Appraisers' Free Forum

I took a political compass test to see where I fit, and I'm a left leaning libertarian, if that isn't a contradiction of the terms most us most of us think in.

It sounds like you are at least half right

In the '80's a friend of mine pointed out that I was a Libertarian or, possibly, an agreeable pirate, whatever that meant. I had no knowledge of LP.

At our state fair several years later, I walked past the LP booth and the guy had a crude logic driven set of lights, rigged to light up in a way that graphed L tendencies per the replies to a 20 question exam. Normally, I like to plod, but the 20 questions were answered in a heartbeat. They guy looked at my perfect LP score and chart, feigning amazement.

The gal I was with wanted to take the test. She did, but I had to explain about half of the questions to her because she was somewhat apolitical in that she boycotted current events coverage.

All I know about CO Springs is that it is strung out along the highway, has beautiful views, military, and at least 7 miniature golf courses (early '90's data). Plus some of my relatives live there now.

Edd Gillespie wrote:...I took a political compass test to see where I fit, and I'm a left leaning libertarian, if that isn't a contradiction of the terms most us most of us think in.

Not at all. Libertarians generally don't think in terms of left and right... more usually in terms of freedom restricting or freedom promoting. I once heard an LP party member describe libertarian as conservative fiscally combined with liberal socially. That is close, IMHO, but not exactly... I tend to think of it more as conservative Constitutionally in a way that promotes liberty to be whatever you want to be socially.

BTW, I know a lot of left-libertarians. It is my opinion that one of the main reasons the L party has not taken off is they haven't embraced the left-libs or recruited from the Dems strongly enough.

Steve Owen wrote:BTW, I know a lot of left-libertarians. It is my opinion that one of the main reasons the L party has not taken off is they haven't embraced the left-libs or recruited from the Dems strongly enough.

Maybe being libertarian, which is classically been defined as the opposite of authoritarian, has somehow assimilated a hatred for domestic liberal social economics. I can't figure it out, but something is driving this fight.

What I think is driving it is the policies of the Progressives, which are far left of the liberals. This is causing conservatives (and libertarians) to have conniptions because it means the destruction of certain Constitutional principles.

I'm not sure it is exactly right to define L's as opposite of authoritarian, since libertarians believe in strong government enforcement of laws that would allow someone to damage another person's property or liberty if not enforced (murder, fraud, littering, etc.). However, on the world's shortest political test, libertarian is opposite Statist (big government) on the graph.

The test, or whom ever made it up, defines libertarians and authoritarians as opposites. What I am interested in is the increasing separation of political convictions from economic theories. I think that is quite helpful to the discussions.

I'm not sure I know what a progressive is. What specifically do they believe in that is a threat to any of our Constitutional rights? Are progressives intentionally undermining the Constitution. If so how?

What I am interested in is the increasing separation of political convictions from economic theories. I think that is quite helpful to the discussions.

Edd, how about an example? I want to understand and consider your observation.

Thanks.

If I understand this correctly, and I may not so bear with me. The poles in political theory run in the extreme from total governmental control of everything to an almost complete absence of government (maybe leaving the armed forces only according to some). Authoritarians urging more government and the Libertarians less. It seems that there is a wide divergence of thought regarding the distribution of wealth that functions separately from political persuasion. Again, in the extreme there are those that believe the wealth should be used for the benefit of everyone and those that believe it should remain invested unevenly in individuals. We used to call this communism and capitalism, but with the advent of China we now have a communist government with a capitalistic economy. I don't know what the new definitions are or if any are needed, but things have definitely changed from when we believed democracy and capitalism were connected at the hip.

It seems not very many are all one and none of the other, so that puts a bunch of us in the middle somewhere.

Bottom line, even if I thought it would be bad for the economy (and I don't), I want government to release it's clenched grip on my ears in as many areas as practical, both economic and social. That is an aspirational goal with practical limits.

There are parts of the constitution that I like more than other parts, but I want a rule of law that is based upon the constitution as amended. That means quite a bit of roll back from where we are now. And, I don't want word games out of the high court or low courts with regards to constitutional principles. If changes are deemed necessary, ram through a constitutional amendment. Too hard? Tough! It was meant to be that way.

