OT Sold It!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nope. You still didn't answer the question. What is your definition of subprime and who did they go to?

Yea, because they are looking for cheap labor.

Nice try Miles but I'm not the one who made that claim, that would be Roy but even here I have seen it. You OTOH, see only what you want to see.

Really??? According to you, your city has been at a steady 20% for years.

That's because the tech bubble as you call it created high paying jobs all over the place and many were doing well, not just the tech investors.

Yawn. That would be your bias Miles. According to you, if it isn't right wing then it must be left and there is nothing else. To me, there are right wing, left wing, and everything else which is neither. Unlike you Miles, I can see when something is right biased, left biased, or simply a story that is neither. What I was saying was unlike Fox, they don't accredit all good to one party and all bad to the other.

That is correct as far as increases go but you cannot have both falling prices and rapid growth at the same time unless Phoenix is either being populated by idiots or they are still building far more houses than are needed. If demand is high, then prices either hold or go up, not down unless the supply is even greater but even then, why would you buy when it is almost a guarantee that you will lose money due to falling prices? Sorry Miles, but something just doesn't make much sense here!

New housing means nothing unless you have buyers for it and that's only going to happen if you have a limited supply of available housing or you don't mind building them at a loss.

Show me one that claims that they are NOT used.

Tbone, just show us ANY statistic that backs your wild claims. Any at all.

Oh, and, do try to reply to the post where I gave you more stats and facts with more than a "those aren't accurate because I refuse to believe them."

The world has problems and ALWAYS will. Those that dwell on the negative will generally be less happy than those that see the good and think positive. You see doom and gloom in everything. Not a good way to make it through the low times. Besides, things aren't anywheres near as bad as you've painted them to be. Most are doing just fine.

Oh of course!! Seems to you we all must be doing bad, dwelling in gloom and doom or if not, then we're being bad and greedy to others. No other way!!

Yep, can't be successful and happy in your doom and gloom world.

Mostly went to people trying to buy far more than they could afford. Lenders conned buyers into subprimes which allowed them to qualify for a far larger more expensive home than they would otherwise. Most buyers were NOT poor, NOT high risk, and NOT poor credit and NOT low income.

I gave the exact years for that 20% figure because you claimed Phoenix isn't the place where so many would want to live. The last few years it's growth has slowed, yet is still positive while most of the country is seeing a negative growth rate.

Huh? I've said Fox is right wing biased. At least Fox does have a few liberal hosts and guest commentators on. CBS never has any right wing hosts. But CBS is VERY left wing biased and yet you claim otherwise. CNN, ABC are also left wing biased but you won't admit that because they agree with your views by leaving out the right wing side of stories.

Um, true...so? Yet Phoenix is seeing positive growth rate and slowly rising house prices right NOW. Most of the country is still negative. Yet you still argue that Phoenix isn't a place where people want to be.

Sorry Tom, argue all you want but Phoenix is seeing positive growth and rising home prices NOW. Most of the country is not. Ya, Phoenix is not the place people want to be!! Too funny.

Never said that unemployment claims were NOT used. I said they were not the primary source of data used to compute unemployment stats. You did say just that.

What are these numbers based on Max? Is that percentage based on mortgages taken out within the last few years or all existing mortgages?

Sure you will Max because they agree with what you want to believe but you have no idea what they are based on.

LOL, I watch the news, the financial channels, CNBC, and I see what shape the banks and builders are in. Sorry Max, but you really don't have a clue.

LOL, sure Max.

It says no such thing Max. To bad you don't understand WTF you are reading. While the numbers have gone down slightly, there is no data about the rise or fall of the national income. You also didn't bother to mention that we are almost a point and a half above what we were the same time last year. Unless income has also increased by near or greater than this amount, it is still stagflation. I will be curious to see what the May numbers show as the amount of decrease between March and April was almost nothing.

But that still reveals no data about current salaries. If a person loses a job paying 60K and is forced to take one paying 30K, that is not reflected here. It also does not take into account any people who have decided to try and go it on their own as they are no longer considered unemployed, even if they are making no money at all.

LOL, are you really this stupid. This data means nothing. 5% of all homes is a meaningless number. How many of the loans taken out in the past 2 years when the prices were at there highest have gone into forclosure? This is where the real problem lies as the banks will never recover all of the money that they lent out? You really don't understand this stuff, do you?

So what, who cares. Your figures are adding in all homes, including the ones already paid for. The banks really don't care much about them. Old mortgages also don't mean much as the banks already made their money back on them and most of them are doing just fine. It is the new loans where the bank has the most to lose that count, get it yet?

Perhaps you should post valid points and realistic facts.

AP says 0.2% of mortgages. They did not qualify the number, so it should be assumed it was all mortgages. Feel free to look up AP's story and judge for yourself.

You've reported nothing, nor have you supplied any sources. Since AP reported solid numbers based on research they've done, I'll take their numbers as the most correct available. Again.

My claim is based on an AP news story. Look it up. Then, go get your own numbers to prove me wrong.

I have a clue, and you have yet to post ANY facts or figures from your alleged sources.

And that's why you are having such a hard time filling positions. In order for someone to work at your company, the pay has to at least meet what they need to survive or they simply cannot work for you.

LOL, more spin. A salary needs at a minimum the amount to support the needs of the average person living in that area. Anything above that can be considered awards.

Then perhaps your competitors are not paying a valid salary either. You told me what the starting salary was and that you are looking for experienced people and you live in a city. Sorry Miles, but the salary that you mentioned is far from excessive and below average in states like NJ for the same skills. You can only set the bar so low and eventually, people are simply going to choose to do something else.

Then why are you offering slightly above entry level pay?

So did NC? What is your point?

There are many areas of Florida that are not heavily populated but what exactly does Florida have to do with the point at hand. I didn't say that Florida was a better place to live, only that many of the people that live in Phoenix are trying to make it into something else.

LOL, you should be the last one to talk about polution compared to Phoenix.

The point Miles is that you are still in the desert and the more houses they build there, the worse the water situation is going to get. We are dealing with the same thing here now and we are not in the desert.

So what????? What is the median income or better yet, the required income to live near your company? If I lived in Pheonix, what salary woud I need to support a family of 4?

If that is what it take to live in that area (and I'm not talking luxury), then yes or you will not be able to retain valuable employees.

Please explain it to me.

It is still a city and will be far more expensive to live in then a more rual area.

April ended as a comparatively strong month. Will have to see if May sustained that. Thing is, you often discount any stats that go against your belief and quote those that you agree with.

And you feel that my company MUST pay far too little huh? It can't possibly be because too few skilled workers looking for a job? Sorry TBone, skilled workers are difficult to come by nationwide. That causes pay scales to go up, not down.

Oh sure, that must be it!

75K-100K+ is not below average for even NJ. We have a few from that area. They moved here because of low salaries compared with cost of living where they were. Ya, NJ is the place people are swarming to live huh? lol

Entry level is what a college grad with no experience would make. You telling me a college grad entry level job pays 100K+? Get real TBone, not even close.

Downtown Phoenix area has bad smog in the winter. The entire rest of the metro area sits on the opposite side of mountains and is rather clear.

What you fail to realize is that the desert cities of Arizona get NO water from the desert. Arizona is mountainous with heavy snowpacks, lakes and streams. The deserts below get their water from the mountain runoff through a very large system of lakes as well as from the Colorado River. Arizona has more water than it needs and sells the excess to California.

OMG! You really don't know the difference between median and average!! lol, they let anyone graduate high school!

Cost of living wise thats not true. In rural areas there are few jobs and those generally pay far less than in the city.