How bad is housing?

JuiceMan: "Tisk, tisk, tisk steve. Personal insults?"

JuiceMan: "Please take your douchebaggery somewhere else."

Yup.

JuiceMan: "price per square foot has been relatively stable for the past three years"

What JuiceMan neglected was the first part, which says, "adjusted for inflation."

Are we now adjusting for inflation, or using nominal figures?

LICC: "Funny how the only ones unwilling to bet, and doing all sorts of contortions to come up with reasons why they won't, are steve and dco."

Read again, young grasshopper.

"However, the bet is flawed because there is an enormous amount of new inventory coming online in the next year."

Hmmm, wouldn't that support your theory of a 30-50% reduction? If all of this new inventory is flooding the market, wouldn't that be bad for me and good for for you?

steve, I think it is important to note that douchebaggery is behavior, so I was insulting your behavior not you personally. If you would have said in your last post, that point is not so bright, that is very different than you aren't bright. See the difference? I'll let you off the hook though, because I know deep down you really admire me and appreciate it when I take the time to pay attention to you.

"Are we now adjusting for inflation, or using nominal figures?"

you tell us steve and dco. What are your 30-50% reductions based on?

JM- Everytime I explain my reasoning, the "NYC RE Marketing Machine" AKA the "Crew" just cry about it being BS and make some counter argument. I also don't think you care enough as to why I believe the reductions will be nothing short of 30%. If you want I'm sure you can find some old posts which I explain my rational. However like said, I don't think you really care one way or another.

Why don't you explain why you don't think price will fall?

dco probably doesn't even know if he is adjusting his downturn prediction for inflation. All he knows is to yell "30-50% down" over and over.

I never said prices wouldn't fall, I said prices wouldn't fall 30-50% by next year. What I was attempting to do was have some fun and get everyone involved in a harmless contest. dco, I didn't start it to mock you, I thought it would be fun and we could have some laughs. That was until Mr. Backpedal Buzzkill entered and pissed in my corn flakes.

"I know deep down you really admire me and appreciate it when I take the time to pay attention to you."

Absolutely. And everybody else on the Obama election team.

The bet isn't mine LICC, I just said, flawed or not, I'd join in for $100 to charity in a year. I just need to know exactly what we're betting on, what the parameters are.

I think the situation in Manhattan is pretty bad, and it will probably get worse for a few years. It is always difficult to talk in a macro sense about housing, because every apartment, and every block and every neighborhood is different. So, do I see price reductions at 740 Park, no. However, I do think it is helpful to look carefully at the factors that drove up prices in Manhattan, and see how healthy they are. I never believed that the appreciation we enjoyed over the past 5 or so years was a bubble, rather I think that there were several sound fundamentals that were operating at high levels.

1) Strong local economy...The local economic picture is worse now than it was, and with more Wall Street layoffs coming, I don't see the local picture picking up any time soon.

2) Several years of record bonuses on Wall Street. Those days are over for a while, and we all know that bonuses are a big driver of real estate values.

3) Good leadership in Mayor's office. I am not being political, but Rudy and Mike ran this city better than anyone else has, and a 16 year run of competent leadership is unprecedented. Whoever serves next will not be as capable.

4) Cheap mortgages that were easy to get. The cheaper the mortgage, the more house you can buy. We all know what has been going on in the credit markets. This has constrained demand dramatically and will continue to do so for the forseeable future.

5) Low inventory. For much of this run, inventory levels were very low. Right now they are at around 7500, and I suspect after Labor day they will begin creeping up and, in my opinion, will hit numbers approaching 8500.

I think that Manhattan will always be a destination place, and it will eventually come back to what it was for the past several years in terms of desirability. However, I think that time is several years into the future. My guess is that prices will be down between another 10-15% by next July.

I would like to play the bet, JuiceMan, but all I have to ante up right now is my "Pope Benedict XVI Visits Yankee Stadium" souvenir button. Bet? Or how about.... if people want to get adventurous, wager that if RE goes down a certain percentage, putting them 20% underwater, for instance, the loser of the bet agrees to assume the mortgage and let the underwater owner get out scott free without having to pay another dime? Then what do you do if it doesn't go down that much? 10,000 Pope Benedict XVI buttons? A New York Yankees t-shirt? A lifetime seat directly behind the catcher at the new Yankee Stadium?

