[FairfieldLife] Re: Earth turns around the sun not the other way: (How MMY sold a diamond (TM) f
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, L B Shriver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip As noted, Shankar had broken with the TMO sometime not long prior to 1994, so the sweet poison warning would have had to have been issued at some point in between then and 1998. 1993 at the DC course. L B S Born in 1956 in Papanasam, India, His Holiness Sri Sri Ravi Shankar studied with many renowned spiritual masters and became a scholar of Vedic Literature. By the age of seventeen, he obtained an Advanced Degree in Modern Physics. In 1982, His Holiness Sri Sri Ravi Shankar founded the Art of Living Foundation http://www.artofliving.org/founder.html In 1982, he started the Art of Living Foundation, a United Nations NGO and introduced to the world 'Sudarshan Kriya technique'a unique breathing process, which removes stress and negative toxins from the body by rejuvenating each and every cell. The Foundation aims at fostering health at every conceivable human level-mental, physical, emotional as well as spiritual. http://www.webindia123.com/personal/religious/sriravi.htm I took his basic course with him in 1994 or 95. By then, it was quite a mature movement -- in that some friends had been to india with him 4-5 years or more previously, lots of people on courses, including many former initiators, had been with him for a long time -- 6,7 years + Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Earth turns around the sun not the other way: (How MMY sold a diamond (TM) f
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason Spock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Himalayan masters have outdated ideas. Just a single guy manages to float in the air,.. John Hagelin will be the next president of United States of America. And if just one monkey flies out my ass, I'll be on Letterman. John and I both are s close. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Earth turns around the sun not the other way: (How MMY sold a diamond (TM) f
I think you are sorely mistaken. I don't think many would even take notice of someone floating in the air. I mean who cares, really? What does it have to do with the bulk of people's lives who are primarily concerned with such mundane things like: *earning a living *paying for food *health insurance *gasoline approaching $3/gallon *an administration trying to screw with Social Security *also trying to rewrite the tax code and screw people out of their mortgage deduction to name a few. Add paying $2500 to learn TM so they can spend the next 35 years trying to float? I don't think so. kh --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 11/13/05 11:19 AM, Jason Spock at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Himalayan masters have outdated ideas. Just a single guy manages to float in the air,.. John Hagelin will be the next president of United States of America. No, the fundamentalist Christians, who are a powerful voting block in this country, would go bananas and oppose him violently if necessary. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Earth turns around the sun not the other way: (How MMY sold a diamond (TM) f
Probably most people wouldn't believe it. There are some amazing magic tricks out there, like guys walking through plate glass windows. People know it's a trick even though they can't imagine how it's done. People would assume the same with levitation, even if were done in their living room. David Blaine (http://www.davidblaine.com) levitates on NYC sidewalks, which freaks people out, but they don't elect him president. on 11/13/05 1:14 PM, Kenny H at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think you are sorely mistaken. I don't think many would even take notice of someone floating in the air. I mean who cares, really? What does it have to do with the bulk of people's lives who are primarily concerned with such mundane things like: *earning a living *paying for food *health insurance *gasoline approaching $3/gallon *an administration trying to screw with Social Security *also trying to rewrite the tax code and screw people out of their mortgage deduction to name a few. Add paying $2500 to learn TM so they can spend the next 35 years trying to float? I don't think so. kh Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Earth turns around the sun not the other way: (How MMY sold a diamond (TM) f
Kenny H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: *also trying to rewrite the tax code and screw people out of their mortgage deduction And who is getting screwed out of thier mortgage deduction? Under the proposal, the average home owner will maintian their full deductiblity. And those who are unable to deduct it now, because they dont save enough by itemizing will be able to deduct it. Who will lose part of their deduction? The upper third or so on the wealth scale. You seem overly concerned for these poor souls. First, they will retain dudutability up to about the average price home regionally. Thus in California, those with a million dollar home, would, under the proposal, be only be able deduct the mortgage interest equivalent to about a $400-500,000 home. And yet, in balance, a lot of these taax payers are not currently able to deduct for such, because at their incomes the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) kicks in. But under the proposal, AMT will be killed, thus the upper third or tax payers trade part of their mortgage deduction for elimination of the onerous AMT. So don't cry too hard for these upper 1/3 of taxpayers who will be affected. (Which seems odd for you -- to cry for such (mostly Republicans), but I guess its just compassion bubbling out for all of God's creatures.) Their taxes will be pretty much uneffected as the AMT gains will balance out the partial mortgage deducability loss. And the lower 2/3s of tax payers will be generally uneffected -- or will actually gain -- by being able to deduct mortgage interest when they can't now. And the overall effect will be to make housing more affordable. A good thing, yes? What is interesting is your implication that mortgage interest deductions is an entitlement. It is a poor policy economically, having been a huge bonanza of a tax shelter for the rich and has contributed to current housing being out of reach for 85% of potential buyers. An effect will be that less money will be sunk into fancy show-off houses and more into capital investments which will raise productivity and wage rates for all. A good thing, yes? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Earth turns around the sun not the other way: (How MMY sold a diamond (TM) f
