| Oct 2014 | Oct 2013 | ||||
| Wk 1 | Wk 2 | Wk 3 | Wk 4 | ||
| Unconditional Sales | 83 |
230
| 356 |
512
| |
| New Listings | 178 | 393 | 556 |
979
| |
| Active Listings | 4100 | 4060 | 3988 |
4322
| |
| Sales to New Listings |
47%
| 59% | 64% |
52%
| |
| Sales Projection | -- | 661 | 630 | ||
| Months of Inventory |
8.4
| ||||
There has been some discussion about this piece of "analysis" by a mortgage broker. His theory is that when interest rates go up, so do prices. Apparently in the last 30 years, increasing mortgage rates lead to increasing prices 62% of the time 2 months later. Never mind that the two month lag is never justified (as Just Jack said, a 3 month rate hold would blow that out of the water). The obvious gaping hole in this theory is that prices have been increasing for most of that 30 year period, so it's not at all surprising that 62% of the months they went up. If someone were to care to evaluate the entire period they would probably find more than 62% of months that showed increasing prices.
279 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 279 of 279You have no idea about Nelson Mandela I guess....
Well, perhaps a better idea than you.
Mandela, like his wife Winnie, was a terrorist. However, when offered the Presidency, Mandela (once referred to as the world's greatest baggage shedder) readily adopted the affable grand-fatherly role for which he is now world famous.
@2(TO):
"How after all do you compensate the First Nations of BC for the 1862 smallpox epidemic that killed about 100,000 Indians and which, some say, was the result of a deliberate act of genocide."
You don't. Statute of limitations has long expired. There is no legal claim despite whatever position anyone might want to take. Nothing will happen.
First, according to the Federal Department of Indian Affairs:
"First Nations with longstanding grievances will not have their claims rejected before they are even heard because of the technicalities provided under the statutes of limitation ..."
Second, the claim is not strictly a legal claim, it is a moral and political claim, backed by the potential (I admit very small at present) of an Indian insurgency.
Third, asserting that nothing will happen is about as futile as predicting that the housing market will never decline. No one knows what will happen.
Re: Mandela
As a young man, Mandela was a committed Communist who sought Russian backing for an anti-white-rule insurgency. However, the Russians didn't come through with the aid, so Mandela eventually adopted a different line. Despite the change of approach Mandela never quite overcame the urge to use the raised fist, Black Power salute.
Cs- they are called aandc now and that site is for land claims under the specific claims process. This is an alternative to courts for settlement of land matters - nothing else.
Ahh, I see, I guess they were lucky that when they released the communist terrorist that he didn't burn the place down and loot it... Shoot Libya could have used a murdering scum bag like Mandella that's for sure...
However, when offered the Presidency, Mandela (once referred to as the world's greatest baggage shedder) readily adopted the affable grand-fatherly role for which he is now world famous.
That's more an image cultivated by Western politicians and media than by Mandela himself. He never disavowed armed struggle against oppression (aka terrorism). For example (2004):
""Yasser Arafat was one of the outstanding freedom fighters of this generation, one who gave his entire life to the cause of the Palestinian people," said Mandela, who met Arafat numerous times over the years."
Ok I'm beating the market now! Up 12.5 % across all my portfolios for the month. Only real recent did is SeaDrill but I'm gambling oil goes back up come spring and the don't nuke their dividend.... Top performers? GoPro, BABA, Apple, and Netflix. See, better than RE and I don't even have to fix any faucets!
Dud not did...
Mon Nov 3, 2014 8:25am:
Oct Oct
2014 2013
Net Unconditional Sales: 602 512
New Listings: 945 979
Active Listings: 3,927 4,322
Please Note
Left Column: stats for the entire month from this year
Right Column: stats for the entire month from last year
Leo, to imply that the work involved in being a landlord is equal or equivalent to the work involved in "consulting" is ridiculous.
Good thing I didn't imply that then. I said the return on the endeavour is similar once you account for all the costs. Of course if you calculate gross profit / maintenance hours you get insane results.
Dasmo, the brightest on wall street are envious! Good for you if you truly are “Up 12.5 % across all my portfolios for the month” you should consider wall st and making the big bucks! Experienced fund managers haven't even been matching the S&P which was only up 2%. The problem for most is they panic when they buy TSLA on Oct 10 as you claimed you did, and then bail at a loss when they see it plunging the next few days.
http://www.biznews.com/etfs/2014/11/03/fund-managers-struggle-match-sp-500-index/
I bought in again when Tesla dropped... Still have a small amount of cash in case any more opportunities PPP up. I think the volitility is ending though...