At some point, the people will rise up over such taunting of process. Perhaps only 1/3 or less may draw a line in the sand, but it will happen. I am not promoting this, but rather trying to vent my anger that there are those forces that would play chicken with the sensibilities of the true patriots and adherents to a constitutional republic. I have no idea where the breaking point is, but I am pretty sure it could erupt like an oil soaked pile of rags, into spontaneous combustion.

Why screw with that possibility? I am talking to all politicians that want to take short cuts.

Edd Gillespie wrote:In my book NAR's economist is not neutral and therefore disqualified as a source of reliable, factual information about what is happening in the real estate market.

^^^Another one for the NAR®-hating-nut-bin!

Appraisers never cease to amaze me...as a group I mean. I wonder if the vast majority aren't enticed into the business for specific reasons. Like working alone (read can't get along with others). Those looking to get into appraising have told me the reason they are doing so is because they "want to be their own boss & work from home." That's based on past experience...NOBODY I know is currently looking to get into the business.

I've also observed that the measureless mainstream of appraisers seems to be the most dreary, monotonous, lifeless, demoralized bunch I've ever encountered...at least in the internet chatrooms & at those few CE classes I've attended. This is one of many reasons I changed teams.

Agents (read NAR®) seem to be a more optimistic profession. Why not...they have a huge lobby & the earning potential is FAR GREATER than that for appraisers. This might be one reason so many appraisers HATE agents (read NAR®). Also, it's hard to sell when you have such a dull outlook on life.

Perhaps this is one explanation NAR® economists are perceived by our more oppressed citizens as "putting a positive spin on things." Success breeds contempt.

Edd has appeared confused on how I define a "Crusader." Well...over on the other forum there dwelt a one-time appraiser who once told me they, "hate all real estate agents." They then set out to create as much havoc as they possibly could for lenders, agents, and anybody else they perceived as THE DREADED ENEMY.

Finally, I don't see how any appraiser can consider themselves an "unbiased professional" when they have such obvious contempt for others in the same & similar industries.

Well then ignore my opinions about Yun if you don't like them. I base my caution on Mr. Yun's unsupported assumptions from the data NAR collects. He is alone among his peers and his predictions don't play out like he says they will. But, I do understand that selling real estate is a tough profession and it is important almost above everything else to remain optimistic. I really don't know what NAR expects of him, but I think he is an important cheerleader for them.

Appraisers not so much. In fact if they are reporting with any bias whatsoever they may be in violation of their own rules. I just don't consider Mr. Yun's information and predictions to be reliable not only because they won't verify, but because based on what I can find out he has an agenda to sugar coat the news in a bad market and fan the flames in a hot market. But, as I said maybe that is what he is paid to do.

Appraisers are paid to tell it like it is and should verify everything before they rely on it.

I'm pretty optimistic yet pay no mind to the propaganda put out by NAR. My shiney happy real estate sellin' spouse feels the same. I hope to hell her income surpasses mine in 2010.

Edd Gillespie wrote:Well then ignore my opinions about Yun if you don't like them. I base my caution on Mr. Yun's unsupported assumptions from the data NAR collects. He is alone among his peers and his predictions don't play out like he says they will. But, I do understand that selling real estate is a tough profession and it is important almost above everything else to remain optimistic. I really don't know what NAR expects of him, but I think he is an important cheerleader for them.

Appraisers not so much. In fact if they are reporting with any bias whatsoever they may be in violation of their own rules. I just don't consider Mr. Yun's information and predictions to be reliable not only because they won't verify, but because based on what I can find out he has an agenda to sugar coat the news in a bad market and fan the flames in a hot market. But, as I said maybe that is what he is paid to do.

Appraisers are paid to tell it like it is and should verify everything before they rely on it.

I've always found the NAR Economists EXTREMELY informative. And it's all a matter of opinion...I believe they DO support their opinions & often offer data to support those opinions.

When I was investing (we only own our primary residence currently) - I relied a great deal on what NAR Economists were saying. Furthermore, most of MY clients are investors and/or past investors (my wife works new construction), and they value my opinions - which more often than not are in line with the NAR.

