Global survey: U.S. homes are most affordable

United States real estate offers a lot of bang for your buck, according to a new survey that shows U.S. homes are the cheapest relative to incomes among English-speaking nations.

Australian homes – which have a median price of $454,000 – were found to be the most unaffordable among English-speaking nations, according to the report by consulting firm Demographia, which examined affordability in the third quarter of 2010. The median home in Australia costs 6.1 times the gross annual median household income. What’s more, 85 percent of the homes in Australia’s major cities were more than 5.1 times average income, according to the survey.

On the other hand, U.S. homes have a median home price of $168,000 and homes cost only three times yearly income or less.

The priciest city for real estate, in general: Hong Kong, with homes costing 11.4 times income. (The report considers any markets where home prices are 5.1 times household income or more very unaffordable.) Prices in Hong Kong have increased by more than 50 percent in the past two years due to low interest rates, an expanding economy and buyers flooding in from China.

The United States boasted the most affordable major markets. Atlanta was the most affordable big city, in which the median home price is $129,000.

Meanwhile, the most unaffordable markets in the U.S. were mostly found in California: San Francisco (homes cost 7.2 times income), San Jose (6.7 times), San Diego (6.2 times), New York (6.1 times), and Los Angeles (5.9 times).

Nation's cold snap may heat up Florida's real estate market

Finding an escape from the snow last week was tough. Nearly 70 percent of the contiguous United States was covered in the white stuff. The National Weather Service said that every state except Florida reported snow on the ground — even Hawaii.

The Lower Keys of Florida, was the farthest away from snow that you could get without leaving the US. The warm climate, the ocean and the lack of an income tax, appeal to home buyers.

Key West, the southernmost point, is also rich in culture. It's an old historic city with a live and let live, non-judgemental attitude. It is more cosmopolitan than the rest of the Keys, with lots of theaters and galleries. At the center of its famous Old Town is lively and colorful Duval Street, lined with bars, evening strollers and nightlife. Key West has areas — including New Town, Midtown and Casa Marina — where homeowners can walk to shops and restaurants, but Old Town is the most desirable. It is charming. In Old Town, you can get something tiny: a one bedroom, one bath from $300,000. But it is $500,000 minimum for something decent. And the high-end starts at $3 million. In Old Town, you cannot tear down, just renovate, and there are old Victorians and what they call conch houses. It's a small - 2 by 4 mile - competitive island market, where a bargain can be very hard to find even with the help of an agent who is tapped into the local coconut telegraph.

2011 Bleakest year in foreclosures? Time to Buy?

Banks took back 1 million homes in 2010 and are poised to take back more homes this year than any other since the U.S. housing meltdown began in 2006. About 5 million borrowers are at least two months behind on their mortgages and more will miss payments as they struggle with job losses and loans worth more than their home's value, industry analysts forecast.

"2011 is going to be the peak," says foreclosure tracker RealtyTrac Inc.

One in 45 U.S. households received a foreclosure filing last year, or a record high of 2.9 million homes. That's up 1.67 percent from 2009.

The pace slowed in the final two months of 2010 as banks reviewed their foreclosure processes after allegations surfaced in September that evictions were handled improperly. Under increased scrutiny by the government, lenders temporarily halted taking actions against borrowers severely behind on their payments. However, most banks have since resumed their eviction processes, and the first quarter will likely show a rebound in foreclosure activity.

Foreclosures are expected to remain elevated through the year as homeowners contend with stubbornly high unemployment, tougher credit standards for refinancing and falling home values. Sharga said he expects prices to dip another 5 percent nationally before finally bottoming out. The decline will push more borrowers underwater on their mortgages. Already, about one in five homeowners with a mortgage owe more than their home is worth.

2010 worst for home sales in more than a decade

Home prices are dropping in the nation's largest cities and are expected to keep falling next year, as fewer people purchase homes and millions of foreclosures come on to the market.

The Case-Shiller 20-city home price index released Tuesday fell 1.3 percent in October from September.  All cities recorded monthly price declines. The last time that happened was in Feb. 2009.

Atlanta recorded the largest decline. Prices there fell 2.9 percent from a month earlier. Home prices in Washington dropped 0.2 percent in October, the second monthly decline after five straight increases.  Home prices in Dallas, Portland, Ore., Charlotte, N.C., Tampa, Fla. and Denver have fallen for four straight months.

