3 votes

Is NOW the Best Time to Buy or Sell a Home?

“Right now may actually be one of the best times to buy a home” National Association of Realtors 2006 Marketing Campaign

As it turned out when that statement was made, it was probably the worst time to buy a home.

Promoting home ownership as a primary real estate marketing ploy is a mistake that the National Association of Realtors (NAR) and its REALTOR members often make because:

-they run the risk of giving bad advice – it can’t always be a good time to buy a home*; and

-it sounds more like “now is one of the best times for us to make commissions”.

I understand the logic. If more people would buy homes, there would be more work for Realtors.

Imagine, however, if the American Bar Association were to run ads blaring:...


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

To sell imo

ie. I think it will be ever more challenging to sell homes from now on. Unless of course they have some unique advantages to them. The cookie cutter style homes of suburbia will be a tough sell imo. These homes will not make it past 50 years on average imo. The only thing holding them together is the vinyl siding :P

These homes are use 'weak' materials imo and who knows who put them together. People are better off with pre-fabricated homes or a motorhome lol


I just purchased a home

I just purchased a home myself. It is my first home since I have just graduated college, and unless I wanted to give someone else money every month for an apt I didn't have much of a choice. However I think it is a really good time.

A lot of housing markets aren't doing so good, driving prices down.
With the economy doing so badly as well I got a really low interest rate on it.

Since I plan to stay here a while and not flip it to make a profit I dont really have to worry about how well the buying market is doing in the area (even though it is pretty good here)

And with the possibly of hyperinflation hitting (those of us with debt can only hope) this would make it even easier to pay off assuming you are not on a fixed income.

a fixed 30 year mortgage at a low rate

would be worth something a few years from now if there is increased inflation as you cost of shelter would remain low

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

There are many if, ands, or buts

All-in-all I would say if you have a home, and you need a home, keep your home. May want to refinance. If you need a home, it's probably a good time to buy.

Linda Cross's picture

Since this is apparently the Real Estate thread........

I have two properties that I would like to sell. Both would make great "bug out" properties. They are in Sunny Florida, in semi-rural areas. Most homesteads in area have an acre or more of property, fishing and hunting nearby, or on the property, but schools and shopping are also convenient. both have over 1600 SQ FT and 3 bedrooms 2 baths, and are move in ready. Both with fireplaces, decks for cooking out, and their own water supply and septic systems. One has 1/2 acre with a 2001 mobile home for 49k and the other has a 98 MH, almost 5 acres, a pond, and is surrounded by a 23k acre state forest, for 99k.

I totally agree with your posted opinion. I often don't agree with NAR, but as a member I have to support them.

Photo albums of property:

5180 Hattie Nolan Rd., Middleburg, Florida

102 Carmichael Rd., Interlachen, Fl.

If you see something, say something, the government is listening.
Silence isn't golden, it's yellow.

It is not illegal to practice law without a license.

There is no license for the occupation of law. Do you know why? Because if the occupation of law is a licensed, privileged activity then one actually does have a valid excuse to be ignorant of the law. There will never be a license for the occupation of law unless the principle, ignorance of the law is not an excuse, is going right out the window too.

What attorneys obtain is a certificate from a state supreme court authorizing them to represent persons in government courts. This certificate also allows attorneys to profit from the intellectual property of codes and statues. Yes, codes and statues are intellectual property and if you want to use them to derive a gain or profit ... that requires permission.

There has never been a law license and there never will be. There are only monopoly bar certificates to work for hire in government courts or using government codes or statutes.

here's some stuff on the unauthorized practice of law


there is no unauthorized practice of real estate that I am aware

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Ok ... if we are going to be cute

and cite from wikipedia which has no weight on this topic, then I am going to slam dunk this ...

Per EVERY CONSTITUTION in the UNITED STATES, what BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT has authority to establish an occupational license?

Is it the EXECUTIVE, LEGISLATIVE, or JUDICIAL branch of government?

If you answered anything other than LEGISLATIVE BRANCH then please cite the specific constitution that allows an executive or judicial branch of a state to enact law(s) which establish and ordain occupational licenses.

