That may or may not be true. What is known is that Realtors always claim that “now” is a great time to buy no matter when “now” happens to be and what is happening to the market. Back in 2006, the NAR went about trying to convince the public that prices had stabilized, interest rates were low, the number of houses for sale were up and that it was a great time to buy a home. Today it’s the same song and dance — prices have stabilized, interest rates are low, the number of houses for sale are up and it’s a great time to buy a home.

This may be the ideal time to buy a house. It might not be the ideal time to buy a house. However, it’s impossible to rely on the NAR in determining such things as that bunch has a vested interest in always parroting the “now is a great time to buy” line. I’m not sure if they’re stupid, think we’re idiots or a combination of both. What is very clear, however, is that the NAR’s always optimistic view of housing markets is simply not credible.

Back when I was taking economics classes in college (institutions that most NAR members have only a passing familiarity with), we learned about market forces, supply and demand — that kind of stuff.

What we saw from about 1999 through part of 2007 was the growing sub-prime lending market. Getting a “0 down” loan for about any house you wanted was a breeze. In that kind of environment, prices inflated — when people don’t care how much something costs, the cost goes up.

That debt-heavy system proved unsustainable and crashed. In 2008, the government started paying people to buy houses by offering them tax credits and went on to sink $1.25 trillion of our tax dollars into the mortgage backed securities market in a successful attempt to hold mortgage interest rates low. Those actions — like the ridiculous availability of credit that crashed housing markets in the first place — were inflationary in nature and, yes, artificially boosted home prices.

Is it a good time to buy a home? That all depends on you. Do some research and figure out for yourself if housing prices have bottomed out (an opinion the NAR has wrongly shared for years) or if we’ll continue to see prices drop now that inflationary measures like easy credit and government stimulus money are out of the system.

Whatever you do, however, don’t take the NAR’s word for anything. The NAR is a heavily biased organization that will tell you it’s always a good time to buy a house.

Rather than post that agent’s email and give the trash mouth some publicity, I’ve elected to post up a nice Fear video in response. Enjoy it, varmint.

Make sure to check out the other Music Monday entries here.

How low will Realtors sink to make a buck?

Calamity! A damned tragedy has rocked the real estate world!

Yes, it seems our friends at the National Association of Realtors (NAR) were able to buy enough votes to allow more time for people wanting to get their free government money in the form of repeat and first-time home buyer tax credits. However, the rocket scientists at the NAR haven’t been able to bribe enough congressmen to get more cash for the the United States Department of Agriculture’s Rural Development guaranteed loan program.

The NAR be shoved out it place in line at the government trough. No, sir. Even now, the slimy bastards at the NAR are asking its members to irritate their Congressional representatives until they get what they want. Specifically, another government handout to help prop up a housing market that is still overinflated.

To understand why the NAR is in hysterics over this issue, a discussion of the Rural Development guaranteed loan program is in order. Rural Development loans come in two flavors — direct (for the very poor) and guaranteed (for the middle class and people who can’t scratch together enough cash for a down payment). The guaranteed program is administered through private banks, while the direct program is just what it sounds like — cash directly from the federal government.

When the subprime lending market went bankrupt back in 2007, people started to use the Rural Development program as a substitute. Heck, it’s easy to qualify for a Rural Development loan and those have been one of the few mortgage programs left that require no money down.

Now, the federal fiscal year begins on Oct. 1., meaning the guaranteed program was given what Congress thought would be enough money to guarantee loans through Oct. 1 this year. However, so many people lined up to take advantage of the program that it was clear in April that the guaranteed program would be out of money by mid-May at the latest.

So, the program is out of money. That’s a problem for Realtors who operate in rural areas (and you’d be surprised at the areas that still qualify as rural), but a larger problem for people who are still waiting to close on loans and receive some government money in the form of tax credits for first-time and repeat buyers.

Back in July, Congress extended the deadline for closing on deals for those tax credits. Under the original terms of the credit, qualified buyers were required to get a home under contract prior to May 1 and then close on it before July 1. At the first of July, however, Congress moved that closing deadline to Sept. 30.

If the NAR can’t bribe Congress into pumping more money into the Rural Development guaranteed loan program soon, the next time it could possibly get any cash is when the next fiscal year starts on Oct. 1. In other words, those buyers who need a Rural Development loan may miss the deadline to close on a home and receive a home buyer tax credit.

That’s right. There are some buyers out there who can only take advantage of one government program by availing themselves of another.

Here are some questions for the NAR — how much support from the government will it take to keep you guys happy? Can we even pretend like the housing market is part of the free market at all? Can Realtors go out and make money without being subsidized by the government?

