Urban Digs' Message to Vulture Buyers: Be Careful What You Wish For!

bring it on!

bring what on? The increased crime? Because substantial price declines and high crime rates are married to each other. When ou get one, you get the other.

You need to read all the way to the bottom, alpie:

"I was quite bearish for very real reasons 18 months ago, and now I am way less bearish than I was because the process started; but we still have a ways to go before a solid foundation can be built to sustain a recovery."

A 50% decline from the peak would bring us back to 2003 prices. Not exactly the height of a crime wave.

The alternative is to have thousands of units sitting empty, inviting vandalism, projects stopping halfway because no one will buy. There are very good reasons why real estate rises and falls in value, cyclically. It has NEVER risen so far so fast in the history of the world; now it is a mere correction.

Alpine, you really need to work on the reading comprehension.

A 50% decline would still leave us waaaaaaaaaay ahead of most of the country.

projects have already stopped half way steve.

"Because substantial price declines and high crime rates are married to each other."

No they're not.

and when you go to some of the hard hit areas in the outer boroughs, there are vacant house galore, especially in Jamaica.

did you read the entire article steve?

"Everybody wants a deal and the biggest bears on Manhattan real estate talk about a correction peak to trough that sees prices fall 50%-70% from their highs before all is set and done - via an overshoot to the downside. But let me tell you what forces make a market fall so severely:

a) rising unemployment
b) rising crime rates
c) huge service cuts to the city
d) deterioration in quality of life, or perceived deterioration in quality of life
e) families no longer wanting to raise their kids in the city
f) rising taxes to fill budget gaps - hitting affordability
g) much higher borrowing costs - hitting affordability
h) rising homelessness on streets
i) zombie condos, unfinished projects, empty retail stores
j) deteriorating building financials, rising number of arrears"

with the nature of this recession deeply affecting the higher end:

HIGH END ($5M+) - down aprox 25% - 40% from peak
HIGH/MIDDLE ($2M - $5M) - down aprox 25% - 30% from peak
MID END ($1M - $2M) - down aprox 20% to 30% from peak
LOWER END (Under $1M) - down aprox 15% - 25% from peak
*this was stated 2 months ago, and I would raise the range of the high/middle deals to down aprox 25% - 35% from peak levels - similar to high end range.

there is no way the high end will suffer more than the low end. at the end of the day, the harder the high end falls, the harder the low end will follow suit. those units at where $5-10M at the peak just cannot compete with those that where $15-20M and drop asking prices by 40%. so lower they go. it takes time (1 year at least), but it happens. why going to the ghetto if you can wait and buy in a better location?

there's research that shows that even higher property taxes that are meant to affect only "mansions" end up lowering middle income housing by the same proportion. housing is a ladder, when the higher steps go down all the others need to adjust.

alpine, crime will either increase or not, along with QOL. regardless real estate prices will fall. if you want to complain about the effects of the fall, talk to those who created the bubble in the first place. the blame should fall on their shoulders.

If it takes a few sacrifices to make NYC a more balanced city, i'm up for it!
And the huge holes in the city budget are more likely to bring back crimes in the city and suburbs than the decline in RE prices. Unless starved brokers start mugging people at open houses....who knows, anything is possible in NY.

I want the prices to reflect what 2009 prices should be if there wasn't a credit/mortgage bonanza the last few years. That's all.

crime is down in my precinct 17% this yr over yr -- so are real estate values - off 25%....

excellent point redddog

if NYC wasnt like those places in 1995 then why would it be now? real estate people have become so brainwashed that property cant go down that they cant comprehend the current situation. sorry folks, but the party is over and its time to pay the bill. NYC will be just fine..people lose money and thats how the game works..assets change hands at the market clearing price.

"h) rising homelessness on streets "

i can bet you alpine an arm and a leg that you have more homelessness when home prices are 10x median annual income than when they fall to 3x median annual income. if food cost 90% of the median income, would you see rampant obesity or starvation?

sorry to disappoint you guys, but the crime wave has started:

VIOLENT CRIME WAVE JOLTS TRENDY DOWNTOWN

Downtown Manhattan, the city's party mecca, has been hit by an alarming spike in vicious street violence.

UPDATE: Kelly Says NYPD Is 'Aggressively Investigating' Crime Spike Report

Assaults in Greenwich Village lead the frightening upturn, with a whopping 43 percent increase so far this year compared with the same period in 2008.