Maybe to most of what you have written However, I don't consider $350,000+ for an 800-1000 sq. foot 2 br/1 bath bungalow (here in Sacramento) in a lousy neighborhood affordable. Go a few blocks over and the same houses are already at half a million. Go a bit further south towards the Bay Area or east towards Tahoe and you start getting to the $500,000+ range for a small-normal size home, not the estate one would have imagined for this kind of money. Do you know that the cost of --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kenny H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: *also trying to rewrite the tax code and screw people out of their mortgage deduction And who is getting screwed out of thier mortgage deduction? Under the proposal, the average home owner will maintian their full deductiblity. And those who are unable to deduct it now, because they dont save enough by itemizing will be able to deduct it. Who will lose part of their deduction? The upper third or so on the wealth scale. You seem overly concerned for these poor souls. First, they will retain dudutability up to about the average price home regionally. Thus in California, those with a million dollar home, would, under the proposal, be only be able deduct the mortgage interest equivalent to about a $400-500,000 home. And yet, in balance, a lot of these taax payers are not currently able to deduct for such, because at their incomes the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) kicks in. But under the proposal, AMT will be killed, thus the upper third or tax payers trade part of their mortgage deduction for elimination of the onerous AMT. So don't cry too hard for these upper 1/3 of taxpayers who will be affected. (Which seems odd for you -- to cry for such (mostly Republicans), but I guess its just compassion bubbling out for all of God's creatures.) Their taxes will be pretty much uneffected as the AMT gains will balance out the partial mortgage deducability loss. And the lower 2/3s of tax payers will be generally uneffected -- or will actually gain -- by being able to deduct mortgage interest when they can't now. And the overall effect will be to make housing more affordable. A good thing, yes? What is interesting is your implication that mortgage interest deductions is an entitlement. It is a poor policy economically, having been a huge bonanza of a tax shelter for the rich and has contributed to current housing being out of reach for 85% of potential buyers. An effect will be that less money will be sunk into fancy show-off houses and more into capital investments which will raise productivity and wage rates for all. A good thing, yes? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Earth turns around the sun not the other way: (How MMY sold a diamond (TM) f
I know, California real estate is unreal (literally IMO and is not stable at current levels.) Thats one reason I left the state, having been born, raised, educated and careered there. Housing prices are just in fairyland compared to many other nice areas. And with broadband internet being most everywhere (and soon to be wireless, and literally EVERYWHERE, location is less and less important IMO, particularly if you can make a living not tied physically to a large hub business center.) Compare a $500,000 or million dollar home in SF, San Diego or Sac to one in FF. Its a joke. But the mortgage deduction still applies to the 350k bungalow. The proposals are for it to be partially taken away for the kind of basic $million middle class home close to it. And long run, thats a good thing, it will help bring housing and affordability back into synch. 15% affordibility rates are crazy and unsustainable. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kenny H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe to most of what you have written However, I don't consider $350,000+ for an 800-1000 sq. foot 2 br/1 bath bungalow (here in Sacramento) in a lousy neighborhood affordable. Go a few blocks over and the same houses are already at half a million. Go a bit further south towards the Bay Area or east towards Tahoe and you start getting to the $500,000+ range for a small-normal size home, not the estate one would have imagined for this kind of money. Do you know that the cost of --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kenny H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: *also trying to rewrite the tax code and screw people out of their mortgage deduction And who is getting screwed out of thier mortgage deduction? Under the proposal, the average home owner will maintian their full deductiblity. And those who are unable to deduct it now, because they dont save enough by itemizing will be able to deduct it. Who will lose part of their deduction? The upper third or so on the wealth scale. You seem overly concerned for these poor souls. First, they will retain dudutability up to about the average price home regionally. Thus in California, those with a million dollar home, would, under the proposal, be only be able deduct the mortgage interest equivalent to about a $400-500,000 home. And yet, in balance, a lot of these taax payers are not currently able to deduct for such, because at their incomes the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) kicks in. But under the proposal, AMT will be killed, thus the upper third or tax payers trade part of their mortgage deduction for elimination of the onerous AMT. So don't cry too hard for these upper 1/3 of taxpayers who will be affected. (Which seems odd for you -- to cry for such (mostly Republicans), but I guess its just compassion bubbling out for all of God's creatures.) Their taxes will be pretty much uneffected as the AMT gains will balance out the partial mortgage deducability loss. And the lower 2/3s of tax payers will be generally uneffected -- or will actually gain -- by being able to deduct mortgage interest when they can't now. And the overall effect will be to make housing more affordable. A good thing, yes? What is interesting is your implication that mortgage interest deductions is an entitlement. It is a poor policy economically, having been a huge bonanza of a tax shelter for the rich and has contributed to current housing being out of reach for 85% of potential buyers. An effect will be that less money will be sunk into fancy show-off houses and more into capital investments which will raise productivity and wage rates for all. A good thing, yes? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Earth turns around the sun not the other way: (How MMY sold a diamond (TM) f