JM: "I think it is important to note that douchebaggery is behavior, so I was insulting your behavior not you personally."

There is no difference between what you think and what you do, unless you don't think about what you do.

Which may be the case.

See the Latin: agitare, cogitare, for details.

Ok back to the bet - it can't be based off of listing prices. To irrelevant. In a down market nothing gets sold at the listing price. If you base it off of that you are just making a bet based on how unrealistic sellers are. Have to use Faustus' method. Like I said - I'm in for the charity bet. Let's make this thing happen. No more bickering. And let's make it 20% down so that it is fun for everyone.

sorry - "too" irrelevant

I'm in it for the charity bet since I'd give a lot more than that anyway. But WHAT IS THE FINAL BET?

I agree that list prices are arbitrary. ACRIS sale prices? Are they detailed enough?

Nominal or inflation-adjusted?

Miller-Samuel or Streeteasy?

Somebody pleeze tell me!

Let's use the "search recorded sales" feature on streeteasy, unless someone has a better idea. (I don't know what ACRIS is but it sounds good to me). We can pick a price range (below $3 million?) for the last 30 days leading up to the final day, and go by price/ ft. That search produces 628 listings. Someone's going to have to make a big spreadsheet.

pick a recently completed condo - compile their sales as of the official closing date from ACRIS (city records viewable online) - pick a date 18 mos. from that official closing date when the biggest # of units are recorded as havingsold - compare any sales between 12mos to 18mos after initial date - look for units in same line, just as people have done in threads here

I vote to use the Charleston, 225 E. 34th Street, for the wager.

I wager my Pope Benedict XVI Visits Yankee Stadium button that prices will be down 10%

I have a John Paul II statuette on Fire Island, but I hung it from the blinds cord.

You don't want to give me a Benedict button. :0

Sure steve, Manhattan real estate is exactly like West Virginia, Florida, Oregon, and every other place in the country. No differences whatsoever. You are getting more and more comical.

Hmm, Manhattan rents have not declined: http://www.observer.com/2008/real-estate/no-we-can-t

but...but....but.....everyone is leaving the city, rents are going down, no one will move here, unemployement will skyrocket, oil will reach 200, DOW will hit 10000.......RUN FOR THE HILLS

LMAO

"There is more doorman inventory this month than we’ve seen in a long time, yet prices keep rising. Conversely, prices in non-doorman properties have come down, and inventories for those units have followed suit. But if it’s a widely-accepted fact that the market has, indeed, turned—even the largest companies concede, finally—why are prices continuing to increase in service buildings? As I’m not an economist, I simply observe what’s before me and attempt to offer insight into market trends. With the market as off-kilter as it is this month, I must conclude that owners of doorman buildings are resistant to lowering prices and, instead, are offering incentives while actually increasing prices to offset those concessions. Unfortunately, this strategy appears to be backfiring, and inventories continue to mount as the season hits the midway point. My main concern is that these accumulating vacancies may not be absorbed even if prices are lowered—which is why, as we head into August, I strongly urge all property owners to take a hard look at their marketing plans for the subsequent months so as not to be overwhelmed by an excess of unrented units as the busy season
comes to a close."

tregny.com

there's your answer.

JuiceMan: "DOW will hit 10000."

Moving the target again, JuiceMan? Let me go back to your posts on the idiot's thread, commenting on Dow will hit 11000, which it did, and it fell below.

Or oil will hit $150, and it fell below.

LICC: "Manhattan real estate is exactly like West Virginia, Florida, Oregon, and every other place in the country. No differences whatsoever."

You're right - it is.

LICC's link: http://www.observer.com/2008/real-estate/no-we-can-t:

"But the layoffs have been gradual: about 2,000 in the city’s financial services sector in the past year, according to the state’s Labor Department."

Truth of the matter: "Layoffs on Wall Street tend to have less of an immediate effect on unemployment statistics because financial companies often hand out severance that tides people over for weeks or months, delaying their need to seek unemployment benefits, analysts said."

http://www.balconynewyork.com/2008/06/20/layoffs-show-on-new-york-unemployment-rolls/

Don't just parrot statistics - look at why they are. Some rents are up, some are down, but rental inventory is swelling. Layoffs on Wall Street haven't affected the unemployment statistics because when you get a package, you're technically still employed for up to 6 months.