Visa was a big winner too! The best comparison to the market would be its low in October since that's the number I'm basing my gain on not the beginning of the month. (Was looking everyday so the number stuck in my head)
As was 3M...
Also, my portfolio is heavily weight on what apple does. I've owned for sol long it is about 2/3rds of my portfolio. So probably less genious and more faith...
Just Jack
Any chestnuts from that seminar last week you'd like to share?
Awesome dasmo! Those are all on the high-flyer list. I heard someone mention you own properties too. When did you buy those?
There were 5 presenters at the seminar that spoke for 15 minutes each. With breaks and introductions that didn't leave much time for questions and answers.
Steve Feldman- PARP
Matt Andrews - BC Assessment
John Sheldrake - Coast Appraisals
Gibb Small -PAB
Ed Furlan -Altus Group
There are 1,955,076 properties assessed in BC each year. Only about 16,000 are appealed. And most of these are resolved without a formal presentation at the initial tribunal (PARP). If you don't like the decision of the initial panel you can appeal to the property appeal board (PAB) and then onto the Supreme Court of BC.
You have 8 minutes to present your reasons for a decrease or increase in your assessments. The assessor has 8 minutes to explain their reasoning and the tribunal has 8 minutes to come to a decision. You don't have to be the owner of the property to appeal the assessment. You can appeal your neighbors assessment with or without your neighbors permission.
If you want to know more you can visit evaluebcassessment.ca
I was a bit surprised of how informal the PARP panel can be. They are made up of about 270 ordinary citizens through out BC. And you don't need any great knowledge of real estate to be on the board.
All appeals for changes in the Assessment Roll HAVE TO go through PARP. The municipalities have no legal authority to decrease any persons assessment. You can call your assessor and the assessor can agree to a change, but that change must still be presented to PARP - but an appearance before the board is not necessary.
Light refreshments were supplied by a Happy Appies and were quite nice.
My question related to the attitude among First Nations.
Indigenous people do not make up a single-minded monolithic entity, speaking with one voice.
The only thing there is a claim to is title and rights that were not extinguished because BC failed to enter into binding treaties for the most part despite their promises to do so - unlike most of the rest of Canada.
Yes. And in Alberta, for example, the tar sands are violating rights laid out in Treaty 8. Recently, the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation has launched a constitutional challenge.
This, of course, is just one of many treaty violations occurring across Canada. Many First Nations, however, do not possess the financial means to challenge violations in court.
-----------------------------
Implementation of the recommendations of RCAP would mean nothing short of a decolonization of Canada, which is what needs to occur eventually, as Indigenous people are never going to go away.
Until such dramatic changes occur, we will continue to see justifiable unrest among our Indigenous friends.
You don't have to be the owner of the property to appeal the assessment. You can appeal your neighbors assessment with or without your neighbors permission.
Now theres potential for mischief. If you get their assessment changed will they know it was you? :)
As the owner of a multiple-unit rental property in Victoria I will have to disagree with a few of the posts above: there are many people making out quite well from rentals. From my experience they are:
-the City of Victoria tax department (over $6000)
-the bank which holds the mortgage
-the insurance company
-the property manager
-the roofer
-the painter
-the plumber
It's quite the little revenue-generator, all-round.
Slightly cynical I suppose and disguises the fact that the property does what I asked of it. I don't reside in Victoria but wish to in the future. Seeing the hard charge the market was on about a decade back I decided to buy as a hedge against getting priced out of the market when I move there. it has done that well, as it could now be sold for about $350,000 more than I paid.
So there you have one motivation we don't hear much of here, but I have several work colleagues who have done the same.
The only problem with dasmo's market returns (congrats btw :)) is that it is unlikely he is leveraged with 10% down and 3% interest over a 25 year term.
That and how much is taxable? The TFSA limit amount? Unlike the generous capital gains tax exemption on a primary residence.
A house is a leveraged investment that returns on the purchase price not the down payment. You have to calculate cash on cash return overall.
Also, re First Nations - they make up 2.6% of the population in Canada and the number of status Indians is declining due to the rules around status in the Indian Act.
Without status and membership (usually contingent on status) in a Band, land claims are a moot point.