Honestly, the United States would be a lot better off without Rural Development loan programs, tax credits and every other program that pays people money to buy houses. Clearly, interference in the free market through government programs that the NAR often bought and paid for is the very thing that left the housing market in shambles in the first place.

Of course, if the government doesn’t step in and pump some more money into a broken system, the economic ramifications will be fairly intense for a time. Some Realtors will fall behind on the Escalade payments while the traffic at Starbuck’s, mid-level department stores and nail salons around the nation will decline for awhile.

But we’ll survive it. It’s about time to let the housing market stand on its own. The country will be better off for it.

Why? Because people who have the audacity to sell their homes without the help of a Realtor don’t pay commissions. One can well understand why a buyer might choose to go it alone — a 6 percent commission is a real burden these days, what with the economy in shambles and home prices falling faster than Tiger Woods’ popularity.

Look at it this way — if a home owner sells a house for $200,000, why on earth should he or she want to fork over $12,000 in commissions? What do Realtors actually do to justify that kind of money? Simply put, the primary value of a Realtor — quite often — is the ability to dump properties into the local multiple listings service (MLS), sit back and wait for buyers to get in touch.

Without the MLS, what real value would a Realtor bring to the transaction? The NAR knows that the MLS is essential to keeping Realtors relevant in this day and age and that bunch has fault like hell to make sure that its members — and only its members — have access to the MLS.

Want proof? Just have a look at the panic the U.S. Department of Justice caused within the NAR’s ranks when it brought a suit claiming that the NAR had improperly excluded everyone but Realtors from accessing the MLS. To take a hard look at that issue, just start here and, perhaps, do some research beyond that.

The problem with FSBO is simply this — Realtors have access to comprehensive MLS systems that serve as wonderful marketing tools, while folks like you and me do not. While there was some hope that the Justice Department would allow “the rest of us” to gain access to a local MLS, the NAR bought off enough people to put that issue to rest a couple of years ago.

Without that access, people wanting to sell homes on their own have nothing that can come close to competing with an MLS. Sure, there are some FSBO sites spread around here and there, but take a look at them — you won’t find just a ton of listings on any of them and there’s no comprehensive site where people can show up and list homes.

The lack of a comprehensive system where sellers can list their own homes is a real problem. The Realtors have such a system whereas sellers do not and that gives the NAR and its members a huge advantage. Should such a comprehensive system emerge from FSBO enthusiasts, people throughout the nation will quickly come to the realization that Realtors are about as relevant as buggy whips and Whig politics.

To get an idea of the typical Realtor’s attitude toward those who would sell their homes on the own, have a look at an article called “The Big FSBO Lie” that was written by some North Carolina Realtor named Roger Johnson. One of Roger’s main points is that FSBO sites lie when they tell people it’s easy to sell their own homes because those sites are interested in making a profit.

In other words, it’s ridiculous to believe that selling your own home is easy because the companies telling you that are simply out for money. By that same logic, how can you trust a profit-motivated Realtor when he tells you that hiring a real estate agent is the ideal way to sell your house?

Meanwhile, a lot of us hope the FSBO crowd gets its act together and builds the NAR-killing system that will compete favorably with any MLS out there.

But, really, what’s wrong with renting?

Here’s the thing about financing a home — you’ve got to pay property taxes, assume a bunch of debt and pay maintenance costs because something always seems to break.

The slugs at the NAR love to say it’s a shame to waste your money on rent because you’re not building equity in your home. Consider this, however — how long does it actually take to build up equity in your home? That depends on how the markets faring (not worth a damn these days), how much money you put down on your home, etc.

Consider, too, that most of what you pay over the life of your home loan is interest. Is it worse to pay rent to a landlord or a lot of interest to a bank? Furthermore, the “building up equity” argument goes out the window if you’re only going to stay in a home for a couple of years — it makes more sense to rent if you’re moving around quite a bit.

Additionally, a lot has been said about the “debt crisis” that played a large part in taking the U.S. economy around 2007. The problem was that Americans assumed more debt than they could realistically sustain. Based on the number of foreclosures, death of the subprime lending market and other factors, it’s clear that a lot of the trouble had to do with mortgage debt.

Here’s something else to consider — just a month ago, my hot water heater broke, the lawnmower quit working and had to be replaced, the air conditioner was in need of service and the garbage disposal sprung a leak. All of those items had be to be replaced or fixed, and that burden fell on me.

Back in the days when I rented a home, there was a landlord who took care of repairing such items. That’s not the case anymore and any home owner can tell you that something is always broken and needs to be fixed.

Finally, let’s talk about another joy that comes with owning a home — yard maintenance. The happy homeowner has the option of mowing the lawn and such or paying someone to do it, but renters often have a landlord who takes care of those things.

