Posted by unregistered user at 4/8/08 1:38 p.m.

who said that this is a bubble market?

Posted by unregistered user at 4/8/08 1:44 p.m.

The study - Read the linked PDF.

Posted by unregistered user at 4/8/08 1:55 p.m.

Second that. Bailing reckless people out only encourages further recklessness. Improper practices should go punished

Posted by unregistered user at 4/8/08 1:59 p.m.

Yeah, it would set up a moral hazard to bail out those who chose to go in over their heads. Reckless borrowing should not be subsidized. Nor should reckless lending.

Posted by FlawedReality at 4/8/08 2:39 p.m.

anonymous 3 and 4 nailed it. This is life, folks. Sometimes you make a poor decision and you need to live with the consequences. Lesson learned? Don't buy stuff you can't afford.

A bailout punishes those of us who made prudent financial decisions and draws out what is already going to be a deep, painful recession.

Posted by citizen at 4/8/08 3:02 p.m.

Shouldn't be bailing out the lenders either.

Posted by FlawedReality at 4/8/08 3:40 p.m.

agreed, Citizen!

Posted by unregistered user at 4/8/08 3:53 p.m.

Nice little study, done by unqualified people who didn't check stats very well. How many rentals have you been able to find in Seattle for under $1000 that would be the equivalent of a home mortgage between $1900 - $2600?

None.

With bad data like this, why is this being published at all?

Posted by unregistered user at 4/8/08 5:29 p.m.

I rent for $1500 a month in Wallingford where a comparable house would cost me $2500-$2800 in a monthly payment. Sounds close enough to me.

Posted by unregistered user at 4/8/08 11:03 p.m.

A $1500 place in Wallingford is either a 2 bedroom condo, or a dump of a house, you may have an exceptional rental.

Posted by Wally at 4/9/08 12:48 a.m.

Yet, for all their bad decisions, Bear and Stearns got bailed out.

Stunning logic...

Posted by unregistered user at 4/9/08 2:32 a.m.

I looked at this study carefully and the person who pointed out that the study is built on flawed data is correct. First of all no where in the study is housing supply taken in to effect. The housing supply in your local market is the number one indicator of future appreciation. Number two is employment. I happen to own property in two of the cites this report says are not bubble cities(Cleveland and Detroit). They also say that only 5 cities will see appreciation in the next four years. Seattelites are projected to lose over $100,000 of appreciation in the next four years. There is a reason those cities did not explode during the boom years. No one wants to live there. Those people are not going to see $60,000 of appreciation in the next 4 years as this report predicts. I don't have a crystal ball but I will bet these people anything that my homes in Cleveland and Detroit is not going to appreciate $50,000 in the next 4 years and my home in Seattle is not going to lose $100,000 in equity. There are a bunch of other assumptions like rentals should be no less than 75% of home ownership, otherwise the market is a bubble (why not 70, 80, where does 75 come from). Read it for yourself. The premise id good that the government should him renters because housing is going to do what it does and we can't stop it but the forecasting is all wrong.

Posted by dorkbus.com at 4/9/08 3:34 a.m.

Also the study states that Seattle FMR is 942 dollars a month compared to a mortgage cost of 2000 plus on the high end. Where the heck do these people get their info?
The average rental price for a 2 bedroom apartment all over the Puget Sound Area is between 1500 and 2000 per month. One can maybe get a shoe box studio at 925 per month. There are no more middle class renting here. While I do not believe in bailing out people who got sucked into buying overpriced homes and I do believe that the Seattle Market does need to correct itself substansially, I believe that people need to keep there homes or the rental market for those of us who cannot afford to buy a home here, ever, will become chaos.

Posted by homegirl at 4/9/08 4:12 a.m.

This is definately an overinflated bubble market. Do you people actually think your home are worth the money?

Posted by homegirl at 4/9/08 4:15 a.m.

I'll take that bet about Detroit homes!

Posted by unregistered user at 4/9/08 8:36 a.m.

Anonymous three- the true moral hazard is in allowing banks to taking bigger and bigger risks and when things go south, their companies are bailed out- with taxpayer money. Being a homeowner who has already taken a hit on their credit history due to late mortgage payments isn't exactly getting off scot-free.

And a careful read will show that supply is implicit in the study's analysis- Having a large over supply in housing inventory is part of the reason prices will continue to decline is most bubble-markets.

Posted by unregistered user at 4/9/08 3:00 p.m.

Anyone heard of supply and demand?

If you want a cheaper home move to detroit.

People need to be responsible for their actions. All I read on blogs on the PI is how we need government action or bail outs. WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT...THEREFORE, OUR TAX DOLLARS PAY FOR THESE BAILOUTS. I would rather donate to the charity that I choose, not have it chosen for me.

Posted by unregistered user at 4/9/08 5:21 p.m.

I read this report and have a hard time believing one can rent a three-bedroom house in north Seattle for $950. However I do believe my three-bedroom house in north Seattle will lose $112K in value over the next four years: it is no secret the Seattle area is, on average, 38% overpriced. Still, with the mortgage interest and property tax deductions, and no pet/child deposits, it is cheaper for me to own than to rent.

Posted by unregistered user at 4/9/08 5:31 p.m.

If you put in correct numbers for Seattle, you will find this study proves Seattle prices will not fall by $100,000 over 4 years, they will rise.

Rents here are simpy too expensive.

And, by putting thousands (millions across the US) into foreclosure, instead of figureing out a way to forgive or subsidize part of their debt, and arrears, you create more lifelong renters, thus propping UP Seattle real estate prices,not deflating them.

C'mon people. Figure it out.

Posted by Jim98122 at 4/10/08 12:02 p.m.

Posted by homegirl at 4/9/08 4:12 a.m.

This is definately an overinflated bubble market. Do you people actually think your home are worth the money?

If someone will buy it for that price, it's "worth it". It's as simple as that. The fact that you don't think so, or that you can't afford it, doesn't change that for someone else.

"Worth it" is in the eyes of the beholder.

Posted by Wally at 4/11/08 1:34 a.m.

""Worth it" is in the eyes of the beholder."

It bears repeating. :-)

Posted by unregistered user at 4/21/08 5:09 p.m.

I chose not to purchase a home-I knew the market was going to disintegrate and I did not want to go with it. I rent and am not happy but I really don't want anyone else bailed out. Case in point, I worked for a women who runs a small business consulting business for women. She chose not to pay me and others so she could take about ten thousand get into a condo up North. She is one of the ones who wants a bail out now. She had to fight hard to get the mortgage and should never have gotten it. When she was doing it, we did not know our paychecks were going in to her American dream. I am sure there are many other stories of how people scraped in-recklessly as other commentors noted. I chose to marshall my resources and I am against their poor decisions being "saved".