"I've never seen it like this before -- never, ever," said G. Simon Chafik, a female photographer who has lived in Manhattan for 15 years.

Other hot Manhattan neighborhoods tainted by the crime wave include TriBeCa, with a nearly 17 percent jump, and Gramercy, which has seen a 24 percent increase in assaults.

The danger zones also include the East Village from East 14th Street to Houston Street and the East River to Broadway, which has seen a 27.7 percent rise, from 47 to 60 assaults.

The Lower East Side has experienced a whopping 30 percent hike in assaults.

Residents say the recent violence in the popular West Village is particularly frightening because it had been so rare.

"I feel anxious -- there are muggings on my block," said writer Warren Ransom, 50.

The victims even include cops. One case involved a vicious anti-gay attack on an off-duty NYPD officer.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05192009/news/regionalnews/manhattan/violent_crime_wave_jolts_trendy_downtown_170010.htm

alpine, am i detecting a bit of glee in your tone regarding rising crime rates? if so, i hope you're mugged.

well, congratulations bears, it looks like you might get your 70% declines after all if the current crime trend continues. Just remember to never leave home without your bullet proof vest.

Hate to support alpine, but there has to be a correlation in the drop of funding for the NYPD (the cancelleation of graduating classes) and the increase in crime. This is where we will feel the effects most from a QOL standpoint.

Homicides up in New York City in 2008

NEW YORK (CNN) -- The number of homicides in New York City rose about four percent in 2008 compared with the previous year, preliminary figures from the city's police department showed.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/01/new.york.murder.rate/index.html

now alpine, if you want to add:

k) higher demand for psychological help for those that bought near or close the peak

then, i agree. that's a given. even higher divorce rates among those are a given. there's gonna be a lot of finger pointing on those couples that thought they were swimming in rock solid home equity but now finally understand that it's gone for good.

reddog, i don't think there are many who believe that the economic destruction that is occurring won't have some effect on QOL. That's not supporting alpine.

No, there doesn't have to be that correlation. You're assuming that crime is a natural force, like gravity, and that if not kept in check it will flourish. But another possibility is that the intent to commit crime increases and decreases without regard for downside/risk.

the post really was to discuss two things on my mind:

1) that buyers should be aware that as the severe economic slowdown continues and hits home for this local economy, the buildings they may choose to buy into can start to reflect side effects for their own financial conditions

and

2) the biggest bears, those that expect declines of 50-70% off peak (so a 1M pad sells for 300K to 500K or so), especially those in the 60%-70& camp, probably wouldnt want to live here if it gets that bad. In my opinion, the forces that kick in to take a general market that is trading down 40-45% or so, to down 60% to 70% or so (not random foreclosure sales, the general market), are the items that I noted. Not the best thing for any city's residents.

thats all.

The anxiety shows as Bears are yelling louder and louder 10% no 30% no 50% no 75% no 90% down from Peak!
Whatever that means. Here's the reality: Buyers, as we all have read, are coming back as that depression they were talkin about never happened. The recession is ending and banks are flush with cash. The VIX is back under 30, the Ted spread is around 50(close to norms, it was 450 basis after lehman). Those sellers who had to sell are selling/sold. The 2nd half of 2009 should see a nice surge in buying, once again driving prices higher as has been the case with Manhattan over and over again. have a great day!

What's funny is alpine moves so smoothly between the sour grapes of rufus and the idiocy of perfitz...

you think I like high crime? Why woudl I want high crime? That makes no sense.

we debated this a ways back too steve, I think 50% haircut would takes us closer to late 2001-2002 prices, after the market had a temporary adjustment after 9/11

I honestly can't see how one can argue that huge price declines will not result in higher crime. Read the data people.

no alpine, you only want crime to punish the people who refused to overpay for apartments. if they'd only open the checkbooks and pony up the cash you'd be happy to see low crime levels.

not saying you support crime just that a reduction in NYPD funding could lead to more of it. just like the economic downturn is messing with the subways which will also effect the QOL here.

45 people, offer accepted

Posted by Noah | May 19, 2009 11:49 AM

Is that all Noah??

one the other hand, it's better for a buyer to be mugged once in the street than to have to pay $1M more for the same unit. not such a bad deal, right? lol

Noah - how did your OH go this past weekend? Anything you can share?

