U.S. Homeowners Lost $5.9 Trillion Since 2006 Peak

**michaelr** · 11th December 2009 03:30 PM

U.S. Homeowners Lost $5.9 Trillion Since 2006 Peak

Hey lets celebrate, were losing our wealth, and jobs, and our morality, and the future so many have worked for for so many years.

**michaelr** · 11th December 2009 03:31 PM

Hey peeps, I do have a solution, lets tax the rich!

**Djinn** · 14th December 2009 08:53 AM

Works for me; they're suffering the least, and they benefited the most from the practices that helped create this mess.

**metheron** · 14th December 2009 01:08 PM

This article is very misleading. Property values may have decreased by that much in that time frame, but those are just numbers stored on computers somewhere. There is no guarantee of any value there. They are all just estimated value anyway. The real value is not found until you are ready to sell and find out what people are willing to pay.

I bought my house 7 years ago. At that time it was appraised at $140,000. Since then I have put in $52,000. I wanted to refinance this year to take advantage of the low rates. My appraisal last month came back at $130,000.

Your article would lead people to believe that I lost money. I have not. And don't believe I will as I intend to keep it for about ten more years.

Following the logic of this article you could talk about how much people that own Gold have lost in the last two weeks. Or how much richer those that own stocks are over the past year.

But all those would be inaccurate until it is cash in hand. Until then, it just looks good on paper.

**Djinn** · 14th December 2009 02:09 PM

[quote name='metheron' date='14 December 2009 - 03:08 PM' timestamp='1260821303' post='79529']

This article is very misleading. Property values may have decreased by that much in that time frame, but those are just numbers stored on computers somewhere. There is no guarantee of any value there. They are all just estimated value anyway. The real value is not found until you are ready to sell and find out what people are willing to pay....[/quote]

A very good point. I bought my house in 1998 for $177K. At the peak of the housing bubble, it hit around $280K. Now it's down to around $240K.

So, bearing in mind I have no plans to sell in the foreseeable future, have I, as a homeowner, gained, or lost?

**metheron** · 14th December 2009 11:05 PM

[quote name='Djinn' date='14 December 2009 - 04:09 PM' timestamp='1260824960' post='79578']

A very good point. I bought my house in 1998 for $177K. At the peak of the housing bubble, it hit around $280K. Now it's down to around $240K.

So, bearing in mind I have no plans to sell in the foreseeable future, have I, as a homeowner, gained, or lost?

[/quote]

I'm sure someone will see it differently, but imo, all you have done is gained equity which at this point only looks good in your 'worth' column. It actually does you no good except to become indebted more.

As far as actual value, you will have neither gained or lost nor will you even know the true value until you sell and find what someone is willing to pay.

**michaelr** · 15th December 2009 08:19 AM

[quote name='metheron' date='14 December 2009 - 10:05 PM' timestamp='1260857117' post='79823']

I'm sure someone will see it differently, but imo, all you have done is gained equity which at this point only looks good in your 'worth' column. It actually does you no good except to become indebted more.

As far as actual value, you will have neither gained or lost nor will you even know the true value until you sell and find what someone is willing to pay.

[/quote]

Try to sell it.

**Djinn** · 15th December 2009 08:30 AM

[quote name='michaelr' date='15 December 2009 - 10:19 AM' timestamp='1260890380' post='79895']

Try to sell it.[/quote]

Why? I like my house. I don't need to sell it. I suppose the $5.9T of "lost value" is real under the assumption that ALL homeowners are planning on selling right now, but I have a hunch that's not the case.

Also, why should we measure from the 2006 peak? Why not state how much U.S. homeowners have gained or lost since 2002? Or any other year?

Let's say I sell you stock for $100. The next day, it's value shoots to $500, but you fail to sell before it drops to $200 the following day. Did you gain $100, or lose $300?

**michaelr** · 15th December 2009 08:39 AM

[quote name='Djinn' date='15 December 2009 - 07:30 AM' timestamp='1260891005' post='79897']

Why? I like my house. I don't need to sell it. I suppose the $5.9T of "lost value" is real under the assumption that ALL homeowners are planning on selling right now, but I have a hunch that's not the case.

Also, why should we measure from the 2006 peak? Why not state how much U.S. homeowners have gained or lost since 2002? Or any other year?

Let's say I sell you stock for $100. The next day, it's value shoots to $500, but you fail to sell before it drops to $200 the following day. Did you gain $100, or lose $300?

[/quote]

Apples and oranges. Your reported home values are not accurate. You pay taxes on an assessment made by the local governments, those assessments in a time of decline are hardly accurate. If you want a true representation of your home vale, sell it, then tell me your story.

**Djinn** · 15th December 2009 08:51 AM

[quote name='michaelr' date='15 December 2009 - 10:39 AM' timestamp='1260891590' post='79903']

Apples and oranges. Your reported home values are not accurate. You pay taxes on an assessment made by the local governments, those assessments in a time of decline are hardly accurate. If you want a true representation of your home vale, sell it, then tell me your story.[/quote]

Again ... You say that the assessments are "wildly inaccurate in a time of decline." It's also true that the assessments are "wildly inaccurate" when house prices are rising.

And the degree of inaccuracy is wholly conditional on when the assessment was made. If your assessment was made in 2006, then you're quite correct. If your last assessment was made in 2002, then it's much less likely to be true. It's safe to assume that most houses in the U.S. were not assessed in 2006 - which would be a worst-case scenario.