Housing won’t hit bottom ’til 2012

[jpinpb]

[quote=sdrealtor]js
I cant disagree that for higher priced RE the rent vs buy looks better. However for many people (not all) renting is a substandard lifestyle. It typically means moving every couple years and sometimes more often than that. It means not having control over the place you live. For many people their home is the core of their existence. I hate moving, I hate answering to anyone other than my children and I love the sense of security our home provides us. There are alot of people like me. This means you can take your calculator and toss wherever you want because all things considered a home is and will remain a good store of value (throwing out the crazy the few year we went through which we all agree was an extreme outlier period) because there will always be someone who wants what we homeowners have around here.

So if you want to live your life under the auspices of calculators you should do so. I on the other hand enjoy the rewards of my hard work be it a nice bottle of wine, a ticket to see Roger Waters play The Wall live in concert that I missed 30 years ago or on my home that makes no sense to own when you compare buy vs rent. I can live with that.[/quote]

sdr – you were the one that was professing that buying was better than renting financially. If you want to add emotions to the mix, that’s a different issue. I hate to say this, but sometimes you can be myoptic. I think you are very focused on just your area and think the other areas of San Diego are exactly like that. It is just so vastly different in the ZIPs that jstoesz and I watch.

[jpinpb]

[quote=jstoesz]Probably…hence my leaving I suppose.

Its not that I love the beach, although surfing is fun. Its just that most inland neighborhoods in S. California suck. There are no neighborhoods, as defined by side walks and walkable commerce, inland except for a select few and those have crime issues (la mesa comes to mind). Most areas of SD were built as lame tracks of the 70s up until today. They are devoid of character.

So historically I desire the impossible. Reasonable and affordable prices as compared to…not s. california. So I chose to leave, as many have suggested to me, sdr included (Is it cool to laugh at ones own joke?) MM and the like is not a neighborhood, it is a decrepit version of irvine.[/quote]

I feel your pain. It is elusive and comes w/a ridiculous premium, IMO.

[jpinpb]

[quote=jstoesz]Probably…hence my leaving I suppose.

Its not that I love the beach, although surfing is fun. Its just that most inland neighborhoods in S. California suck. There are no neighborhoods, as defined by side walks and walkable commerce, inland except for a select few and those have crime issues (la mesa comes to mind). Most areas of SD were built as lame tracks of the 70s up until today. They are devoid of character.

So historically I desire the impossible. Reasonable and affordable prices as compared to…not s. california. So I chose to leave, as many have suggested to me, sdr included (Is it cool to laugh at ones own joke?) MM and the like is not a neighborhood, it is a decrepit version of irvine.[/quote]

I feel your pain. It is elusive and comes w/a ridiculous premium, IMO.

[jpinpb]

[quote=jstoesz]Probably…hence my leaving I suppose.

Its not that I love the beach, although surfing is fun. Its just that most inland neighborhoods in S. California suck. There are no neighborhoods, as defined by side walks and walkable commerce, inland except for a select few and those have crime issues (la mesa comes to mind). Most areas of SD were built as lame tracks of the 70s up until today. They are devoid of character.

So historically I desire the impossible. Reasonable and affordable prices as compared to…not s. california. So I chose to leave, as many have suggested to me, sdr included (Is it cool to laugh at ones own joke?) MM and the like is not a neighborhood, it is a decrepit version of irvine.[/quote]

I feel your pain. It is elusive and comes w/a ridiculous premium, IMO.

[jpinpb]

[quote=jstoesz]Probably…hence my leaving I suppose.

Its not that I love the beach, although surfing is fun. Its just that most inland neighborhoods in S. California suck. There are no neighborhoods, as defined by side walks and walkable commerce, inland except for a select few and those have crime issues (la mesa comes to mind). Most areas of SD were built as lame tracks of the 70s up until today. They are devoid of character.

So historically I desire the impossible. Reasonable and affordable prices as compared to…not s. california. So I chose to leave, as many have suggested to me, sdr included (Is it cool to laugh at ones own joke?) MM and the like is not a neighborhood, it is a decrepit version of irvine.[/quote]

I feel your pain. It is elusive and comes w/a ridiculous premium, IMO.