Unsettled indigenous land rights are exercised communally, not individually. You need a Band or a representative of a Band to file a claim.
Never mind the fact that poverty poses a barrier to litigation of rights for most Bands.
The only reason government is at the table is that there is a real legal claim based on unextinguished title and rights related to land.
Please stop the fear-mongering about an "uprising" and takeover of private lands.
The only problem with dasmo’s returns is he’s calculating it from the October 15th bottom. He’s not factoring in how much he first lost in the downfall.
“The best comparison to the market would be its low in October since that's the number I'm basing my gain on not the beginning of the month. (Was looking everyday so the number stuck in my head)”
Also not sure if he’s including his fallen. Seadrill is down ~15% from where he bought.
“For the record I bought some Seadrill this morning based on the charts and their stats it's momentum is shifting upwards... Experimenting now that the gauntlet was thrown to beat the market... Still liking my Sugar play though....
October 21, 2014 at 11:33 AM ”
Even the sugar play is down 7% since beginning of September.
SeaDrill is down 9% from when I bought. I did include that since I am only looking at the total. It's all with one bank brokerage and with my phone app that total is the first thing I see. KKR is the other one down by 4%. I have quite a spread. Besides Apple most positions are in the 5k range so I am not affected much by a single stocks. I have been researching a lot on SeaDrill and its not a short play. A gamble for the juicy dividend lasting yes but darn that's the lowest P/E I have ever seen. If they do drop to 15% lower I'll buy more. It is oil after all...
@ Totoro I was referring to RE as an investment not Home Ownership. Two different things. There are no tact advantages the RE investments. Full tax on income and capital gains tact. The only benefit is that the bank will lend you gobs to buy it more easily than say half a million in equities. AND that is only if you are able to fool them that it's not a commercial loan. Those are harder to get, have a shorter amortization and higher rates. I think home ownership is a good thing if you can afford it.
I just looked, SeaDrill is down by 15%. I guess I'm buying more... By the way my sugar play is up 1%.
That's in my RRSP in my TFSA RSI is up 2%.
One principle I like to follow recently is taking a position over a few buys. Especially if you are buying on the way down like I like to do.
@Totoro
First Nations - they make up 2.6% of the population in Canada and the number of status Indians is declining due to the rules around status in the Indian Act.
Without status and membership (usually contingent on status) in a Band, land claims are a moot point.
Never mind the fact that poverty poses a barrier to litigation of rights for most Bands.
Please stop the fear-mongering about an "uprising" and takeover of private lands.
i.e., Indians are fast disappearing and anyhow they're a bunch of poverty stricken bums, so land claims, no prob, just forget it.
Except that first nations are the fastest-growing ethnic category in Canada, and treating them with contempt seems like the best way to instill the idea that violence is their best bet.
My own view is that the traditional policy of just forgetting it is a mistake and that the sooner a generous offer is made the better the deal the settler society will get.
The Alaskans settled several decades ago at a cost of 600,000 square kilometers of land plus some billions of dollars.
Don't expect Canada to settle for peanuts.
Tou hit the nail on the head CS. The FN doesn't necessarily want to settle soon. They might get a better deal if it's dragged out.....
Please stop the fear-mongering about an "uprising" and takeover of private lands.
"Takeovers" of private land won't ever happen, in my opinion. However, it's conceivable to me that in certain places, in certain cases, in the future, a First Nation would be able to charge a sort of "rent" for private lands illegally occupied, in addition to having equal say in decisions concerning that land's stewardship/management. I imagine this almost like a fourth-level of government (after federal, provincial and municipal).
Oh and in reference to my investments the only red ones I have are: KKR - 4.57% and SDRL - 10.46% (after adding to my position today).
"They might get a better deal if it's dragged out....."
That is absolutely true.
Treaties in the 1800's could have been had for peanuts but why bother when we can just take their land anyhow.
Treaties in the 1950's or 60's would still have been cheap as the courts had yet to assert much aboriginal rights.
Settling claims in the 80s would have cost more.
Settling claims now with all the decisions that have gone in FN's favour is going to be a lot more expensive.
Settling in the 2020's or 2050's - who knows how much it will cost.
There will be no large scale giving of private lands to FNs as part of the settlements. But I wouldn't rule out the odd case of expropriation (with compensation) to settle claims. That will be the exception not the rule IMO
About 8% of houses listed for sale in the core communities are vacant. Which is almost identical to the level of listed vacant homes in the Western Communities.