Posted by OT | May 19, 2009 11:44 AM

admin, how bad is the mugging? cost benefit analysis needs to know. lol.

but overall i'm with UD on that, higher crime will drive the more risk averse away and those tend to be the ones with options and deeper pockets. that means a smaller buying pool. but not the end of the world either.

"admin, how bad is the mugging? cost benefit analysis needs to know. lol."

a purse taken here and there. it reminds me of the AARP, i prefer them to be able to mug me on a frequent basis, lets say once a year, than to free riding us (the young that is) the way they intend to do.

yes, thats all SteveF, quiet day

You're damned right admin, better be mugged $100 than overpaying $200K to a seller.
Now Alpine you've just proven you're the perfect American idiot who gets driven by this culture of fear from sensationalist news like the NY "garbage" Post and Fox 5. You're a real piece of work, man!

SteveF arent you proud of me! I said something bullish!

"45 people, offer accepted

Posted by Noah | May 19, 2009 11:49 AM "

"culture of fear from sensationalist news"

yep, somehow phrases like "Be Careful What You Wish For!" and "we are all in this together" tend to have a manipulative element to them. give them the freedom to wish what they want to wish for. i wish the AARP would let me opt out for example. lol

If nyc becomes as cheap as Detroit and equally crappy at the same time, would you guys move out or buy a properties here? Just curious...

No opinions?

To me, life is too short too live in a crappy place, but you can always make more money.

Qwll urban digs and TOP - why has crime not spiked incessantly in Los Angeles or SF or LV or Miami or many of the other cities that have already fallen 50% or so? I don't mean for Alipne to say "look their crime rate is higher than NYC!".

I mean, are there crime rates appreciably higher than they were at the peak of the bubble, and by an amount any decent econometric study would say is independant of the huge jump in unemployment (say in LA conty, which over 11% now?)

I don't buy the argument for one second that a decline in real estate prices alone leads to a spike in crime. There is zero evidence for it in the above mentioned places, and in fact ample evidence of the OPPOSITE during both the real estate run ups in the 1970s and 1980s in NYC and the other major cities (crime skyrocketed) and during the last bubble bursting (crime went way down in LA and NYC in particular despite lower real estate values.)

I expect alpine to pull sh** out fo his ass, but not urbandigs. Unless you have a study to back the claim up, I call BS.

lol jason. alpine's dixit translated: "be very scared! the city will not be able to afford new playgrounds if people are able to afford housing!!!".

justin, where would you move to? Kansas? what cosmopolitan city in the US isn't having major housing price declines?

cosmopolitan, how do you define that? cause people use it as "with people from all over the world" but many non-coastal cities are having immigrants from latinamerica and africa. that doesn't count?

But as many on StreetEasy would tell you, no other US city is as reliant on the financial industry as NYC. That's why the decline of NYC this time around will be more severe, blah blah. (Do I have to repeat all that?)

Manhattan has had crime waves, real estate crumbling and we survived and will again...this is a correction that is needed...living in Manhattan should not be only for the very wealthy.

Ill repeat, because the argument was missed again Jason:

"In my opinion, the forces that kick in to take a general market that is trading down 40-45% or so, to down 60% to 70% or so (not random foreclosure sales, the general market), are the items that I noted."

justin, just cause you insist. all i know of detroit is the airport. and it rocks in comparison to jfk and la guardia. i'm not rufus, just being honest.

sometimes nyc's infrastructure makes many 3rd world countries proud. crumbling ceilings in many subways, rats to count for fun running around in the rails and dirt. dirty streets could be solved without big funding, it's just basic education. it could be a source of revenue, fine everybody that's making the city a dirty one.

admin, intangibles and tangibles. not just the coasts. which attractive (subjective, obviously) major cities did not have a housing bubble? or will not be affected by high unemployment?

justin, you don't have to repeat anything. but where would you go for improved QOL?

All you guys who are broke and think that one day you'll be able to afford an apartment in Manhattan if you just trash the market long enough, you're payday will never come. The foreclosure rate in Manhattan just isn't rising, period. The high end buildings on Fifth and Park are barely leveraged and while there are good discounts to be had, no one's gonna sell at a 50% discount. If anyone here has any money (and judging by the rants, my guess is no) I'd suggest buying really good property at 30% off, waiting five or so years, and then engaging in self-congratulation. In addition to the price break, you get a good hedge against the impending devaluation of the dollar that is almost certain to come. To the "cash is king" crowd, I would suggest that you should act soon lest your cash be severely impaired.

