Yeah, I watched him too, tonight. C'mon, you know he was being a bit facetious. He said if you had a choice to give up your car, your credit card, or your house, the "econ 101" correct answer would be the house because you need the car to get to work (except in NYC) and the CC to buy groceries. He also added that you should just quit making payments now and live rent free until the bank kicks you out. You didn't think that was serious too, did you?

I love Cramer, but c'mon....let's get real.

Cramer is a showman and little more. I certainly would not act on anything he predicts or says. It is a well documented fact that flipping a coin is about as accurate as his predictions.

Sure you can walk away from your mortgage, but don't think for one second the banking system won't black list you for a very long time. You can be assured that either they or the collection agency they subrogate your loan to will go after you for what ever they can get. They will pursue you until you either file bankruptcy or work a deal out with them to pay them off. You can also pretty much forget getting a prime mortgage for many, many years.

As for the home-builders what is Cramer talking about? How many do you know that build spec homes? The only thing they are liquidating are homes that people signed contracts on and walked away from. What does he expect these builders to do, stop building so the resale market can catch up? They are in the business of building and will figure out how to sell a home even in this market.

The one thing you can always count on is for Wallstreet and the media to overreact to just about every negative situation that pops up. The good news is their attention span is very short and they soon forget why they are pessimistic.

kitchenshock -- I do believe in some areas of the country it is common to build spec homes, ours included. Last summer there was so much construction, primarily spec homes, but that was when homes were selling in a few weeks. Now it has dwindled to only homes built on contract. And boy have the prices dropped on such homes in addition to amazing builder incentives.

kitchenshock: "As for the home-builders what is Cramer talking about? How many do you know that build spec homes? The only thing they are liquidating are homes that people signed contracts on and walked away from. What does he expect these builders to do, stop building so the resale market can catch up?"

The one that Cramer is down the most on is Beazer, and I tend to agree. In January of last year it was trading for over $72/share; today it dropped to an intraday low of $8.10 before somewhat recovering to close at $11.48. They are losing millions of dollars with no end in sight and they have a terrible balance sheet with enormous long-term debt. They are not much better at this point than a dot com was in 2000.

What is needed is for the new homes to be zapped with a large, one time new building tax to help pay for the new infrastructure that is needed to support them. It'd cut down on spec building and make people use what is there.
There's way too much building going on in some areas, to the point where they can't build new schools or firehouses fast enough to support what they are creating, let alone build roads to support the new developments they create.

gdognj did begin the post by saying "This from a crazed financial huckster..."
That man stresses me out, I can't watch him.

"What is needed is for the new homes to be zapped with a large, one time new building tax to help pay for the new infrastructure that is needed to support them"

In Florida, they are called impact fees and they have definitely not curbed development

What is needed is for the new homes to be zapped with a large, one time new building tax to help pay for the new infrastructure that is needed to support them.

In my area they area called system development fees.

They might be zapping them with fees but is it anywhere near enough to help defer the cost to the local area for the new additions that need to be added to the infrastructure?
In most cases I don't think it is. We only have so much land and water. If we continue to build we are going to end up with very little area to farm and be very dependent on forgein countries for all our food, meds and fuel.

"What is needed is for the new homes to be zapped with a large, one time new building tax to help pay for the new infrastructure that is needed to support them"

In Florida, they are called impact fees and they have definitely not curbed development

My county also imposes impact fees on new residential development - they were instituted in the mid-1980s. It was looked upon as a significant planning instrument to manage growth, but things did not turn out quite as expected. What we've found is that the money collected from new development were not necessarily spent on that area - so, still no new schools, fire stations, roads, libraries. It also drove up the cost of housing so housing affordability became the hot planning issue of the late 1990s and 2000s.

Cramer at al are indeed financial huckstersÂÂbut they are crazy like a fox...laughing all of the way to the bank...because people actually listen to them......(shaking head)

That said...in NJ, the developers get to build pretty much however many homes they want...if the towns says no, they sue the township, and get the NJ Council On Affordable Housing (COAH) into the act, ultimately prevail, as long as they include some "token" affordable housing....and the wrangling that occurs always involves lawyers, consultants and tax payer money spent.

Or...they can choose to pay the "development fees" (aka in lieu of) instead...but then the town has to use that money to buy land and build the affordable housing, which given the cost of land, materials, labor and the lack of the builder advantage of economy of scale, invariably costs a FORTUNE...

Instead of the Bon Jovi song, "Who Says You Can't Go Home" the NJ theme song should be the classic Joni Mitchell tune "Pave paradiseÂ..put a parking lot..."