That's probably quite typical of most houses for sale. Most are simply over priced and the owner has gone on to their new home purchase and are carrying two mortgages. Some of these listings may not sell and the owner will simply become a reluctant landlord.
In contrast, the vacancy level for condos in the core is higher at 13% even when you exclude new buildings.
Looking at the list to assessment ratios for these condos it's evident that half are over priced by more than 5%
Condos and enclosed balconies.
Should the balcony be included in the square footage or not?
I don't think it should, since it's typically not heated and isn't used all year.
A 960 square foot condo sounds pretty good until you realize or have it pointed out to you that this includes a 25' x 6' enclosed balcony.
How about Sidney?
It's a cute little town complete with sidewalks that can be rolled up at night.
32 homes for sale ranging from $299,000 top $1,250,000. That's quite a spread in asking prices.
Ger rid of the water view and ocean front homes and you have 25 ranging from $299K to $599K.
6 sold last month. While 13 more were listed.
That makes it a balanced market since some of these new listings will be cancelled or are initially over priced.
You'll pay about a hundred grand less for a home in this hood relative to most of the core districts. Which is good news as most of the people are retired and don't have to travel to Victoria daily. That'll save you $6,000 a year to spend on Disney Land for the family.
Looks like my Tesla play will pay off!
But not as good as my WFM play!
@ Leo S
Great graphic. Another view that would be interesting would be the relative difficulty in getting the returns. I mean the second one from the top is guaranteed and cheap and available to everyone. The less profitable alternatives actually take more work to get! (mutual funds, etc.) and you can't get much BRK.A exposure without $200,000 lying around (although BRK.B is a little cheaper)
The interesting thing about Buffets performance is that it was the best before information was widely available via the internet. In the 10 years ending in 2000, BRK.A returned about 4x the S&P. If you bought 10 years ago, you would have received about 2x the return on the S&P and if you bought 5 years ago, you would have only realized about 20% more than an S&P investor.
It seems to me that 2 things are at play -
1. the more widely available information is, the harder it is for individual investors to consistently outperform, which makes sense, with everyone constantly looking at everything, information asymmetry is the only thing that really matters in stock market trading.
2. Asset inflation - high tides floating all boats. Buffett might be a good bet going forward as governments take their feet off the accelerator pedals and people start focusing in fundamentals again, which don't matter when money is free. Although no one knows what will happen to the BRK outlook when the old guy croaks, so maybe not.
Also keep in mind this graphic domed along with a TVP article selling an investment vehicle. But like the article says doing simple index base investment will put you ahead of the average joe. As was my experience mutual funds with a financial advisor get you no where...
I'll just leave this here.
I wonder where "Doesn't invest in the stock market because profitability & social/environmental evil are closely correlated" falls on the Investment Wisdom Spectrum.
Correlation doesn't imply causality.
Profitability is certainly possible when companies act responsibly when consumers are educated.
There are entire ETF's dedicated to "ethical investing" that actually perform quite well.
In a democracy, don't blame to politician, blame the constituency!
I'm an environmentalist capitalist. You would be better off to get rich and then donate to good organizations or use your spoils to invest in green technology than to be pure of heart when investing. It would be like playing poker and trying to be nice... I invested in Tesla not solely because they are doing what's right but because they are doing well by their vision... WFM because they are making gobs of money selling organic food... Everything we do as humans is destructive. We modify, we design, we make, we destroy. The key is to do this in a way that is sustainable for us, the earth and it's inhabitants. One individual going off grid to live in the bush does nothing towards that goal. Their carbon footprint might be bigger from all the wood they will burn to stay alive....
Correlation doesn't imply causality.
Correlation doesn't necessarily imply causality.
Also, correlation doesn't preclude causality.
Correlation doesn't imply causality.
Correlation doesn't necessarily imply causality.
Also, correlation doesn't preclude causality.
Correlation sure suggests thinking about the existence of causation, which is darn close to implying it.
In fact, according to David Hume, who said the only sensible thing that can be said on the subject, invariable correlation is all that causation amounts to.
You would be better off to get rich and then donate to good organizations or use your spoils to invest in green technology than to be pure of heart when investing.
Kinda like saying, I'll be bad now, but I'll be good later to make up for it.
Bad-then-good usually results in a net bad, IMO.
Lots of "bad" can't be erased by "good" later. For example, you can't un-exploit people once they've been exploited.