"The high end buildings on Fifth and Park are barely leveraged and while there are good discounts to be had, no one's gonna sell at a 50% discount."

discount from where? from the peak? that's not a reasonable benchmark to use, but if you are interested there's already inventory in park below 40% initial asking prices. i agree that many are not leveraged but those don't matter as they didn't bid up prices either. how many of the transactions of the last 5 years were cash ones?

i've got some money. the real estate market can't have it.

Noah, the force that will drive down the prices from 40% off the peak to 50% off (or more) is the extra risk of default from your neighbors. Not only default on their mortgages, as a foreclosure next door will hurt your comps, but also a default on the maintenance.
As you and others are starting to realize you can no longer see a $1,500/month maintenance and assume that amount will stay constant. Buyers will need to price in the fact that their maintenance may actually be $3K or $4K for a while until defaulting buyers are evicted and new tenants who will have a lower cost basis move in. This added risk will force apartment buyers to offer less.
Eventually we will see investors jumping back into the market. We won't be able to sell 11,000 units one at a time so we'll need investors to buy all 10 units in one building. But these buyers won't come in until monthly mortgage and maintenance expenses are near projected rental income.
I predict we come off 50% from the top. (But that only puts us back to about 2002 prices meaning lots of people won't be underwater and NYC won't revert back to the 70s.)

"As you and others are starting to realize you can no longer see a $1,500/month maintenance and assume that amount will stay constant. Buyers will need to price in the fact that their maintenance may actually be $3K or $4K for a while until defaulting buyers are evicted and new tenants who will have a lower cost basis move in."

instead of rising maintenance, buildings could cover that with reserves, right? is there 100% transparency on how many owners in the building you are buying are late in their maintenance payments?

sick of losers - wow. denying a credit bubble. Alrighty then. Heres a question:

1165 Park, 15C/14C, Classic 8 - what do you think it is in contract for? And where would that have traded at peak? lets be real here and check back in a few months when it closes

jazz - Im with you on that statement. I think you'll see pockets of distress though and cases where it could be more. Its great to see banks make money Q1, I hope it continues because we need that tax revenue here. I fear massive service cuts.

UD-my family sold a 3 bd at 1165 (15D) in 1974. Guess price. Admin, coops will eventually get back maintenance-they are ahead of the banks.

xkcd.com/552

i cant imagine..100K?

$52,500 was the actual price. I saw the listing for the PH you mentioned. Can't remember the exact price but I was stunned. Hard really to make sense of it. One thing for sure is that paper money has been trashed since then. More of that to come. This makes it quite hard to predict how far down paper money prices will go from here-perhaps not that much. Maybe we should predict the decline in ounces of gold-certainly more.

Wow. Just, wow.

According to the BLS's inflation calculator, $54,000 in 1974 has the buying power of $233,569.17 today.
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl

I don't think we are going to experience anywhere near the kind of decline that would bring those figures in line, but it certainly supports Aboutready's theme that families have been stretched to the breaking point.

Vulture buyers will swoop in on that penthouse at $234k
Poor Noah -- I feel for him.
Buyer diligence leads to loss of livelihood. Broker floored.
I am really surprised actually, but everyone is allowed their one day of bitterness in the face of disappointment. Noah and Urbandigs are jewels to cherish.

Regardless the compass points in the direction Noah has signalled for some time.
The recent inventory improvement and stock market flowering may took root, but the fundamentals still point to the daisies in the ground and not the pie in the sky

"justin, you don't have to repeat anything. but where would you go for improved QOL?"

Simple. If nyc becomes as bad as detroit, anywhere better than detroit would do. Where would that be? Maybe whatever city that becomes the center of the wind mill industry?

Will nyc become detroit? I don't see why not if the doomsayers turn out to be correct.

Do I wish the doomsayers turn out to be correct so I can save a few hundred K on real estate? I guess you know the answer.

justin, this isn't so that you can save a few hundred K. this is so that the city will once again be a feasible place for people other than those employed in finance to live. so that buyers won't have to stretch so far that their eyeballs are about to pop out of their sockets. i seriously doubt that i'm even going to buy in NYC. i've got no vested interest here, unless it is as a humanitarian who understands the concept of affordability.

this is a falsely inflated market. it has served to enrich a very few, disproportionately. some pain may be necessary to return the prices to earth, but once again, go talk to the people who inflated the bubble. they've got a whole lot to account for.

evnyc, thanks for that. I guess I was wrong about pricing things in gold. In late 1974, an ounce of gold cost about $180, which means you would have needed 292 ounces of gold to buy my family's apartment. 292 ounces of gold today at $930/ounce is only worth about $270,000. So a lot more than paper money inflation is at work here.

evnyc, i missed your post, but clearly i'm continuing my theme. that is a stunning calculation. you've just made my point far better than i could have hoped to.

