Again, I'll bring this up again, you claim to be looking at raw data, okay sure fine. But history would lead me to believe that the information being leaked is being cooked, because it's being provided by people that stand to benefit from overtly positive data.
Back and to the left. Back and to the left.
You're right, it is a conspiracy.
Nope, data is raw data. I found it by reading the USG annual report which pointed to an organization that has been collecting this data since 1959. Relax, USG did not provide a single number. They said they have near term expectations because of the data though. Ironically some other famous investor *cough* BUFFETT *cough* have a similar sentiment.
But me. I'm a thinker. I actually think. Wow. Should I trust them or actually go research the matter on my own. Well, the value investing way is to discover for oneself.
I read about the place in USGs annual report ( I read things like annual reports for fun instead of watching Jim Cramer) and then remembered to go look at the place to see what data is available. Doing one's own research provides a competitive advantage against other investors who all rely on what they are spoon fed. That's another lesson though. Anyways, it's not leaked. Really? You are taking facts and saying that ... oh that must be cooked data? Tell you what. If my numbers are off:
1) Do some independant research
2) Collect the data
3) Draw a conclusion
Don't react to things that contradict your preconceived notions with conspiracy's or random facts that do not address the issue at hand.
All it takes is some basic brain skills, have you not noticed how many of those 'rosy' pieces of data provided over the last 6 months have been revised downwards?
Brain skills? can you provide a single independent thought? You and pliable moose both have not. Reiterating media talking points in a disconnected manner does not result in a conclusion. Take the talking points. Some numbers that your have found and draw a rational conclusion. That is brain skillz. ('z' intentional to make me look cool)
Well, the past is definitely an indicator of the future I guess. So it must continue to get worse then.
What about the fact that something like 45% of the USA is underwater on their mortgages, yet you claim there isn't enough property? Who's going to be buying all this property, especially with a stagflation going on.
What is worse than relying on information on TV is not even remembering the things the media tells you. You can look up the actual percent if you want. HINT: You are off just a bit.
Now, you have gone beyond the step of hearing something on TV and said, how far under water? If housing prices remain flat for a year, what percentage of those home owners will still be underwater? I am referring to the effects of paying down principle and interest of course.
And if inflation is 3% and wages follow that 3% what happens to housing prices in 3 years? Prices should be up about 10%. This is ideal of course. Well, in 10 years prices should be up.
Not interested in addressing the premise of where people are going to sleep at night in 5 years time? Still convinced that tents are the answer?
Listen. I am simply making a case that more homes will be needed. They don't appear out of thin air. It requires the 22% or so unemployment level in the construction industry to get back to work and use products from the sector with the second worst unemployment level (manufacturing) to build those homes.
PS: Manufacturing is at 15% unemployment.
I still do not know why I go through these exercises in futility. People either get it or they don't. Most people enjoy being a Lemming. Even when people are told information, they refuse to even ask what the sources of information is from. Most people are to concerned with proving their point instead of trying to learn. Perhaps it is being human. Often why I say that most investors would benefit from a basic understanding of cognitive biases and behavioral finance. You still have yet to ask for a single one of my sources. For all you know, I'm jsut pulling data out of my backside.
I'll ask you. Where did you get your 45% underwater number from? I'd love to see that data.
Facebook
Twitter