3B/2B homes in Mira Mesa to be under $300K soon?

[sd_bear]

Just curious – where did you find that incomes grew 30% in this area in 7 years? My gut says that is pretty high, though I don’t know where to research it. If it did I’m sure its very likely much of it could be bubble money.

This math also takes into account that rents remain stable while housing goes down. Won’t rents will be going down as well? I guess its all speculation anyway.

[DWCAP]

esmith,
I dont really agree with all your numbers. They seem to optimistic.
First check the main page just below the latest entry. In the graph Rich graphs wages since 2001 and they are up maybe 18%, not 30%. I know you said 2000, but I dont think there was a huge jump in wages the year we started sliding into the last recession.
Second, this is a lower middle class area unless you are north of Calle Cristobal. Overall wages may be up ~18%, but the bottom half isnt feeling the good times. Remember the supposed jobless recovery of 2003-05? No jobs result in no wage growth. What wages/jobs growth their was for this segment of the population was in real estate, and over inflated as you said. It wont keep.
Third, it isnt like what wage growth was seen isnt being eaten away by gas, utilities, food and other inflation that is alot higher. To assume that people can contribute the same level of income to payments now as they could after the longest and most broadly felt boom in the last century is ignoring the realities of 3.50 gas.
Fourth, sure interest rates are 5.8%, for you. Most middle income people dont have $80000, let alone that in cash to invest. And those nice low interest rates you use are only for the best buyers. Most of us dont actually get that rate, especially from risk adverse banks demanding 20% down payments that the “buyers” just dont have.
People who can buy in carmel valley can easily buy in MM, but that doesnt mean that they want to live in MM.

Plus, something for FLU and all the rest to think about. In the same graph rich posted, rents are also tracked. They are up way over wages. (~10% more) If we are really sliding into a recession, with the job losses and everything else, do you really think that you can get a +10-15% rise in rents as is being discussed in other threads? The easy increases have already been had, anymore and you seriously jeperdize demand. I know, as I just posted, my current place sat empty for 2 months until they dropped the increase and accepted our application.

[DWCAP]

esmith,
I dont really agree with all your numbers. They seem to optimistic.
First check the main page just below the latest entry. In the graph Rich graphs wages since 2001 and they are up maybe 18%, not 30%. I know you said 2000, but I dont think there was a huge jump in wages the year we started sliding into the last recession.
Second, this is a lower middle class area unless you are north of Calle Cristobal. Overall wages may be up ~18%, but the bottom half isnt feeling the good times. Remember the supposed jobless recovery of 2003-05? No jobs result in no wage growth. What wages/jobs growth their was for this segment of the population was in real estate, and over inflated as you said. It wont keep.
Third, it isnt like what wage growth was seen isnt being eaten away by gas, utilities, food and other inflation that is alot higher. To assume that people can contribute the same level of income to payments now as they could after the longest and most broadly felt boom in the last century is ignoring the realities of 3.50 gas.
Fourth, sure interest rates are 5.8%, for you. Most middle income people dont have $80000, let alone that in cash to invest. And those nice low interest rates you use are only for the best buyers. Most of us dont actually get that rate, especially from risk adverse banks demanding 20% down payments that the “buyers” just dont have.
People who can buy in carmel valley can easily buy in MM, but that doesnt mean that they want to live in MM.

Plus, something for FLU and all the rest to think about. In the same graph rich posted, rents are also tracked. They are up way over wages. (~10% more) If we are really sliding into a recession, with the job losses and everything else, do you really think that you can get a +10-15% rise in rents as is being discussed in other threads? The easy increases have already been had, anymore and you seriously jeperdize demand. I know, as I just posted, my current place sat empty for 2 months until they dropped the increase and accepted our application.