"If nyc becomes as cheap as Detroit and equally crappy at the same time, would you guys move out or buy a properties here?"

Good question. I guess I would have to see with my own 2 eyes how bad the situation is. If it's really bad, I would move. If it's bad, but not Hell, I would stay and, with the money I save, buy tons of security, including an armored car and an AK47

Did someone mention crime in Las Vegas?

Nevada's Crime Rate Has Jumped

http://www.klas-tv.com/Global/story.asp?S=2325694

I'm starting to feel like everyone has me on ignore. Lately I post about something and then 2 days later people start to talk about it like no one mentioned it before.

but I think people are making a mistake here in recognizing what is CAUSE and what is EFFECT. It almost seems like people are acting as if prices go down, is will cause crime, etc. to go up. I realize Noah's premise in the blog post isn't exactly that (although i don't think he strongly enough asserts it's the other way around), but I also don't think it's as black and white as some of the assertions: i think there is some (large) likelihood that those things WOULD cause that kind of shock to the price system of Coops and Condos, but as has been debated over the "pricing" threads recently, it isn't a layup that these things are NECESSARY for those kind of price drops.it's sort of the obverse of "necessary but not sufficient"; it's sufficient but not necessary.

In other words, if those things happened, you would get the results talked about, but even if those things DIDN'T occur, you could still get those results. which is why I have to in this case disagree with Noah, because I think it is entirely possible for those who want prices to end up falling 50% without all of the negative things. Now, as I stated ?yesterday?, i do think we will see a bunch of those things happen, and I think we already HAVE seen a number of them occur (my anecdote about my friend being asked for the first time ever to pay her cab up front to drive her to Brooklyn). But I don't think things have to fall off a cliff for a 50% total reduction from peak. As i stated yesterday, all it takes is a lack of consumer confidence in RE, and a different group of buyers entering the playing field.

But perhaps I'm being overly harsh, because Noah isn't saying all these thing are going to happen, I guess I just think his logic has a glitch in it. Maybe it's just because I've been thru the process of what actually happen when buildings go bad and seen how they make it out the other side, and it's really not as bad socially as is being made out. What I mean by that (and maybe I'm misreading the blog post) is that Coops and condos going bust and even taking people's savings with them won't cause nearly the blip on the socioeconomic radar as many other things in the economy which will FAR outweigh them in terms of effects. If you were around during the 1989 thru 1995 period, there were PLENTY of Coops (not so many condos, like we'll see this time) that had TONS of issues with underlying debt, non-paying Sponsors, etc. And while it made life difficult economically for a bunch of people living in those buildings, the LONG TERM effects were not as bad as everyone made them out to be as "white knight" capital came in and fixed those problems over time (Look at companies like the Cheshire Group) with examples of all the buildings which were MacArthur Portfolio conversions by MJ Raines et al, to all hosts of lesser (but often huge in terms of number of units) out in Brooklyn and Queens (like The Howard).

My point is that while the conditions listed would cause a downward pressure on RE prices, I think it's seting up a straw man to knock down to say that those "wishing for prices to come down" should be careful because it translates into wishing for all the other bad stuff to happen because it is thoroughly possible for one to happen without the other.

"According to the Nevada Department of Public Safety's annual crime report, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police responded to more homicides than any other police agency in the state. The total in 2003 was 147, averaging out to about one murder every other day."

your an idiot joedavis. How dare you bash Noah like that. He is the smartest person in the room. You sir are a clown.

"In my opinion, the forces that kick in to take a general market that is trading down 40-45% or so, to down 60% to 70% or so (not random foreclosure sales, the general market), are the items that I noted."

As you later say, you'll see pockets of it, though. I can point out numerous examples of Coops (i.e. every unit in a building) going down by that or more from last peak till 1992. And it's when the foreclosure sales become less than "random" and more like "routine" where this happens, and once to get a convergence of several factors, it doesn't take all that much to get the snowball rolling down the hill. think about this, for example: in a 50 year old coop, odds are there are people who bought for very little and have lots of equity all the way up to people who bought at the most recent peak and are now under water. But if a building got built as a condo in 2008, EVERYONE is under water. So you might call the whole building going out a "pocket", but you get enough of it happening and it "makes the market" as people either decide to buy in one of those buildings at the "fire sale" prices, or don't, but still USE those prices when benchmarking what they are going to pay for any other unit.

