Your logic is not convincing enough :-)

From historical studies, high price was never a cause for the slump. Like in the late 80s, price in many places in the US was tripled after a 5-6 year boom leg. In relative terms, the price in the late 80s was higher and more unaffordable by the public than this cycle. But it was the job loss and end of cold war that triggered the economy to slow down and then pulled the housing market with it. Another example is China, price there has gone way beyond what a bubble is defined in the US, but there is no sign of dropping.

The real reason you don't buy now is that you already know that the slump has started and you are feeling very confident that price will go down more in 2-3 years. Your action is not the cause, but a result from the cause.

I don't think the cause is easy credit either because easy credit was not new to this cycle, it was the same back in the 80s.

I understand 100% what you are saying. To me they are mostly a resulting phenomina, not convincing enough for me to identify them as clause.

所有跟帖： 

• 回复：Your logic is not convincing enough :-) -pediatrician2- ♂ (1471 bytes) () 10/31/2007 postreply 16:59:15

• 回复：回复：Your logic is not convincing enough :-) -miat42- ♂ (1443 bytes) () 10/31/2007 postreply 17:11:39

• well, all of your confusing words can be summrized -pediatrician2- ♂ (274 bytes) () 10/31/2007 postreply 17:19:26

• Thanks, we are basically on the same page :-) -miat42- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/31/2007 postreply 17:22:01

• 太精彩了,二位, DDD! -左右逢源- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/31/2007 postreply 20:35:17