I agree with you that Yun and the NAR may be a little optimistic, but Yun's a breath of fresh air compared to some doomsayer economists. Moreover, he's extremely intelligent.

Appraisers are paid to tell it like it is and should verify everything before they rely on it.

SOME Appraisers "tell it like it is," however far too many are running around with a chip on their shoulder. Just make sure you're not ONE OF THOSE.

skibs wrote:I'm pretty optimistic yet pay no mind to the propaganda put out by NAR. My shiney happy real estate sellin' spouse feels the same. I hope to hell her income surpasses mine in 2010.

Depends. Whatever action governmental forces take today - takes 9-18 months to work its way into the system. Take The Pelosi Plunge for example: That stupid insert expletive here single-handedly tanked the stock market over a year ago & we're only now getting back to last October's levels (she destroyed public confidence).

Obama's a green behind the ears politician (younger than I am), and although a lot of what is taking place now isn't his fault...I don't see this silver tongued con artist accomplishing much in his 10 months in office thusfar.

When its all said and done I'm betting we're going to see a pyramid shaped recovery...with more pain to come. However, echo boomers are expected to buy more homes between 2010-2020 than homes that were purchased between 1995-2005.

Sooner or later that pent up demand is going to come knocking...unless Obummer & his socialists pals try to take the country the way of Cuba...then the shooting begins

P.S. skibs-

Read "Homebuyer's Tax Credit & Harry Reid."

Harry's "bill" doesn't go far enough & some are saying it's "the bill most likely to get passed."

If this is the case...we're going to be in for another round of foreclosures & home price depreciation.

His bill would expire about the time the Fed quits buying MBS's...great timing Harry...just greeeeeeat.

That means higher interest rates @ a time the tax credit will expire (geniuses huh ). Additionally, inflation (nemesis of bonds & home interest rates) is going to start creeping into the picture eventually...equating to EVEN HIGHER INTEREST RATES.

I don't see jobs suddenly appearing...in fact MORE PEOPLE are losing their jobs in this region, and we're "suppose to be one of the most stable areas in the U.S."

Deutche Bank recently predicted 1/2 of U.S. homeowners could be underwater by 2011.

What we need is;

* @ least a 12 month extension on the tax credit

* Expansion to include EVERYONE

* Elimination of the income cap

* And increased credit to $15,000

Harry Reid's bill falls far too short of what's needed to get the housing markets back on track & fails to instill public confidence.

That's why I say, "more pain to come."

Thanks Harry (30% approval rating). Thanks Nancy (34% approval rating). Thanks Obunghole! (approval numbers falling like a rock).

Mako wrote: I've always found the NAR Economists EXTREMELY informative. And it's all a matter of opinion...I believe they DO support their opinions & often offer data to support those opinions.


SOME Appraisers "tell it like it is," however far too many are running around with a chip on their shoulder. Just make sure you're not ONE OF THOSE.

Then follow NAR Mako. If it works for you and doesn't mislead others, that is just fine with me. And thanks for the admonition, I'll try to remember that particularly when I'm tempted to be condescending.

His bill would expire about the time the Fed quits buying MBS's...great timing Harry...just greeeeeeat.

Mako, have you ever tried to quit smoking? Coffee? I have seen someone overdosed on narcotics ( a presumed accident) to relieve pain. It isn't going to be pretty whenever the government stops preventing market forces to establish a sustainable supply-demand.

I know this batch we have in office right now will not put the crack pipe down until there is some sort of intervention, most likely, a supply disruption caused by a revolt of investors around the World where they refuse to buy USA treasuries at any price!
The way this economic hand is being played out, we are going to lose the country as we know it. The whole darned thing will have to be renegotiated, from retirement to medicare to welfare to state aid to foreign policy.

Good bye public employee unions, good bye teachers union, and the whole legal profession will get a memorable tort reform snuggie, if they even are permitted a seat back at the table. They may go the way of previously designated appraisers after T-11 & have to reapply under new standards I said that mostly, because Edd can't help but read this stuff