We modify, we design, we make, we destroy. The key is to do this in a way that is sustainable for us, the earth and it's inhabitants.
That certainly is in no way happening right now.
Exactly Introvert, exactly.... In my career I am culpable. I had to make a choice long ago that I am still better of doing what I do because I can actually affect change better in the position I am in. Do I do bad? Yes. However I also do good. Also, My investing (or not) will have no effect on the system. I choose to syphon off some cheddar from the system for my lil ol self. How was my usage of affect/effect?
I still stand by my original statement re causality & correlation.
http://www.correlated.org/
At best, CS is probably closest with
"Correlation sure suggests thinking about the existence of causation"
Any critical thinker would tell you that as soon as you realize something is correlated and start to imply causality, the right thing to do is to uncouple the link in your mind and start from scratch on the causality side.
Correlation is at best a starting point to try and discover causality, but is not a factor that contributes to the causality itself.
Correlation is at best a starting point to try and discover causality, but is not a factor that contributes to the causality itself.
But what is the difference between invariable correlation and necessary causation?
According to David Hume:
"All events seem entirely loose and separate. One event follows another; but we never can observe any tie between them. They seem conjoined but never connected. And as we can have no idea of anything, which never appears to our outward sense or inward sentiment, the necessary conclusion seems to be, that we have no idea of connexion or power at all, and that these words are absolutely without any meaning, when employed either in philosophical reasoning, or in private life."
Has anyone ever refuted his contention?
(Sorry, I couldn't resist this totally irrelevant topic!)
TFSA is up 46.9% since I open it now! 2 years ish. Picking individual stocks doesn't seem so bad to me...
Also, My investing (or not) will have no effect on the system. I choose to syphon off some cheddar from the system for my lil ol self.
Each person's choices have some small effect. When we multiply small effects by many people, we get big effects.
So, really, more people need to make "good" choices.
How was my usage of affect/effect?
Poor. It's "effect change," not "affect change."
"Effect," in this case, means "to bring about."
"I'm gonna get mine, and to hell with everyone else and everything else."
"Everyone's doing it, so why shouldn't I?"
"I alone can't make a big difference, so I'll continue to make choices that benefit me at the expense of others."
"Because causation is a pesky thing to prove, I will refuse to draw conclusions on stuff."
I don't mean to go after you, specifically, dasmo. You are, however, representative of a lot of people.
Apparently not with my awesome stock picks...
And shoot on my usage of affect and effect...
"When person makes bad property investments they try to make (up) awesome stock returns."
TFSA is up 46.9% since I open it now! 2 years ish. Picking individual stocks doesn't seem so bad to me...
Good. But that is a 2 year period of very good returns on the overall market. What matters is the long term return.
"Doesn't invest in the stock market because profitability & social/environmental evil are closely correlated" falls on the Investment Wisdom Spectrum.
Depends on where you put your money then.
Also keep in mind this graphic domed along with a TVP article selling an investment vehicle.
Actually no. Low cost index funds is the cheapest way to invest. No need to buy any service. The article talks about a service that does the tax loss harvesting for you for an additional fee, but the overall effect on net return is minimal.
Doesn't matter if they are low cost, the article is still selling https://investor.vanguard.com/home/ and https://hello.betterment.com/affiliate/welcome-to-betterment-ir/?clickid=Tp2xudRWIxCJ000WphXICRYwUkQXRlXW8wUETg0
That's OK I just assume it's part of his retirement strategy. Probably gets free services for the post. That's usually how such things work on such blogs. I still like it there a lot and think the advice of the article is sound so no big deal to me...
Long term I can look at my cash account that I have had for over 15 years. Apple is the only stock I have had in there that long though since a few other oldies I moved over to my TFSA. Apple is up 4900% (that's not a typo) All the others I bought in the half off sale of 2009. Those are up a total of 231.5% since 2009... Much better than RE...
Speaking of RE, I have done just fine Old Man having bought in 2003 and paid off my one place...
"It only matters what you believe. Only feelings of inadequacy would spend countless hours on a blog trying to convince strangers otherwise."
I don't care what you believe. I find the debates and information posted here very useful so I contribute in my own special way. I tell the truth here because I can... I like investing, I have done well by it. I know very few other people that do it...
My personal best stock doesn't quite match AAPL. I bought Petrobras in 2001 and sold in 2007 for an approximate 10X gain. My timing of sale was fortuitous as it has been precipitously down since then. The good timing was luck not skill- I sold most of my stock portfolio at the 2007-2008 market top to raise money to buy the house I now live in.