[jpinpb]

[quote=jstoesz]Probably…hence my leaving I suppose.

Its not that I love the beach, although surfing is fun. Its just that most inland neighborhoods in S. California suck. There are no neighborhoods, as defined by side walks and walkable commerce, inland except for a select few and those have crime issues (la mesa comes to mind). Most areas of SD were built as lame tracks of the 70s up until today. They are devoid of character.

So historically I desire the impossible. Reasonable and affordable prices as compared to…not s. california. So I chose to leave, as many have suggested to me, sdr included (Is it cool to laugh at ones own joke?) MM and the like is not a neighborhood, it is a decrepit version of irvine.[/quote]

I feel your pain. It is elusive and comes w/a ridiculous premium, IMO.

[Anonymous]

CAR, my point on the correlation is only that the Fed can manipulate both home prices and RE prices through their interest rate policies. There is no evidence of a significant DIRECT link between stock prices and RE prices.

– Housing prices went up primarily due to credit bubble caused by Fed policies
– Stock market went up primarily due to Fed policies (ZIRP, QE).

In both cases the Fed policy is the cause and the rising asset prices is the result.

[Anonymous]

CAR, my point on the correlation is only that the Fed can manipulate both home prices and RE prices through their interest rate policies. There is no evidence of a significant DIRECT link between stock prices and RE prices.

– Housing prices went up primarily due to credit bubble caused by Fed policies
– Stock market went up primarily due to Fed policies (ZIRP, QE).

In both cases the Fed policy is the cause and the rising asset prices is the result.

[Anonymous]

CAR, my point on the correlation is only that the Fed can manipulate both home prices and RE prices through their interest rate policies. There is no evidence of a significant DIRECT link between stock prices and RE prices.

– Housing prices went up primarily due to credit bubble caused by Fed policies
– Stock market went up primarily due to Fed policies (ZIRP, QE).

In both cases the Fed policy is the cause and the rising asset prices is the result.

[Anonymous]

CAR, my point on the correlation is only that the Fed can manipulate both home prices and RE prices through their interest rate policies. There is no evidence of a significant DIRECT link between stock prices and RE prices.

– Housing prices went up primarily due to credit bubble caused by Fed policies
– Stock market went up primarily due to Fed policies (ZIRP, QE).

In both cases the Fed policy is the cause and the rising asset prices is the result.

[Anonymous]

CAR, my point on the correlation is only that the Fed can manipulate both home prices and RE prices through their interest rate policies. There is no evidence of a significant DIRECT link between stock prices and RE prices.

– Housing prices went up primarily due to credit bubble caused by Fed policies
– Stock market went up primarily due to Fed policies (ZIRP, QE).

In both cases the Fed policy is the cause and the rising asset prices is the result.

[zzz]

[quote=CONCHO]Whoah, that house on Upas closed at $819K! I had been watching that one, it was listed in the low 7s. It’s a cool place, the location next to the park is neat. Probably would’ve been $1M+ back in 2007.[/quote]

Concho, I think 819k was a steal

[zzz]

[quote=CONCHO]Whoah, that house on Upas closed at $819K! I had been watching that one, it was listed in the low 7s. It’s a cool place, the location next to the park is neat. Probably would’ve been $1M+ back in 2007.[/quote]

Concho, I think 819k was a steal

[zzz]

[quote=CONCHO]Whoah, that house on Upas closed at $819K! I had been watching that one, it was listed in the low 7s. It’s a cool place, the location next to the park is neat. Probably would’ve been $1M+ back in 2007.[/quote]

Concho, I think 819k was a steal

[zzz]

[quote=CONCHO]Whoah, that house on Upas closed at $819K! I had been watching that one, it was listed in the low 7s. It’s a cool place, the location next to the park is neat. Probably would’ve been $1M+ back in 2007.[/quote]

Concho, I think 819k was a steal

[Author]

Posts