From the title, you might think this is a commentary on the differneces between Republicans and Democrats (or Rush Limbaugh and...um...anyone sane and balanced). I love how they talk about "tax cuts" versus increases in funding that aren't as much as they used to be. When I was interested in raw politics, I cared...
Anyway, I found it humorous that the headline to this CNN article was "A $200,000 'loss' - and happy with it". The article talks about Century 21 CEO "losing" $200,000 of home value as the market has softened. It's idiotic, really, since the real news is that Mr. Kunz bought the home for $340,000 in 1998 and it's now worth $1.1 milllion (down $200k from 2004).
Why do the idiots at CNN headline this as a loss? If I were to make $700,000 on a transaction, I'd call it a GAIN, not a loss. If I could have sold it for $1.3M instead of $1.1M, I'd call it a SWEET deal because I still gained $700k (worse case scenario, I'd say "I could have made $900k instead of $700k"...but that's still not a loss).
Perhaps as prices fall from historic highs, we can remind sellers that a "realistic" price is not a loss, it's a GAIN over prices just a few short years ago...and in many areas it's still a sizeable gain! I guess it's all about perspective. Is the glass half full?
In case you want to see it (along with a very happy looking Mr. Kunz): http://money.cnn.com/2007/08/27/news/economy/kunz_homesale/index.htm?postversion=2007082715
Comments(4)