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know, California real estate is unreal (literally IMO and is not stable at current levels.) Thats one reason I left the state, having been born, raised, educated and careered there. Housing prices are just in fairyland compared to many other nice areas. And with broadband internet being most everywhere (and soon to be wireless, and literally EVERYWHERE, location is less and less important IMO, particularly if you can make a living not tied physically to a large hub business center.) Compare a $500,000 or million dollar home in SF, San Diego or Sac to one in FF. Its a joke. But the mortgage deduction still applies to the 350k bungalow. The proposals are for it to be partially taken away for the kind of basic $million middle class home close to it. And long run, thats a good thing, it will help bring housing and affordability back into synch. 15% affordibility rates are crazy and unsustainable. I was just looking at housing prices in my neighborhood in Santa Clara, Cal. which is a middle-class neighborhood, but nothing ritzy- Many retired folks, some families and couples. Houses are typically single story, about 50 years old, 1200 to 1500 square feet. Selling prices are 750 to 900K. You won't find a house for less, although I did see a 2/1, 900 square feet, for 720K... The proposed mortgage deduction would hurt a lot of people here, even if prices softened somewhat. The trend here, just to buy a house, is to take out an interest-only loan. So many homeowners are counting on that large mortgage interest deduction to be able to afford the house. For the last twenty years at least, through good times and bad, people have been predicting housing prices to go down here. There is about a 15% affordability rate in this area, with lots and lots of overseas investor money mostly from Asia keeping prices high, even through recessions. So the SF Bay Area is not purely a domestic real estate market. If the mortgage deduction is adjusted to the 350K range, all that will happen here is that local people will be forced to sell, the properties will be snatched up by investors and we'll have more renters. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Earth turns around the sun not the other way: (How MMY sold a diamond (TM) f
jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was just looking at housing prices in my neighborhood in Santa Clara, Cal. which is a middle-class neighborhood, but nothing ritzy- Many retired folks, some families and couples. Houses are typically single story, about 50 years old, 1200 to 1500 square feet. Selling prices are 750 to 900K. You won't find a house for less, although I did see a 2/1, 900 square feet, for 720K... The proposed mortgage deduction would hurt a lot of people here, even if prices softened somewhat. Well the rent to mortgage cost (after tax) in many parts of the bay area, and other high price areas are quite low, like 50% and less. They are hurt only if they feel the need to buy. Pay 2000 in rent or 4000 in a mortgage. Rentals in sme areas a great deals -- and a great way to ride out the bubble. Some will say, but I don't want to throw my money away in rent. At least with a house I amd building equity. False on so many levels. First, everyone is a renter. They either rent property, or the rent money to to buy housing. A million dollar home costs a lot of rent on money. Just as wasted as property rent. Second, the only thing that makes owning more attractive, financially, than renting when the rent to mortgage ratios are so low, is the expectation of appreciation. But that train has left. Prices everywhere are leveling off or beginning to fall. And when the expectations for apprecation are no longer there, it becomes a double whammy: no appreciation, and demand for housing falls thus bringing pressure for lower prices -- starting a depreciation expectation cycle. Thats when everyone tries to unload and prices plummet. Third, if you are paying 2000 in rent instead of 4000 in mortgage for the same property, you are saving 2000 a month which can be saved, invested etc. Thats your rent equity building up and if there is no or little price appreciation, it will far outstrip any equity build up in property. Fourth, if one is paying interest only, they are not building up any equity -- nothing is going to repay principal. And they may actually be building up negative equity, which gets tacked onto the loan in later years. The only equity build up is if prices keep appreciating -- it becomes a game of the greater fool. Hold risky properties now with the hope someone will be foolish enough to buy at an appreciated price in a flat or declining market in years hence. Fifth, international investors may be holding up the market now, and maybe suffering from information lags -- being sold on price trends of past years and not understanding the dynamics of the local market. But after a year or two of flat and declining prices, the bloom will be off the rose, and hot international money could flood out of the area. By definition, international investors are renting their properties. 