[DWCAP]

esmith,
I dont really agree with all your numbers. They seem to optimistic.
First check the main page just below the latest entry. In the graph Rich graphs wages since 2001 and they are up maybe 18%, not 30%. I know you said 2000, but I dont think there was a huge jump in wages the year we started sliding into the last recession.
Second, this is a lower middle class area unless you are north of Calle Cristobal. Overall wages may be up ~18%, but the bottom half isnt feeling the good times. Remember the supposed jobless recovery of 2003-05? No jobs result in no wage growth. What wages/jobs growth their was for this segment of the population was in real estate, and over inflated as you said. It wont keep.
Third, it isnt like what wage growth was seen isnt being eaten away by gas, utilities, food and other inflation that is alot higher. To assume that people can contribute the same level of income to payments now as they could after the longest and most broadly felt boom in the last century is ignoring the realities of 3.50 gas.
Fourth, sure interest rates are 5.8%, for you. Most middle income people dont have $80000, let alone that in cash to invest. And those nice low interest rates you use are only for the best buyers. Most of us dont actually get that rate, especially from risk adverse banks demanding 20% down payments that the “buyers” just dont have.
People who can buy in carmel valley can easily buy in MM, but that doesnt mean that they want to live in MM.

Plus, something for FLU and all the rest to think about. In the same graph rich posted, rents are also tracked. They are up way over wages. (~10% more) If we are really sliding into a recession, with the job losses and everything else, do you really think that you can get a +10-15% rise in rents as is being discussed in other threads? The easy increases have already been had, anymore and you seriously jeperdize demand. I know, as I just posted, my current place sat empty for 2 months until they dropped the increase and accepted our application.

[DWCAP]

esmith,
I dont really agree with all your numbers. They seem to optimistic.
First check the main page just below the latest entry. In the graph Rich graphs wages since 2001 and they are up maybe 18%, not 30%. I know you said 2000, but I dont think there was a huge jump in wages the year we started sliding into the last recession.
Second, this is a lower middle class area unless you are north of Calle Cristobal. Overall wages may be up ~18%, but the bottom half isnt feeling the good times. Remember the supposed jobless recovery of 2003-05? No jobs result in no wage growth. What wages/jobs growth their was for this segment of the population was in real estate, and over inflated as you said. It wont keep.
Third, it isnt like what wage growth was seen isnt being eaten away by gas, utilities, food and other inflation that is alot higher. To assume that people can contribute the same level of income to payments now as they could after the longest and most broadly felt boom in the last century is ignoring the realities of 3.50 gas.
Fourth, sure interest rates are 5.8%, for you. Most middle income people dont have $80000, let alone that in cash to invest. And those nice low interest rates you use are only for the best buyers. Most of us dont actually get that rate, especially from risk adverse banks demanding 20% down payments that the “buyers” just dont have.
People who can buy in carmel valley can easily buy in MM, but that doesnt mean that they want to live in MM.

Plus, something for FLU and all the rest to think about. In the same graph rich posted, rents are also tracked. They are up way over wages. (~10% more) If we are really sliding into a recession, with the job losses and everything else, do you really think that you can get a +10-15% rise in rents as is being discussed in other threads? The easy increases have already been had, anymore and you seriously jeperdize demand. I know, as I just posted, my current place sat empty for 2 months until they dropped the increase and accepted our application.

[DWCAP]

esmith,
I dont really agree with all your numbers. They seem to optimistic.
First check the main page just below the latest entry. In the graph Rich graphs wages since 2001 and they are up maybe 18%, not 30%. I know you said 2000, but I dont think there was a huge jump in wages the year we started sliding into the last recession.
Second, this is a lower middle class area unless you are north of Calle Cristobal. Overall wages may be up ~18%, but the bottom half isnt feeling the good times. Remember the supposed jobless recovery of 2003-05? No jobs result in no wage growth. What wages/jobs growth their was for this segment of the population was in real estate, and over inflated as you said. It wont keep.
Third, it isnt like what wage growth was seen isnt being eaten away by gas, utilities, food and other inflation that is alot higher. To assume that people can contribute the same level of income to payments now as they could after the longest and most broadly felt boom in the last century is ignoring the realities of 3.50 gas.
Fourth, sure interest rates are 5.8%, for you. Most middle income people dont have $80000, let alone that in cash to invest. And those nice low interest rates you use are only for the best buyers. Most of us dont actually get that rate, especially from risk adverse banks demanding 20% down payments that the “buyers” just dont have.
People who can buy in carmel valley can easily buy in MM, but that doesnt mean that they want to live in MM.