This is why there will never be an occupation license for law from a LEGISLATURE or ignorance of law will be an excuse. Bar certificates come from the JUDICIAL BRANCH because state supreme courts can set their own rules which has nothing to do with licensing the occupation of law.

If you answered LEGISLATIVE BRANCH then please cite a statute or code from any of the several states of the United States of America which establishes a license for the occupaton of law. I don't care what wikipedia says. Show me what a legislature has said.

But even if we are going with wikipedia, the section titled United States begins with:

"Lawyers in the United States must be admitted by each U.S. jurisdiction in which they intend to perform legal services"

Which is clever legal language stating exactly what I stated. Perform for hire legal services in a specific jurisdiction and you have to get permission to use that intellectual property ....

Down vote it all you want but

the one thing you will not be doing is rebutting it or citing something from a LEGISLATIVE BRANCH or LEGISLATURE that has enacted a positive LAW which establishes any LICENSE for the OCCUPATION OF LAW.

Generally speaking,

it does not constitute the unlicensed practice of law for a non lawyer to sell a book that contains general legal information. New York County Lawyers Association v. Dacey, 287 N.Y.S. 2d 422 (N.Y. 1967); 283 N.Y.S.2d 98 4 (N.Y. App. 1967). The book may also contain legal forms.



In Cheek v. United States 498 U.S. 192 (1991) the willfulness test was described as 1) the law imposes a duty, 2) the duty is known, and 3) it was intentionally violated.

In Lambert v. California, 355 U.S. 225 (1957) the court held that in order to be punished, there must be a probability that the accused party had knowledge of the law before committing the crime.

I declare the following to be true and accurate to the best of my ability, accept to full liability for anything proven to be a known outright lie, and not an honest error:

1. It is my understanding New York law is a licensed activity.
2. I am ignorant of New York law.
3. I am unlicensed to practice New York law.
4. I am incompetent to represent myself in any matter of New York law.
5. I have never been offered any compensation or benefit from New York as an incentive to alleviate any ignorance or incompetence of New York law.
6. I have never received any compensation or benefit from New York to alleviate any ignorance or incompetence of New York law.
7. It is my understanding representing myself in any matter of New York law is an unlicensed practice of law.
8. It is my understanding the unlicensed practice of law when representing oneself is a permissible activity.
9. It is my understanding no entity has any authority to compel the alleviation of my ignorance of any New York law and if there is any positive duty or obligation to not be ignorant of New York law it can only be justly acquired by my consent or just compensation to do so.
(10. A specific statement to whatever the charge is such as ... I have no knowledge of any duty in law or otherwise which requires me to obtain permission from anyone to travel God's green earth.)

Furthermore, I do not consent to:
1. Any permitted unlicensed practicing of law representing myself when I am ignorant and incompetent of New York law.
2. Any hearings, trials, or proceedings for any matter of New York law, a subject matter of which I am ignorant and incompetent.
3. Any fees, fines, or sanctions for any matter of New York law, a subject matter of which I am ignorant and incompetent.

In closing, I do not consent to any entity or matter seeking to criminalize my ignorance or incompetence of New York law when no justly acquired obligation to alleviate ignorance or incompetence exists.



There are only two possibilities. Either a case is going to be dismissed in New York because ignorance of New York law is excusable or it is not going to be dismissed and that section of New York codes cited doesn't mean how it reads to a layman using terms which are not defined in New York code.

The above is NY Judicial code, this one is Texas legistlature


Irrespective of the derivation of the laws, practicing law without a license has penalties and selling or buying real estate has no such restrictions-that was the only point being made.
I am no expert in the derivation of the law on attorney licensing

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

It took a few minutes to reply because I had to prepare that

previous post. I deal in the world of principles, not deviations of language.

There is a reason legislatures do not precisely define terms. It is so they can be applied as broadly as possible. As a matter of fact, the absence of a precise definition from a legislature is prima facie evidence the term was intended to be applied as broadly as possible.

I didn't read the whole thing but obviously the Texas codes read more sensibly. However none of the language is going to change any principles. The principle is "ignorantia juris non excusat" translating to "ignorance of the law does not excuse."

It is axiomatically impossible for law to be a 100% privileged activity because if that were true the principle ignorance does not excuse can not be true. So the question becomes what percentage of law is privileged and what percentage of law is not privileged.