And don't change your goal posts: Dow 11,000 has become Dow 10,000. And if we reach it (I doubt it) it will be Dow 9,000!

I didn't change my goal post. I never said 11000 or 10000, someone posted 10000 the other day which is where I got it from.

Bottom line steve, Manhattan housing isn't great but it isn't crashing either. At some point you have to admit all of your short term doomsday predictions have not materialized. Rents and prices are stagnating right now and could continue like this for a while. Call it like it is steve, you will have more credibility that way. We are in a wait and see market.

JM has a point. Neither he nor I are bullish on Manhattan real estate, and I think we both expect a softening and some decline. However, steve maintains a pigheaded view, despite all the flaws in his arguments that are clearly pointed out, that NYC real estate will crash. When indicators show signs that NYC real estate will not crash, steve can't handle looking wrong. He must have some insecurity or self-esteem issues.

Well I never said Dow 10000 either, I thought BSC was the bottom and was wrong. We went slightly lower than that, the Feds are taking appropriate action (limiting naked short sales, investigating rumors) and inappropriate action (unlimited line of credit to Freddie and Fannie - boy I'd like that!).

"Manhattan housing isn't great but it isn't crashing either."

You are absolutely correct. I believe we are at the inflection point, and it's downhill from here as it's been elsewhere. I could be wrong - I have $100 staked on it, though, so watch out, I'll be consulting a psychic.

"At some point you have to admit all of your short term doomsday predictions have not materialized."

I'll reword that slightly:

"At some point you have to admit all of your short term doomsday predictions have not YET materialized."

Admitted.

Nor have prices gone up 10% as you predicted earlier in the year.

LICC: "steve maintains a pigheaded view"

Translation: I disagree with you.

LICC: "despite all the flaws in his arguments that are clearly pointed out"

Translation: LICC made up his own methodology not supported by any economic or financial theory or data, claims that the Case-Shiller methodology is dumb and that means and medians are not affected by the inventory for sale in a particular period, and can't understand why I don't agree with him.

"that NYC real estate will crash."

Manhattan will, I don't know about the rest of NYC.

"When indicators show signs that NYC real estate will not crash"

What "signs" are those, pray tell?

"steve can't handle looking wrong."

I just admitted that I was wrong about the Dow - I readily admit that I'm wrong, whenever I am.

"He must have some insecurity or self-esteem issues."

LMAO, Dr. von East River View.

"Nor have prices gone up 10% as you predicted earlier in the year."

That, I have never predicted. I have been in the flat camp for 9 months.

"I have $100 staked on it, though, so watch out, I'll be consulting a psychic"

Glad you are in steve, it will be interesting. Now we just need to figure out how to measure it. It is probably better if you and I stay out of the that discussion. I'm sure dmag and LICC (and others) can put something interesting together. Have you actually ever been to a psychic?

"Now we just need to figure out how to measure it."

Agreed. I will chime in if I believe it's unrealistic, and you should, as well.

"Have you actually ever been to a psychic?"

Yeah, it was fun, and she was pretty good. She knew the names of all the people in the pictures that I showed her.

Creepy.

steve, again you make things up. I never said Case-Shiller is dumb, I said that the way you apply it is dumb. The weakness is in you, not in the methodology. I also never said that means and medians are not affected by inventory for sale. Do you often have imaginery conversations?

LICC: "steve, again you make things up. I never said Case-Shiller is dumb, I said that the way you apply it is dumb."

LICC: "Leave it to steve to say that looking at one individual apartment is a better indicator than looking at the mean or average of the whole market. The man doesn't know the meaning of the word objective."

LICC, the record stands. There is only one way to apply the Case-Shiller methodology, so you're talking out your....

LICC: "I also never said that means and medians are not affected by inventory for sale"

LICC: "In a sample size we are talking about (streeteasy listings), the median would not have this big skewing effect that you claim."

Your words come back to haunt you.

Got to love all the rationalizing.

The haircut has already begun, the numbers get worse every month, and we're already in the biggest NYC and Manhattan sales declines in YEARS.

I guess the bitter bubble buyers figure if they post enough, noone will notice.

steve, your reading comprehension skills are pretty weak. If you want a sense of the overall market, looking at the mean or median of the entire market is a better indicator than looking at one individual apartment. You somehow comprehended that statement into me saying Case-Shiller is dumb.