Plus, something for FLU and all the rest to think about. In the same graph rich posted, rents are also tracked. They are up way over wages. (~10% more) If we are really sliding into a recession, with the job losses and everything else, do you really think that you can get a +10-15% rise in rents as is being discussed in other threads? The easy increases have already been had, anymore and you seriously jeperdize demand. I know, as I just posted, my current place sat empty for 2 months until they dropped the increase and accepted our application.

[Eugene]

In the graph Rich graphs wages since 2001 and they are up maybe 18%, not 30%.

I’m not sure where Rich gets his numbers. Median household income for San Diego County according to http://www.census.gov:
2001: $46,845
2006: $59,591 (27% increase)

For San Diego proper:
2001: $46,315
2006: $58,815 (27% increase)

this is a lower middle class area unless you are north of Calle Cristobal. Overall wages may be up ~18%, but the bottom half isnt feeling the good times.

In San Diego, bottom half / lower middle class does not get to own houses. There are not enough houses for everyone. Also, those numbers are median, not averages.

Third, it isnt like what wage growth was seen isnt being eaten away by gas, utilities, food and other inflation that is alot higher.

That’s true. Not sure how important that is though.

Most middle income people dont have $80000, let alone that in cash to invest.

How do you think people bought houses back in 2001 and before, when banks weren’t giving away zero-down loans with funny interest rates to anyone with a pulse? You had to bring some cash to the table, even to buy a house in MM.

People who can buy in carmel valley can easily buy in MM, but that doesnt mean that they want to live in MM.

The way I see it, MM is an entry level market, CV is a move-up market. You don’t buy your first house in CV. You buy in MM or Clairemont, you pay off your mortgage, you save money, then you trade up.

[Eugene]

In the graph Rich graphs wages since 2001 and they are up maybe 18%, not 30%.

I’m not sure where Rich gets his numbers. Median household income for San Diego County according to http://www.census.gov:
2001: $46,845
2006: $59,591 (27% increase)

For San Diego proper:
2001: $46,315
2006: $58,815 (27% increase)

this is a lower middle class area unless you are north of Calle Cristobal. Overall wages may be up ~18%, but the bottom half isnt feeling the good times.

In San Diego, bottom half / lower middle class does not get to own houses. There are not enough houses for everyone. Also, those numbers are median, not averages.

Third, it isnt like what wage growth was seen isnt being eaten away by gas, utilities, food and other inflation that is alot higher.

That’s true. Not sure how important that is though.

Most middle income people dont have $80000, let alone that in cash to invest.

How do you think people bought houses back in 2001 and before, when banks weren’t giving away zero-down loans with funny interest rates to anyone with a pulse? You had to bring some cash to the table, even to buy a house in MM.

People who can buy in carmel valley can easily buy in MM, but that doesnt mean that they want to live in MM.

The way I see it, MM is an entry level market, CV is a move-up market. You don’t buy your first house in CV. You buy in MM or Clairemont, you pay off your mortgage, you save money, then you trade up.

[Eugene]

In the graph Rich graphs wages since 2001 and they are up maybe 18%, not 30%.

I’m not sure where Rich gets his numbers. Median household income for San Diego County according to http://www.census.gov:
2001: $46,845
2006: $59,591 (27% increase)

For San Diego proper:
2001: $46,315
2006: $58,815 (27% increase)

this is a lower middle class area unless you are north of Calle Cristobal. Overall wages may be up ~18%, but the bottom half isnt feeling the good times.

In San Diego, bottom half / lower middle class does not get to own houses. There are not enough houses for everyone. Also, those numbers are median, not averages.

Third, it isnt like what wage growth was seen isnt being eaten away by gas, utilities, food and other inflation that is alot higher.

That’s true. Not sure how important that is though.

Most middle income people dont have $80000, let alone that in cash to invest.