I think it was Ray Kelly who stated that it wasn't the decrease in crime that contributed to economic growth, but that economic growth contributed to the decrease in crime. So if the economy tanks, then you should start worrying about crime.

How's the economy doing?

"instead of rising maintenance, buildings could cover that with reserves, right? is there 100% transparency on how many owners in the building you are buying are late in their maintenance payments?"

How many buildings have the type of reserves needed to do that if the number of defaults are substantial? And then what do they do when the boiler breaks down or whatever it is happens that the reserves were really put in place for to begin with?

30yrs REO 20,

If prices decline, so does tax revenue. In such a case, one or both of 2 things will happen:

1. The city drastically cuts back on services, inclduing cops and fire

2. Taxes skyrocket

If you want to see what happens in this type of case, look at California. Their new budget has taxed everything but the air people breathe. I think they are even going to release 20,000 prison inmates to save money!

So what does all this mean? it means a lower quality of life, a la 1970s.

30yrs i don't have you on ignore. most of these themes have been repeated incessantly on this board for a couple of years, although the tone has gone from mostly bull to mostly bear (i was scorned for a good year due to my silly bearish ways).

and yes, you are right. those things may happen or not, but regardless real estate prices must fall.

towerofshred, how's Ken Lewis doing in the stock market these days?

"I think it was Ray Kelly who stated that it wasn't the decrease in crime that contributed to economic growth, but that economic growth contributed to the decrease in crime."

Crime rates can be connected to the economy. When the economy goes downhill, people commit crimes of opportunity to make a buck. So while crimes like rape that do not yield a profit may very well go down, robbery, grand theft auto, drug dealing, prostitution, arson, and other crimes of opportunity will most certainly increase.

Aboutready and Flatiron, what surprises me about the gold is its constancy. The $40k difference seems like peanuts given the rampant price inflation that has occurred during the specified period. I'm not a goldbug and really know very little about it, but my interest is piqued. Saving paper dollars doesn't exactly seem to get you very far these days.

And REO, I read and like your posts. I am often posting at work so I don't often have time to respond to your ideas, but please keep them coming.

I thought I read somewhere that 1 high paying Wall street job supports 20 service jobs.

And how is good ole Kenny boy? Haven't seen him in a bit.

From the same story, you idiot alpine - and this is something Noah would get:

'By just looking at the raw numbers, it does appear to be an increase in homicides. But the report doesn't take into account the growth that has occurred in the valley over the year.

Lt. Tom Monahan, with Metro Homicide, says, "If you compare apples to apples, if you will, you will find that there is no increase in the homicide rate per 100,000 residents. It has stayed pretty stable for the last three, four, five years. It's about 12 homicides per 100,000 residents.""

Pretty stable in LV for 4 or 5 years on a per capita basis. Idiot.

And what about Miami? LA? SF? Chicago? Every other city with such steep declines? The entire nations of Spain and the UK for that matter...

here is an interesting article about the UK. Apparently our friends acorss the pond see a connection between the economy and crime:

Police expect crime surge during recession

AN extra 2000 officers will be needed over the next three years to help cope with an expected sharp surge in burglaries because of the recession, the head of a police body in the UK said.
The Police Federation, which represents about 140,000 officers in England and Wales, said its research indicated that property crime would increase by almost 25 per cent in the next two years.

The Federation says this extra demand comes when the number of officers is declining compared to the population as a whole.

The body's chairman Paul McKeever said the number of officers per 100,000 people had dropped from 260 to 254 since 2006 and would be down to 251 by 2012, putting the service under additional pressure.

"With crime rates set to increase as the recession deepens, politicians of all parties need to sit up and take notice of this research, which clearly shows that the resilience of the service will be damaged unless police officer strength is increased over the next three years," he said.

A recent survey of 233 police departments by the Police Executive Research Forum found that 100 departments — 43 percent — reported rising levels of what they felt were recession-related crimes.

Forty percent said that thefts had increased in recent months, 39 percent reported that robberies were up and 32 percent said burglaries had surged 20 percent.