In a large sample size, a very small amount of extreme sales would not greatly skew the median. You have comprehended that statement to me saying that means and medians are not affected by inventory for sale.

The record stands - steve needs to go back to the 8th grade and re-take reading comprehension until he passes.

> If you want a sense of the overall market, looking at the mean or median
> of the entire market is a better indicator than looking at one individual apartment.

It does in fact sound like you don't understand Case-Shiller, because it is certainly not the latter.

Case Shiller is much more accurate than mean/median calculations, which can not factor in *what* is being sold. If primarily one bedrooms sell this year, and primarily two bedrooms sell next year, medians and means can both show "growth" even if avg. for 1 bedrooms and 2 bedrooms both DECLINE.

Given that this exact type of thing has happened - with new condos vs. co-ops in this case - those numbers become even less useful.

Case Shiller collects data on a number of cases (not 1, a whole boatload) of same property sales.

Its like when retailers report same store sales.... you need those to tell if sales are growing, or if they just opened more stores (even unsuccessfully).

> The record stands - steve needs to go back to the 8th grade and re-take
> reading comprehension until he passes.

Only after you take math.

Actually, LICC, since I'm a translator by trade with a graduate degree in literature my reading comprehension skills are pretty high.

"You somehow comprehended that statement into me saying Case-Shiller is dumb."

"Leave it to steve to say that looking at one individual apartment is a better indicator than looking at the mean or average of the whole market."

Case-Shiller does not look at "one individual apartment"; it looks at the trajectory of same-unit sales over time, using large metropolitan areas (and thus a large sample size). It is FAR better than median or mean because it corrects for distortions in the sample.

"In a large sample size, a very small amount of extreme sales would not greatly skew the median."

You are absolutely correct, for a large sample size. I advise you to look at Miller Samuel's 2Q2008 Manhattan real-estate report. Go no further than the headline which - to save you the trouble - reads, "Rising Prices Skewed by Mix as Number of Sales Falls."

That was for a total of 3,081 co-op and condo sales which is, historically, quite a high number for Manhattan.

Ergo, the sample size is not large enough to offset the effect of outliers.

"The record stands - steve needs to go back to the 8th grade and re-take reading comprehension until he passes."

No, LICC, I understand quite well, and I know what I'm talking about. Eddie is right - you need to take remedial math.

This, however, deserves a special entry all its own:

"You somehow comprehended that statement into me saying Case-Shiller is dumb."

Let us streamline what you just wrote: "You ... comprehended that statement into...."

"To comprehend into," is what you wrote.

And I have no reading skills?!

You can break down the universe however you like. You can look at the medians of certain apartment types. If you want a general sense of the entire market, a median is more useful than looking at one property. Eddie, take some courses on statistics and quantitative analysis then get back to us.

Then this part:

"into me saying."

"Me saying"? What, precisely, is "me saying"?

Perchance, "My saying?"

Here - let's put your writing skills into English: "You somehow construed that statement to mean that I said that Case-Shiller is dumb."

That better?

steve, you also need lots of help in logic. You constantly draw invalid conclusions from irrelevant assumptions. Try reading the Miller Samuel report. The headline is next to a mountain chart showing average prices. I assume you understand the difference between average and median, and how skewing could occur with respect to both. Read the report further and they note the difference in the overall median and the median adjusted by removal of Plaza and 15 CPW sales. The median went down slightly (3%), not nearly enough of a "skew" to change anyone's analysis. Stick to translating documents and leave the intelligent analysis to others.

> If you want a general sense of the entire market, a median is more useful than looking at one
> property.

One more time, SLOWLY for you. You are comparing nonsense. No measure we've talking about is "looking at one property". Case Shiller is not "looking at one property". If you think anything we're talking about is "looking at one property" (after 4-5 posts noting the claim was BS) then you are an idiot or a 3rd grader.

> Eddie, take some courses on statistics and quantitative analysis then get back to us.

Well, I was required to take 4 classes in econometrics for my degree. And 2 more in "regular" statistics. Hell, pretty much my entire major was "quantatative analysis". Think that qualifies?

When you finish third grade, then get back to us.

BTW, "us" is plural. When you say "get back to us" and you're only talking about yourself, you are making yet another mistake.

So it's your claim, LICC, that the sales of just two buildings is not enough of a "skew" to change anyone's analysis.

