tips-for-men.html
facial equipment|http://frfroodick.maturetrack.com/facial-equipment.html
facial treatments|http://frfroodick.maturetrack.com/facial-treatments.html
backroom facial|http://frfroodick.maturetrack.com/backroom-facial.html
amateur facial alicia|http://frfroodick.maturetrack.com/amateur-facial-alicia.html
public cumshots|http://frfroodick.maturetrack.com/public-cumshots.html
facial mole removal|http://frfroodick.maturetrack.com/facial-mole-removal.html
cartoon cumshots|http://frfroodick.maturetrack.com/cartoon-cumshots.html
facial peels|http://frfroodick.maturetrack.com/facial-peels.html
young cumshots|http://frfroodick.maturetrack.com/young-cumshots.html

csMy URLs is http://fuckson.bunup.com/free-cartoon-simpsons-incest.html
family sex cartoon
http://fuckson.bunup.com/incest-puctures-brother-sister.html
http://fuckson.bunup.com/free-incest-pic.html
http://fuckson.bunup.com/incest-sex-cartoons.html
http://fuckson.bunup.com/free-family-incest-stories.html
http://fuckson.bunup.com/incest-free-gallery-free-incest.html
http://fuckson.bunup.com/incest-daughter-mom.html
http://fuckson.bunup.com/incest-sex-galleries.html
http://fuckson.bunup.com/free-brother-and-sister-fucking-pictures.html