That's not surprising, said Richard Rosenfeld, a sociologist at the University of Missouri-St. Louis who studies national crime patterns.

"There's little question that crime rates peak during or, on occasion, immediately after a recessionary period," Rosenfeld said. "And that's been the case for much of the (post-World War II) period."

It's happened in each of the last five recessions, he said.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/244/story/62503.html

"Manhattan has had crime waves, real estate crumbling and we survived and will again...this is a correction that is needed...living in Manhattan should not be only for the very wealthy."

I don't think too many here remember what Manhattan was REALLY like after the "white flight' took hold and the majority of what would be considered "good neighborhoods" were still dangerous and the effect it had on real estate prices. As late as the early 70's people who lived at 16 West 16th Street hailed cabs at the corner of 14th Street to drive them the 3 blocks home and make sure they got into the lobby before leaving.

Now, I'm not predicting this will happen: I think we've come too far for that to happen without more serious financial meltdowns occurring. But it did happen, so it's not impossible. When the market started coming down (actually for a long time while the market was going up - probably 5 years) I predicted openly that whenever the market turned around (and stated I had no idea when it was going to happen, that year, the next, 5 years, etc) that we would not see a plateau, but a steep correction from where ever the peek ended up at. Not too long about, people called 5% off to be the bottom and I said I thought more likely closer to 50%. And now, I don't know where it will end up. I certainly think 50% can EASILY happen. But I don't know if it's going to get worse than that (hey, think about what would happen if prices when all the way down to the last PEEK pricing; as a general concept, a tough after a bubble bursts is not inconceivable in ANY type of market). It will depend on exactly how bad things get with the economy in general, and what I do believe is that things are far worse than we are trying to be led to believe, because if they told us the truth, there would be such a panic that you might actually see something like a revolution or an actual class war.

Last summer Chicago saw one of it's highest murder rates. More people were murdered in Chicago than the number of U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq:

125 Shot Dead In Chicago Over Summer
Total Is About Double The U.S. Troop Death Toll In Iraq

http://cbs2chicago.com/local/chicago.summer.shootings.2.810166.html

But it was THE OPPOSITE of what Alpine is saying. Crime went up starting in the sixties in NYC and across the USA...THEN you got white flight. Not the other way around. Period.

No alpine, you said REAL ESTATE PRICES and crime. No one disputes that property related crimes go up with ecnomic hardship. You have been arguing for months that REAL ESTATE PRICE DECLINES in and of themselves makes crime go up.

"The entire nations of Spain and the UK for that matter..."

You can't compare the U.S. crime rate to those of Europe. Ours is much higer because in Europe, the people do not have guns.

Phoenix saw prices decline 50%. Today it is the kidnapping capital of the U.S.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-drug-kidnappings12-2009feb12,0,1264800.story

"Ours is much higer because in Europe, the people do not have guns."

Every single man in Switzerland is required to have a gun.

Our crime rate for non-violent crimes is significantly higher than any other rich nation. Our crime rate for non-gun related crimes is significatnly higher than any other rich nation.

Try again.

I agree that prices 50% down doesn't necessary mean more crime. I also find the word vulture referred to an apt buyer hoping to buy for 50% less (after a price hike of 300% in less than a decade!) too extreme... (specially under the light of the phenomenal macro carnage we are going through.) There is some dissonance it Noah's title. I think.

30yrs, you seem to be taking yourself a bit to seriously. Many posters don't real all threads, or even parts of them, who knows what happened with your comment... If you posted something before and went unnoticed, you can link to the thread, or c&p it. Sometimes posters bump up the thread and see if somebody else responds. This is a virtual place, and attention is not taken for granted. Unless, of course, you become an SE oracle, entertainer or main provider of valuable information...at that point people will likely respond very fast. You are quite new here, and it looks like you have a lot of interesting stories/facts/ thoughts to share. Please do, but take it easy...It's not worth the sweat.

Stick to your subject. Proof thatdeclines in real estate leads to higher crime.

And hey, not to paint too rosy a picture, but the late seventies brought the no wave movement to what is now the East Village. Regardless of what you think of the art and music that came from that period, it's pretty compelling.

I would argue that crime leads to lower real estate prices. That seems to be the relationship I recall reading about, not the other way around.

not in England, which is one of the countries you mentioned.

"Proof thatdeclines in real estate leads to higher crime."

Price declines lead to the economy weakening. When the economy weakens, crime goes up. It's as simple as that.