Okay, first of all, for the entire market, the price increase with those two buildings was 14.5%; without those buildings it was 11.2%, and you claim that it is "slightly down (3%)."

You need to take a course in auditing for materiality. That is not a 3% decline - it is a 23% decline: (14.5% - 11.2%) / 14.5% = -23%.

You also need to read the subheading under "Condos": "More Inventory, Yet Price Indicators Show Gains."

Sound like the rental market? Sound like an inflection point?

"leave the intelligent analysis to others."

Others have given intelligent analysis - just not yet you.

"When you say "get back to us" and you're only talking about yourself, you are making yet another mistake."

Actually, Eddie, I think it's delusions of grandeur. Giuliani used to refer to himself in the royal "we," as well.

steve, again you are mixing your variables. The 3% change was in the median price. Are you always this dishonest in your presentations.

Eddie, I know you have trouble with complicated concepts, but try to keep up. "Us" referred to the streeteasy board's readers and commenters. Read past posts, steve very often drew conclusions on the market based on his one rental apartment. I didn't reference Case-Shiller in that regard. In the past when I have shown the falsity of steve's use of Case-Shiller, it had nothing to do with the number of buildings examined. It had to do with the locality of the market reviewed. steve made another false statement that I had said Case-Shiller was dumb. I corrected him and pointed out that I never said that but I do think his application of Case-Shiller is dumb. steve wrongly, as usual, mixed up the mean/median discussion with the Case-Shiller discussion.

Eddie: " No measure we've talking about is . . ." Wow Eddie, what terrible grammar! Also, learn how to spell "quantitative" before you proclaim yourself and expert.

> "Us" referred to the streeteasy board's readers and commenters.

No, THEY seem to get math and English. You are the one with the issues...

> Read past posts, steve very often drew conclusions on the market based
> on his one rental apartment.

Wow, THAT is a stretch. The posts you responded to and quoted were specifically about Case Shiller. Why not claim you were responding to posts from 1983?

Jesus, what a rationalization.

> Actually, Eddie, I think it's delusions of grandeur.

LOL. I think you hit that one on the head.

> learn how to spell "quantitative" before you proclaim yourself and expert.

Lets see, which is worse... typo on "quantitative" or typo (and thats giving you the benefit of the doubt, I think you actually meant to type that) on the word "AN".

;-)

Oh my lord.

Dude, seriously, finish 3rd grade.

"The 3% change was in the median price."

No. A decrease from 14.5% to 11.2% is a 23% bias, not a 3% bias.

"Are you always this dishonest in your presentations."

There's nothing dishonest in that. Look at it the other way: an increase from 11.2% to 14.5% is not a 3.3% increase; it is a 29% increase: 11.2 * 1.29 = 14.48.

This is so easy. If I have $11.20 in a bank account at the beginning of the year, and don't touch the account and at the end of the year wind up with $14.50, then someone has paid me 29% interest.

Or do you deny that?

"Read past posts, steve very often drew conclusions on the market based on his one rental apartment."

And many, many others.

"I didn't reference Case-Shiller in that regard. In the past when I have shown the falsity of steve's use of Case-Shiller, it had nothing to do with the number of buildings examined. It had to do with the locality of the market reviewed."

What is the "locality of the market"?

"steve made another false statement that I had said Case-Shiller was dumb. I corrected him and pointed out that I never said that but I do think his application of Case-Shiller is dumb."

I applied the Case-Shiller methodology the only way it can be applied - by following a single apartment over time. Show me where I did something else.

"steve wrongly, as usual, mixed up the mean/median discussion with the Case-Shiller discussion."

No. I used Case-Shiller to demonstrate the behavior of prices. Mean / median also demonstrate the behavior of prices. Just not as well as they are skewed to the sample, whereas with Case-Shiller, the sample remains the same.

I think LICC is getting a little defensive by trying to project onto me the very things that his own posts have shown he has done.

> I assume you understand the difference between average and median

Well, I know that *you* don't....

Median IS an average. (Arithmetic) mean is another type of average. So is mode. There are still more types.

Of course, I learned this in fourth grade. So maybe you'll get that *next* year.

> I think LICC is getting a little defensive by trying to project onto me the
> very things that his own posts have shown he has done.