The 20-city index has risen 4.4 percent from their April 2009 bottom. But it remains 29.6 percent below its July 2006 peak.

Foreclosures likely will remain high for the next two years.

IMPORTANT!!! Today's vote will define the Internet

Imagine if Comcast customers couldn't watch Netflix, but were limited only to Comcast's video-on-demand service. Imagine if a cable news network could get its website to load faster on your computer than your favourite local political blog. Imagine if big corporations with their own agenda could decide who wins or loses online. "The internet as we know it would cease to exist.

The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is today expected to formally approve controversial new rules on how internet users access content such as YouTube and Skype.

Dubbed by one US senator as "the most important free speech issue of our time", the rules drawn up by the country's media and telecoms regulator would effectively create two levels of internet access.

FCC members Michael Copps and Mignon Clyburn last night said they would support the proposal laid out by chairman Julius Genachowski. The five-member FCC panel is expected to approve the proposal in Washington later today.

However, the new framework would allow mobile internet service providers to charge content companies for more efficient delivery to US homes. Wireless providers will also be allowed to block applications or services, providing that they are not competitors. Fixed-line and wireless provider Verizon, for example, would not be allowed to block access to Skype because it provides a rival voice service.

The new rules allow providers to charge customers more for using high-bandwidth services such as downloading or streaming videos on YouTube or online movie rental site Netflix.

Today's vote represents the first time the principle of net neutrality – where all internet content is treated equally – has been formally ratified in the US. It is the culmination of five years of heated discussion over the future of the internet.

Public interest groups and technology companies called the framework "fake net neutrality" and said the rules "create a vague and shifting landscape, open to interpretation", rather than enshrining principles of the open internet. Netflix, Skype and Amazon have also previously expressed reservations about the plans.

Who rules the web? Important

High Credit Card Rates & Fees * Thanks to the Supreme Court

Have you ever wondered why all your credit card bills seem to get mailed to South Dakota, Nevada or Delaware? Or how credit card companies can ignore your state's usury law, which limits the amount of interest that can be charged on a loan?

The answer lies in a couple of Supreme Court Rulings. A 1978 Supreme Court ruling, Marquette National Bank of Minneapolis vs. First of Omaha Service Corp. and the other Smiley vs. Citibank.

The first ruling let credit card issuers "export" nationally whatever interest rate was allowed in the state in which they were headquartered. To induce the companies to relocate, some states simply dropped their usury laws. Several large issuers bit on the deal, relocated and it became anything goes for credit card rates.

A couple of states deciding their economic development plan was going to be to attract the credit card export industry,deregulated their consumer credit marketplace and said, 'If you come plop your little headquarters in Delaware or South Dakota, you can export our interest rate cap -- look at us, we don't have any!' Other states said, 'They're getting banks to headquarter there; we should take our interest rate caps off as well to compete for credit card issuance.' It became a tool to deregulate credit card rates."

South Dakota was the first to offer what amounted to unlimited interest rates to lure card issuers into relocating their headquarters. A quick look at the membership of the state's Chamber of Commerce shows how big of an impact the offer made -- and continues to make -- on the state's employment base.

It's no coincidence that South Dakota is the home state for subprime card issuer First Premier Bank, which gained notoriety for offering a card with an interest rate of 79.9 percent.

In the other case mentioned, Smiley vs. Citibank, a California woman, Barbara Smiley, had filed a class action lawsuit against Citibank's South Dakota-based credit card division, claiming that the $15 late fee she was charged on her credit card bill violated California state law. Citibank responded that the late fee was, in effect, interest and was covered under the National Bank Act. The Supreme Court agreed; the result was an increase of late fees and other fees from $10 or $15 to the $39 fee that credit card customers may see today.

The pair of decisions caused terrific abuses in the credit card market, and probably stunted the growth of an honest credit card market for over 20 years. They also killed off State Usury Laws for Credit Card Rates, increased late fees and other fees and encouraged predatory lending. The result, were the kinds of tricks and traps based on legal gimmickry that led to the need for some protection for Consumers. That's why we now have the Credit CARD Act of 2009 and the Wall Street reform law that included a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Don't expect those Acts to protect us from being charged rediculously high rates though, to take it that far would come across as anti-capitalism, socialistic or even downright unamerican.