I also once invested in a stock and held to zero. Thankfully a very small investment. Overall over 14 years I have beaten the market modestly despite getting severely burned with some speculative alternative energy companies in 2001.
My friends and family fall into a few categories for investing.
1) Invested in a hodgepodge of high fee mutual funds recommended by an advisor (70%)
2) Invest on hot stocks following tips, boast about their winners (15%)lack diversification or any plan
(3)Invest systematically in a mix of low cost index funds or etfs (10%)
(4) Invest systematically in individual stocks with a modicum of analysis (5%)
That's among the folks that invest. A significant fraction are (a) too broke to invest, (b) 100% invested in RE, (c) 100% invested in their own buusiness, (d) opposed to stock market investing
I wonder where "Doesn't invest in the stock market because profitability & social/environmental evil are closely correlated
I must say Environmental EViL has been Kickin a$$ past month!! Arch coal, Alpha natural, Walter energy... up 100% since the lows. It was worth a shot the republicans would win control of congress. That and the belief the shale gas 'miracle' will give the US long-term cheap energy is wholly freakin misguided. China has to get their coal from somewhere Introvert, and it keeps them moving to Canada bidding up your house to escape their polluted air, Win-Win ;-)) Besides, carbon dioxide, sulphates and nitrogen oxides are all plant food, Win-Win-Win. Feed the crops, drive a Hummer. Just havin fun ;-)
Describes me to a tee...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2014/11/08/my-dream-investor/18660389/
You're so dreamy dasmo
Monday, November 10, 2014 8:00am
MTD November
2014 2013
Net Unconditional Sales: 137 412
New Listings: 195 698
Active Listings: 3,722 4,017
Please Note
Left Column: stats so far this month
Right Column: stats for the entire month from last year
BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE
For most Millennials (born 1980 to 2000) the first home has to be new or near new in remodeling. And because housing is uber expensive near and in the core, it's going to be small in both lot and house size.
Not by choice but by necessity.
Repairs are too expensive so you want all the expensive stuff done.
That makes a home appealing, in say Fernwood, when it has been updated to Millennial standards (quartz counters and stainless steel) but still small enough to lower the acquisition cost. Throw in a basement suite and crank up the acquisition cost by a hundred grand. You end up with a bigger mortgage but some extra income to offset most of the higher annual costs of the home.
And it makes new or newer houses that are both small in house and lot size attractive outside of the core. These homes have a limited new home warranty for a few years as well as warranties for items like the roof for so many years or until the company that installed it is out of business. Which ever comes first. And that usually is the contractor going out of business.
The underlying idea is to buy something that is low on annual net costs and with a bit of luck appreciates so that you and your snuggle bunny can move on to a bigger home on a bigger lot.
But for most Millennials the last half dozen years has not resulted in the anticipated appreciation. And now the home is getting dated in appearance. Appliances need to be replaced, floors are scratched, some water leaks, old hot water tank, painting, decks etc.
When you go to list, most likely the agent will tell you that in order to sell you are going to need to do some remodeling. Otherwise you are not going to appeal to the right market segment. And there goes a lot of your mortgage paydown paid into remodeling and selling costs.
Don't do the necessary upgrades and there might be a significant difference in the selling price.
What's the difference between good debt and bad debt?
Simplistically I would say good debt is an investment that makes you more money than it costs to borrow.
In the past real estate was good debt. Through mortgage paydown and appreciation clearly money was to be made.
But today real estate has shifted into bad debt as a short term investment. And with the continuous over use of lines of credit, real estate becomes long term bad debt for some home owners. A debt that they'll never pay off in their entire lifetimes.
So many young people are loading up on debt at such an early age that are leaving no financial buffer for their future.
They've gone to Vegas and spent all their money the first day. Now they have to sell their sunglasses and luggage to pay for the rest of the trip.
Good thing we're only at the beginning of the buying of the ginormous millennial wave.
http://www.housingwire.com/articles/32008-demographics-still-weighing-on-housing
"Millennials are the largest generation...And this is the cusp—get ready for the millennial wave to drive the housing market for decades."
Good thing we're only at the beginning of the buying of the ginormous millennial wave.
I assume you realize your article is about the US market? If millenials there are struggling to afford houses, what do you think is happening here where houses are twice the price? Do millennials here make double the income?
Post a Comment