How do you think people bought houses back in 2001 and before, when banks weren’t giving away zero-down loans with funny interest rates to anyone with a pulse? You had to bring some cash to the table, even to buy a house in MM.

People who can buy in carmel valley can easily buy in MM, but that doesnt mean that they want to live in MM.

The way I see it, MM is an entry level market, CV is a move-up market. You don’t buy your first house in CV. You buy in MM or Clairemont, you pay off your mortgage, you save money, then you trade up.

[Eugene]

In the graph Rich graphs wages since 2001 and they are up maybe 18%, not 30%.

I’m not sure where Rich gets his numbers. Median household income for San Diego County according to http://www.census.gov:
2001: $46,845
2006: $59,591 (27% increase)

For San Diego proper:
2001: $46,315
2006: $58,815 (27% increase)

this is a lower middle class area unless you are north of Calle Cristobal. Overall wages may be up ~18%, but the bottom half isnt feeling the good times.

In San Diego, bottom half / lower middle class does not get to own houses. There are not enough houses for everyone. Also, those numbers are median, not averages.

Third, it isnt like what wage growth was seen isnt being eaten away by gas, utilities, food and other inflation that is alot higher.

That’s true. Not sure how important that is though.

Most middle income people dont have $80000, let alone that in cash to invest.

How do you think people bought houses back in 2001 and before, when banks weren’t giving away zero-down loans with funny interest rates to anyone with a pulse? You had to bring some cash to the table, even to buy a house in MM.

People who can buy in carmel valley can easily buy in MM, but that doesnt mean that they want to live in MM.

The way I see it, MM is an entry level market, CV is a move-up market. You don’t buy your first house in CV. You buy in MM or Clairemont, you pay off your mortgage, you save money, then you trade up.

[Eugene]

In the graph Rich graphs wages since 2001 and they are up maybe 18%, not 30%.

I’m not sure where Rich gets his numbers. Median household income for San Diego County according to http://www.census.gov:
2001: $46,845
2006: $59,591 (27% increase)

For San Diego proper:
2001: $46,315
2006: $58,815 (27% increase)

this is a lower middle class area unless you are north of Calle Cristobal. Overall wages may be up ~18%, but the bottom half isnt feeling the good times.

In San Diego, bottom half / lower middle class does not get to own houses. There are not enough houses for everyone. Also, those numbers are median, not averages.

Third, it isnt like what wage growth was seen isnt being eaten away by gas, utilities, food and other inflation that is alot higher.

That’s true. Not sure how important that is though.

Most middle income people dont have $80000, let alone that in cash to invest.

How do you think people bought houses back in 2001 and before, when banks weren’t giving away zero-down loans with funny interest rates to anyone with a pulse? You had to bring some cash to the table, even to buy a house in MM.

People who can buy in carmel valley can easily buy in MM, but that doesnt mean that they want to live in MM.

The way I see it, MM is an entry level market, CV is a move-up market. You don’t buy your first house in CV. You buy in MM or Clairemont, you pay off your mortgage, you save money, then you trade up.

[kewp]

There are not enough houses for everyone.

If that were the case, houses would be getting more expensive, not less. There is a huge glut of vacant homes on the market, both bank and speculator owned.

Re: The San Diego median income. We’ll see what happens to that after all the bubbly jobs disappear over the next two years.

[kewp]

There are not enough houses for everyone.

If that were the case, houses would be getting more expensive, not less. There is a huge glut of vacant homes on the market, both bank and speculator owned.

Re: The San Diego median income. We’ll see what happens to that after all the bubbly jobs disappear over the next two years.

[kewp]

There are not enough houses for everyone.

If that were the case, houses would be getting more expensive, not less. There is a huge glut of vacant homes on the market, both bank and speculator owned.

Re: The San Diego median income. We’ll see what happens to that after all the bubbly jobs disappear over the next two years.

[kewp]

There are not enough houses for everyone.

If that were the case, houses would be getting more expensive, not less. There is a huge glut of vacant homes on the market, both bank and speculator owned.

Re: The San Diego median income. We’ll see what happens to that after all the bubbly jobs disappear over the next two years.

[Author]

Posts