You think so? ;-)

Reminds me a lot of the old saying... "If you have the facts on your side, argue the facts; if you have the law on your side, argue the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law on your side, then shout a lot and pound the table."

stevehjx - i WANT your Pope John Paul II statuette
problem is, I don't want to bet too much in the opposite direction from your bet
would you please bet that prices will go up 5% or stay flat so that you will lose and I can get your Pope John Paul II statuette....

everyone else, stop fighting and ante up with pope memorabilia - I would love to find a toy popemobile with a pope doll inside

how about that Charleston? How can anyone lose on that for a bet? If you think RE is going up, you can bank on the relatively low prices per sq ft and the convenient location. If you think RE is going down, you can bank on the fact that people sitting at the tables at the XII bar across the street look up from their beer mugs and see what brand socks people in the Charleston wear, and which channel they're watching on television

steve, I am not talking about the change from 14.5% to 11.2%. I am talking about the change in the median price. How many things can you and Eddie get wrong? Do you both know how petty you appear when you keep getting so defensive and you backpedal so much when you are shown to be wrong?

> How many things can you and Eddie get wrong

Probably a lot, but on this thread, the count on wrongs is LIC 100+, Steve 0, Eddie 0.

> Do you both know how petty you appear when you keep getting so defensive and you
> backpedal so much when you are shown to be wrong?

LOL. Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You've just been shown to be wrong over and over again, and you're resorting to insults, and they you try and claim thats what others are doing.

Sheesh.

Eddie, you are not very good at back and forth. Maybe you are around children a lot and they rub off on you. Take a breath, relax, tell yourself that you are an adult that can have intelligent, respectable discussions with others, and then get back to me (or us, if that makes you feel better).

Eddie, sorry to be nitpicky, but a median is not an average. nor is a mode. these are all different ways of describing (the location of) a distribution, but a median is never an average.

You may want to re-take 4th grade Eddie, then get back to us.

DTY and LIC, I think Eddie is right here about the definition of average (i.e. it can be used to denote mean, median, mode, etc.):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Average#Types

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/average

That said, I think we can all agree that the most common use of the term average is to denote the arithmetic mean.

"Do you both know how petty you appear when you keep getting so defensive and you backpedal so much when you are shown to be wrong?"

I am neither defensive nor am I backpedaling. The median price went down by 2.9% when adjusted, but the skew in the YOY increase was 23%. And that's what we were discussing: whether prices were rising or falling.

You will also note that the median price was skewed by the large number of new-development closings other than the 2 trophy buildings, which had had contracts signed probably 9-15 months earlier. It's not indicative of what's happening today.

TenthStreet is correct, LICC and dumber are incorrect: there are many types of "averages" mean (arithmetic, geometric, harmonic), median, mode. In real estate, median is usually what is meant by "average."

lowery, I just can't give up my JPII statuette. It means more to me than anything, especially hanging from a string.

LICC you've yet to answer: What is the "locality of the market"?

LIC:
> You may want to re-take 4th grade Eddie, then get back to us.

then 10thstreet:
> DTY and LIC, I think Eddie is right here about the definition of average

then the DICTIONARY:
"average... 6. relating to or constituting the middle value of an ordered set of values (or the average of the middle two in a set with an even number of values); "the median value of 17, 20, and 36 is 20"; "the median income for the year was $15,000" [syn: median] "

Holy Shit. ROTFL. LIC is so stupid that he even gets calling others wrong wrong.

Finish 3rd grade. Seriously. Your last 10 posts have been nothing but lousy attempts at personal insults. I'm sorry you get beat up every time you show up for school, but you HAVE to finish before you try posting again.

said dumberthanyou "Eddie, sorry to be nitpicky" (and then he goes on to make an error)

Aren't you the idiot who overextended yourself to buy a WAAAAY overpriced one bedroom in LIC with your girlfriend, and now can't afford the payments?

Looks like we got 2 LIC suckersin the house...

"You constantly draw invalid conclusions from irrelevant assumptions."

Oh, LICC, each time I read what you write, I further LMAO.

There is no such thing as an "irrelevant assumption" because conclusions are not drawn from assumptions, but from premises. Second of all, premises cannot be "irrelevant"; they are merely statements of fact (or not). If the conclusion draw from the premises, factual or otherwise, is illogical, the assumptions are not irrelevant; rather, the logic is f*cked.