If one reviews case law they will find some consistencies:

1. Is the activity complained of practicing law?
2. Is it a permissible activity even if an unlicensed practice of law (ie. pro se)?

A further review will find even more consistency to how those questions are answered and underneath all the linguistics bullshit of different courts applying those same questions in different circumstances a pattern becomes plain as day which is that codes and statues are a form of intellectual property and if one seeks to derive a gain or profit using codes or statutes they must obtain permission of the owner which is what is being called a "license to practice law" using undefined ambiguous language.

Great analysis

The law comment was a throwaway was focused on real estate profession activitiy

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Fair enough ...

perhaps one of the mods will be kind enough move our exchange of comments out of this thread since they are totally unrelated to the OP and a distraction to your posting intent.

The answer from a real estate agent's perspective might be:

If you own a home you should sell it because it is a great time to sell, but then you must buy another home to live in.

If you don't own a home you need to get one so you can sell it and buy another one!

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

I am Sure That You Want Free Markets

As a seller of a home, I want someone to tell my prospects the reason why this is a good time to buy. The Realtor group is similar to a specialized Chamber of Commerce - designed to promote industry wide business for their Realtor brand name. The BAR is also an industry trade group, except they are also a government sanctioned monopoly.

In a free market, buyer beware is the key concept. As a buyer, you get unlimited choices, but you must make sure that you trust but verify.

However, you wanted to know if 2006 was a good time to buy a house? It depends. If you had a large family in 2006, you would have needed a place for them to live. If the mortgage payments were lower than home rental, it might have been an excellent time to buy. On the other hand, if you were planning to buy and hold for resale, you would have lost big time. Everyone's situation is different and no one can predict the wild centrally planned market.

A marketers job is to tell prospects why they should buy now.

Full Disclosure: I personally do not like the Realtor MLS stronghold and I try to stay away from this group that I belonged to at one time. But they have a right to promote their businesses and I support that right. Also, you have a right to compete with their MLS stronghold and a few people have done that successfully. You can compete with Realtors but you cannot compete with the BAR (lawyers monopoly)- that is the big difference.

Gene Louis
Supporting a Needed Tool for Government Feedback:
A Citizen-Operated Legal System.

good point it is ILLEGAL to practice law without a licence

you can still sell real estate without belonging to NAR
Im sure they'd like to change that!

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

You Have Brought Out Another Excellent Point

Almost anyone can easily pass the test to sell real estate (every State is different). The tests that I know about are basic and straightforward. Usually there are no opinions or political nonsense in the agent and broker tests.

On the other hand, the test to become authorized to practice law is full of monopoly garbage that is the opposite of common sense and the opposite of free market economics. It take a lot of boring school time to learn the thinking process of the religion that the BAR preserves with their tests.

When a lawyer tells you that you would not have a chance in court without one of his buddies, he is probably right - you are shopping in a market that was created by his monopoly and designed to force you to buy his services.

When a real estate agent tells you that this is the best time to buy, you can bypass the agent and find a home on your own outside of the agent's marketing system - and save a huge commission and maybe bypass possible lies about the market.

That is the difference between a free market and a closed market system dictated by the state.

Gene Louis
Supporting a Needed Tool for Government Feedback:
A Citizen-Operated Legal System.

True, access to the law is limited via a licensed profession

but access to buying a selling a home is not (yet)

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

I'm in the process of selling a rental home now. my take..

If you have cash and interest rates are high, it's a great time to buy a home. If you are going to spend 15-30 years of your life paying for that house, with a ridiculous mortgage (more than 2000-2500/mo), right now prices are up 10-15% in some areas, so you're trading higher debt vs. lower monthly payment.

I live in an older double-wide mobile home right now on a large parcel with the wife and kids that might have 10 years left on it (subflooring is particle board, no ac) and I probably won't build a home unless I can at least pay 50% cash for it, or build something around 1200 sq feet and add another 1000 sq feet to it over time. We owe around $100k on it with an affordable mortgage, kind of depressing but that's the way it is.

Peace, Freedom and Prosperity. Not War, Welfare and Bankruptcy.