Case-Shiller Index: Housing Prices Decline

The New York Times has gathered data from the Standard & Poor’s Case-Shiller index, which charts prices from 20 major cities across the U.S., to examine how home prices have changed recently. Prices peaked in mid-2006 and soon began their precipitous downturn.  April of 2009 marks the month when home prices appeared to bottom out and commence a sluggish recovery; however, recent data suggests that home prices have actually fallen below this previous low point.

Markets in the 20 metropolitan areas that the index covers have seen prices drop 1.8 percent since April 2009 and 4.0 percent from the beginning to the end of 2011.  Cities like Charlotte, Portland, Seattle and Atlanta where housing prices peaked later – 2007 as opposed to mid-2006 – have experienced the greatest decline.  San Francisco, Detroit, Boston and other housing markets that peaked prematurely in late 2005 to early 2006 have seen prices increase or only slightly decrease since April 2009.  The relationship between when the high point occurred and the change in prices since April 2009 stems from the length of time needed for the markets to self-correct.   For instance in Seattle, where the market peaked in July of 2007, prices are still dropping to realign with income levels in the region.  Of the twenty metropolitan areas, the Las Vegas market has seen the steepest decline in prices, dropping 19.3% since April 2009.  San Francisco, on the other hand, where the market peaked early in 2006, has actually experienced an 8.7 percent increase in housing prices.  

California's Special Election & Economic Disaster

Politics in California has particular meaning to themostsearched as we lived there before our present abode. Indeed, we abashedly reveal our vote for Schwarzenegger back in the days of the 2003 Special Election (regrettably, we wish we had voted for Tom McClintock!!) to rid ourselves of Gray Davis.

California for the past few decades has been and is a blue state. The Democrats control everything, especially the legislature where they have 60/40 majorities. Occasionally a Republican will pop into a statewide elected office. Schwarzenegger is a liberal Republican.

Californians have been voting themselves into debt for years. It seems as though nearly every proposed bond or spending bill that was proposed to the voters was passed. Spend, spend, spend. Raise taxes and spend. Pay for healthcare and schooling of illegal aliens so more will cross the border! Of course, most of the Propositions were put on the ballot by the Democratically-controlled legislature. Of all the blame to be doled out, the Democrats in the legislature need to be held most accountable--who else is there to blame?? It becomes the goal of every astute voter in California to throw out as many Democrats as possible and replace them with McClintock-like Republicans who actually care about spending wisely.

The budget deficit is so bad now in California they are voting tomorrow whether to raise taxes to pay for all the spending mess they are in. The Propositions are a shame except for the "slap on the wrist" 1F which forbids raises on government officials during budget shortfalls. Yet Californians are beginning to wise up. A recent poll showed all the Propositions failing except 1F (graphic, Sacbee.com). Californians realize that giving more money to a Democratically controlled legislature will NOT solve the problem; cutting social programs will.

The Special Election Californians REALLY need is a 2003-style Special Election, but instead of the Governor, throw out the liberals in the legislature. Call it a "California Tea Party" if you will. And there is seemingly widespread support to do so. In a recent Field Poll study a mere 14% of California voters approved of their state legislature while a massive 74% disapprove--the lowest in Field Poll recorded history. That's even lower ratings than the 24% approval rating Gray Davis had before we voters threw him out in our 2003 Special Election.

What themostsearched vigorously opposes is a so-called "California Bailout." Such a bailout would be better-termed an "Illegal Alien Bailout" in honor of such "sanctuary cities" such as San Francisco (though SF is just the tip of the blame game as the whole state is guilty). themostsearched is strongly opposed to any bailout as we way, way, way overdid the bailout thing and are getting our whole country messed up. Mitt Romney was right: we should have never bailed out the automakers, but rather let them file Chapter 11 and emerge leaner and stronger. themostsearched rejects the notion we should have to pay for unwise social program spending of others--besides, frankly, we don't even have the money for a California Bailout should we even desire one.

California won't fail because at this 11th hour the voters are beginning to take back their state.