50% rent to mortgage ratios may be bearable when prices are appreciating 20-40% a year. But when that stops, for a couple of years, bam, many investors will try to unload. Thus putting more pressure on downward prices. The trend here, just to buy a house, is to take out an interest-only loan. So many homeowners are counting on that large mortgage interest deduction to be able to afford the house. And in 2-5 years they may count their blessings the loss of mortgage deductions prevented them from buying at the peak of the market. For the last twenty years at least, through good times and bad, people have been predicting housing prices to go down here. There is about a 15% affordability rate in this area, with lots and lots of overseas investor money mostly from Asia keeping prices high, even through recessions. But there has never been sustained 15% affordability and 50% rent to mortgage ratios. So the past is not a good predictor. And many parts of california had definite flattening and declines 1985-95 or so. Certainly in San Diego and parts of LA/OC. I thought the bay area had such too -- maybe not. So the SF Bay Area is not purely a domestic real estate market. If the mortgage deduction is adjusted to the 350K range, all that will happen here is that local people will be forced to sell, Well, many owners have morgages in the 500 or less range, having obtained them 5-20 years ago. Who will be initially hurt are new buyers. But they can rent for half the price. I can't feel too sorry for them. the properties will be snatched up by investors and we'll have more renters. Not for too much longer, IMO. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the
[FairfieldLife] Re: Earth turns around the sun not the other way: (How MMY sold a diamond (TM) f
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was just looking at housing prices in my neighborhood in Santa Clara, Cal. which is a middle-class neighborhood, but nothing ritzy- Many retired folks, some families and couples. Houses are typically single story, about 50 years old, 1200 to 1500 square feet. Selling prices are 750 to 900K. You won't find a house for less, although I did see a 2/1, 900 square feet, for 720K... The proposed mortgage deduction would hurt a lot of people here, even if prices softened somewhat. Well the rent to mortgage cost (after tax) in many parts of the bay area, and other high price areas are quite low, like 50% and less. They are hurt only if they feel the need to buy. Pay 2000 in rent or 4000 in a mortgage. Rentals in sme areas a great deals -- and a great way to ride out the bubble. Some will say, but I don't want to throw my money away in rent. At least with a house I amd building equity. False on so many levels. First, everyone is a renter. They either rent property, or the rent money to to buy housing. A million dollar home costs a lot of rent on money. Just as wasted as property rent. Second, the only thing that makes owning more attractive, financially, than renting when the rent to mortgage ratios are so low, is the expectation of appreciation. But that train has left. Prices everywhere are leveling off or beginning to fall. And when the expectations for apprecation are no longer there, it becomes a double whammy: no appreciation, and demand for housing falls thus bringing pressure for lower prices -- starting a depreciation expectation cycle. Thats when everyone tries to unload and prices plummet. Third, if you are paying 2000 in rent instead of 4000 in mortgage for the same property, you are saving 2000 a month which can be saved, invested etc. Thats your rent equity building up and if there is no or little price appreciation, it will far outstrip any equity build up in property. Fourth, if one is paying interest only, they are not building up any equity -- nothing is going to repay principal. And they may actually be building up negative equity, which gets tacked onto the loan in later years. The only equity build up is if prices keep appreciating -- it becomes a game of the greater fool. Hold risky properties now with the hope someone will be foolish enough to buy at an appreciated price in a flat or declining market in years hence. Fifth, international investors may be holding up the market now, and maybe suffering from information lags -- being sold on price trends of past years and not understanding the dynamics of the local market. But after a year or two of flat and declining prices, the bloom will be off the rose, and hot international money could flood out of the area. By definition, international investors are renting their properties. 50% rent to mortgage ratios may be bearable when prices are appreciating 20-40% a year. But when that stops, for a couple of years, bam, many investors will try to unload. Thus putting more pressure on downward prices. The trend here, just to buy a house, is to take out an interest-only loan. So many homeowners are counting on that large mortgage interest deduction to be able to afford the house. And in 2-5 years they may count their blessings the loss of mortgage deductions prevented them from buying at the peak of the market. For the last twenty years at least, through good times and bad, people have been predicting housing prices to go down here. There is about a 15% affordability rate in this area, with lots and lots of overseas investor money mostly from Asia keeping prices high, even through recessions. But there has never been sustained 15% affordability and 50% rent to mortgage ratios. So the past is not a good predictor. And many parts of california had definite flattening and declines 1985-95 or so. Certainly in San Diego and parts of LA/OC. I thought the bay area had such too -- maybe not. So the SF Bay Area is not purely a domestic real estate market. If the mortgage deduction is adjusted to the 350K range, all that will happen here is that local people will be forced to sell, Well, many owners have morgages in the 500 or less range, having obtained them 5-20 years ago. Who will be initially hurt are new buyers. But they can rent for half the price. I can't feel too sorry for them. the properties will be snatched up by investors and we'll have more renters. Not for too much longer, IMO. Actually per your above, an interest-only mortgage is actually cheaper many times than renting is, and you have the possiblity of building equity. Also, I don't know of anyone with a $500 per month mortgage who has purchased here in the last 20 years. And you make