While it might make sense for some people to rent rather than own, you’ll not find the NAR spreading that message (although a lot of its members are property managers — you just know the way the NAR looks down on renters has to annoy them). The NAR makes a pile of money in membership fees and those members don’t pay dues if they’re not selling homes and making money.

The “owning a home is part of the American Dream” message is all about money. Most of the messages the NAR beats the public over the head with are all about money, actually. If the NAR can make a buck off of it, they’ll advocate it whether it truly benefits the public or not.

Take everything those NAR bastards say with a grain of salt, kids.

And we, the poor slobs who pay taxes, are stuck with the bill. If that annoys you even a little bit, keep reading.

According to the fine folks over at OpenSecrets.org, the NAR has been spending money like it’s going out of style over the past couple of years. In 2009, the NAR spent $19.48 million in its continuing efforts to suck on the government teat and $17.34 million in 2009 — a total of $36.82 million in two years.

That’s a nice amount of money, but it’s mere chump change considering what the NAR got in return. From April 2008 through April 2010, the government actually paid people to go out and buy homes in the form of tax credits. Eligible first-time buyers received fat, government dollars throughout the life of the two-year money grab while repeat home buyers weren’t as lucky — they only got paid for transactions entered into between November 2009 and prior to May 1.

The cost to taxpayers, a mere $21 billion according to the latest estimates from the U.S. Treasury department. In other words, first-time buyers got up to $8,000 in tax credits, repeat buyers received up to $6,500 for purchasing homes, Realtors got some commission checks and most of us schmucks received no benefit and get to pay for it all.

That $36.82 million in bribe money spent by the NAR was a great investment for Realtors throughout the country, then.

Ah, but there’s more. Bear in mind that the Federal Reserve spent $1.25 trillion from November 2008 through March 2010 propping up the mortgage backed securities market. Apparently, the NAR has no problem with the government showing up and taking on the role that has traditionally been reserved for private investors.

Here’s the thing about the mortgage-backed securities market — as investments increase in that market, so do yields as those securities are regarded as less risky. As risk and yields drop, mortgage rates fall, too. In other words, the Fed stepped in and artificially held interest rates low so that more people would purchase houses.

Ironically, economists expected interest rates to climb substantially after the Fed ended it’s spending spree in the mortgage-backed securities market. However, that didn’t happen — rates that had been hovering around 5 percent or better fell to around 4.5 percent or better for 30-year, fixed interest mortgages and have remained at that level.

Why? The credit systems in Europe went to hell and private investors started looking for safer places to put there money — places like the mortgage-backed securities market. Capitalism, indeed, is a wonderful thing — it’s too bad the Fed and the NAR are intent on wasting our money monkeying around in (formerly) free markets.

The NAR bought some other pieces of legislation (all in the name of helping home owners, mind), but those are two huge benefits that are well worth mentioning. In other words, the NAR spent $36.82 million buying off congressmen on those two issues and received benefits costing taxpayers at least $1.46 trillion. Talk about bang for the buck!

Now, some of that might be OK if the NAR wasn’t so stingy when it comes to its members shouldering some of the tax burden for such expensive programs. The attitude of the NAR is summed up very well by a “crisis” that took place in Pennsylvania this year — Gov. Edward G. Rendell wanted to tax professional fees, including real estate commissions.

The Pennsylvania Association of Realtors bought legislators, sent out a survey (completely unbiased, of course) and generally pitched a fit until the attempt to tax professional fees was defeated. A particularly entertaining element to this tale is found in this article featuring Pennsylvania Realtors going to the state Capitol to annoy people.

As I’ll gleefully show in the weeks and months to come, the NAR and it’s members share the same philosophy — they want the government to spend cash that benefits its members, but none of them want to pay for it. No, that’s the job of us taxpayers.

That, really, is a major problem at all levels of government. These pesky special interest groups like the NAR want the government to spend cash that directly impacts them, yet they raise all kinds of hell when they are asked to give something back.

In the case of the NAR, that group’s constant cries of “gimme, gimme, gimme” might be among the worst of any special interest group out there. Look at it this way — the federal government just spend close to $1.5 trillion propping up the housing market, and what has it gotten us? Housing markets were supposed to stabilize, but has that happened? As soon as the tax credits were gone, pending homes sales fell at the largest rate since 2001.

The whole point of spending all that money on tax credits and capital for the mortgage-backed securities to market was to stabilize housing markets. That hasn’t happened. That NAR and it’s clever pack of slimy lobbyists, then, have saddled us all with more debt and most of us don’t have a thing to show for it.

Thanks, NAR. You guys suck.