Add to this your inventing your own methodology for ascertaining the appropriate price of housing with respect to rental prices - not supported by any financial or economic theory - and your lack of understanding of what an "average" is, and I can only say...

...I see why you live in Long Island City, where my poverty-stricken grandparents lived, and my poverty-stricken-but-smart-enough-to-get-out-of-it father went to high school: Long Island City High.

steve, how about a Father Guideo Sarducci t-shirt in exchange for JPII hanging from a string?

Eddie: i am an idiot. i have no issues admitting this. it's really not that big a deal.

for the record: i never bought a place in LIC. i was only thinking about it.

i stand corrected on the average thing. i've never heard of a median being referred to as an average before. for what it's worth, i think in normal vernacular, an average typically refers to a mean (and a mean is implicitly an arithmetic mean, unless otherwise specified). but hey, like you said, i guess i'm in error. my bad.

I LOVED Guido, and I was thinking about him just yesterday.

However, I just cannot part with him, though I do have good news (gospel, in Greek):

http://www.romegiftshop.com/pojopaiisobu.html

and you can buy your own.

Mine is painted which makes it more desirable, but I admit that it didn't come with a luminous rosary.

I think I will be accused of Catholic-bashing again, although I was born into the faith on both sides.

I stand corrected on something else I said that got deleted: I said that there were a billion stars in our galaxy and a billion galaxies, so if you think that Jesus was interested in YOU, you might think twice 'cause he would seem to be otherwise busy.

HOWEVER, I learned tonight that there are 100 billion stars in our galaxy, and 300 billion galaxies. Jesus is even busier than I thought.

(I'm sure I blasphemed, and I may get booted from this board, but hell, it's really, really funny, and more innocuous than Bill Mahar.)

Or was it 300 billion stars, and 100 billion galaxies...?

Talk about REAL ESTATE!

Eddie, you sound like such a douchebag. I'd love to get you on a therapist's couch to hear you whine about all your little insecurities.

steve - you draw conclusions from your assumed facts (assumptions). This isn't that hard to understand, but then again, this is steve we are talking about. You and Eddie deserve each other, two people arrogant in their ignorance who lash out at others who know more than they do.

dty, you are correct in that the term "average" commonly refers to a mean and not a median. Normal, intelligent people understood that when reading my comment. Eddie must be another insecure person to try to nitpick things like that because he knows how stupid he sounds arguing the substantial points.

dty makes a very respectful point, and Eddie had to act like the petulant person he is and try to demean dty. Eddie, try to learn how to act like a respectable person and maybe you will finally make some friends.

steve, one reason I live in LIC is because lots of young, enjoyable, talented people are living and moving there. You definitely wouldn't fit in.

> Eddie, try to learn how to act like a respectable person

Once again, pot calling the kettle black. You've done nothing but whine and insult on this and every other thread. You wouldn't know a fact if it slapped you in the ass.

> Normal, intelligent people understood that when reading my comment

I get what normal intelligent people understand. BUT YOU DIDN'T. You believed the comment that said I was wrong. You DIDN'T get it, putz!

> who lash out at others who know more than they do.

Who? YOU? ROTFL.

You finally know something?

Oh my lord, THANK YOU. You made my night!

Whenever Eddie is shown to be wrong or his point is countered, his response usually is: "that is the pot calling the kettle black. YOU do that, I DON'T" and "you are rationalizing!!"

Pretty lame.

"steve - you draw conclusions from your assumed facts (assumptions)."

No. Actually, I always publish their source.

"You and Eddie deserve each other, two people arrogant in their ignorance who lash out at others who know more than they do."

Sounds like you're lashing out, as does this:

"steve, one reason I live in LIC is because lots of young, enjoyable, talented people are living and moving there. You definitely wouldn't fit in."

You're right I wouldn't fit in - I need to live closer to the Duane Reade.

> Whenever Eddie is shown to be wrong or his point is countered, his
> response usually is: "that is the pot calling the kettle black. YOU
> do that, I DON'T" and "you are rationalizing!!"

First off, thats just my response to YOU. Because you keep doing it. You are a pretty consistent hypocrite.

Second, on what leap year did you actually counter a point?
I'd actually LOVE to see that one happen. ;-)

> Pretty lame.
Hate to say it, but pot....

> Sounds like you're lashing out,
Nail on the head, Steve.