How close is the San Diego housing market to the historical average?

[briansd1]

I should have been more precise. The money is equity for those startups; but it’s levered money from somewhere else.

When money gets tighter, as I think it will, even the startup will have to locate in cheaper locales; and they will no longer be able to afford profligate spending.

I’m pessimistic about the prospects of turning research into marketable products that generate real revenues. To me, that’s like the financial innovation bubble.

I just don’t see San Diego as a very business friendly city. It’s definitely hard to travel in out of SD with the necessary connecting flights.

Maybe I’m wrong. We’ll see in 2020 if SD has moved up the glamour ladder.

[davelj]

[quote=briansd1]I should have been more precise. The money is equity for those startups; but it’s levered money from somewhere else.

When money gets tighter, as I think it will, even the startup will have to locate in cheaper locales; and they will no longer be able to afford profligate spending.
[/quote]

Well, “it’s levered from somewhere else” only in the sense that MOST money, in some way, is levered money from somewhere else. Along the levered spectrum, however, venture capital is funded by “relatively” unlevered money – mostly pension funds, endowments and HNW individuals – as opposed to banks, investment banks, etc.

Having said that, given our level of debt, the need to service and pay down that debt, and the axiomatic nature of C + I + G + NX, it seems inescapable that “I” (of which, start-up investing is a component) and “C” must decline in order to service and pay down debt. So, if that’s what you’re getting at, then I agree.

[davelj]

[quote=briansd1]I should have been more precise. The money is equity for those startups; but it’s levered money from somewhere else.

When money gets tighter, as I think it will, even the startup will have to locate in cheaper locales; and they will no longer be able to afford profligate spending.
[/quote]

Well, “it’s levered from somewhere else” only in the sense that MOST money, in some way, is levered money from somewhere else. Along the levered spectrum, however, venture capital is funded by “relatively” unlevered money – mostly pension funds, endowments and HNW individuals – as opposed to banks, investment banks, etc.

Having said that, given our level of debt, the need to service and pay down that debt, and the axiomatic nature of C + I + G + NX, it seems inescapable that “I” (of which, start-up investing is a component) and “C” must decline in order to service and pay down debt. So, if that’s what you’re getting at, then I agree.

[davelj]

[quote=briansd1]I should have been more precise. The money is equity for those startups; but it’s levered money from somewhere else.

When money gets tighter, as I think it will, even the startup will have to locate in cheaper locales; and they will no longer be able to afford profligate spending.
[/quote]

Well, “it’s levered from somewhere else” only in the sense that MOST money, in some way, is levered money from somewhere else. Along the levered spectrum, however, venture capital is funded by “relatively” unlevered money – mostly pension funds, endowments and HNW individuals – as opposed to banks, investment banks, etc.

Having said that, given our level of debt, the need to service and pay down that debt, and the axiomatic nature of C + I + G + NX, it seems inescapable that “I” (of which, start-up investing is a component) and “C” must decline in order to service and pay down debt. So, if that’s what you’re getting at, then I agree.

[davelj]

[quote=briansd1]I should have been more precise. The money is equity for those startups; but it’s levered money from somewhere else.

When money gets tighter, as I think it will, even the startup will have to locate in cheaper locales; and they will no longer be able to afford profligate spending.
[/quote]

Well, “it’s levered from somewhere else” only in the sense that MOST money, in some way, is levered money from somewhere else. Along the levered spectrum, however, venture capital is funded by “relatively” unlevered money – mostly pension funds, endowments and HNW individuals – as opposed to banks, investment banks, etc.

Having said that, given our level of debt, the need to service and pay down that debt, and the axiomatic nature of C + I + G + NX, it seems inescapable that “I” (of which, start-up investing is a component) and “C” must decline in order to service and pay down debt. So, if that’s what you’re getting at, then I agree.

[davelj]

[quote=briansd1]I should have been more precise. The money is equity for those startups; but it’s levered money from somewhere else.

When money gets tighter, as I think it will, even the startup will have to locate in cheaper locales; and they will no longer be able to afford profligate spending.
[/quote]

Well, “it’s levered from somewhere else” only in the sense that MOST money, in some way, is levered money from somewhere else. Along the levered spectrum, however, venture capital is funded by “relatively” unlevered money – mostly pension funds, endowments and HNW individuals – as opposed to banks, investment banks, etc.

Having said that, given our level of debt, the need to service and pay down that debt, and the axiomatic nature of C + I + G + NX, it seems inescapable that “I” (of which, start-up investing is a component) and “C” must decline in order to service and pay down debt. So, if that’s what you’re getting at, then I agree.

[sdrealtor]

Three of my best and oldest friends who went to college in Allentown as well as an old girlfriend now stuck there caused me to laugh hysterically oput loud. Allentown is an absolute armpit.

SD has never and will never be a big company town. It is a very appealing town for bright young creative people who will work for peanuts to live here forever guaranteeing a steady stream of talent for start-ups.

[sdrealtor]

Three of my best and oldest friends who went to college in Allentown as well as an old girlfriend now stuck there caused me to laugh hysterically oput loud. Allentown is an absolute armpit.

SD has never and will never be a big company town. It is a very appealing town for bright young creative people who will work for peanuts to live here forever guaranteeing a steady stream of talent for start-ups.

[sdrealtor]

Three of my best and oldest friends who went to college in Allentown as well as an old girlfriend now stuck there caused me to laugh hysterically oput loud. Allentown is an absolute armpit.

SD has never and will never be a big company town. It is a very appealing town for bright young creative people who will work for peanuts to live here forever guaranteeing a steady stream of talent for start-ups.

[sdrealtor]

Three of my best and oldest friends who went to college in Allentown as well as an old girlfriend now stuck there caused me to laugh hysterically oput loud. Allentown is an absolute armpit.

SD has never and will never be a big company town. It is a very appealing town for bright young creative people who will work for peanuts to live here forever guaranteeing a steady stream of talent for start-ups.

[sdrealtor]

Three of my best and oldest friends who went to college in Allentown as well as an old girlfriend now stuck there caused me to laugh hysterically oput loud. Allentown is an absolute armpit.

SD has never and will never be a big company town. It is a very appealing town for bright young creative people who will work for peanuts to live here forever guaranteeing a steady stream of talent for start-ups.

[denverite]

There are some considerations that rarely are mentioned. First, the past 20 years have seen increasingly reduced tax burdens, coinciding with increased federal and state spending that has been financed with ever increasing cheap money and personal and government debt resulting in bubble driven economies. Using these years as a baseline, should inflate the ratio of house-to-income price, as more dollars become available to each individual as a percent of income.

Although the governments are currently supporting the housing market, that will eventually slow. We can’t, IMO, continue those actions forever. But in the interim, we have replaced personal debt with even more government debt. That’s almost certainly not sustainable.

Eventually the piper must be paid. We are starting to see some significant downsizing in state and local governments, which will have a tendency to depress the economy.

Most economists agree that higher taxes will be forthcoming reversing the trend of the last 20 years. The absolute amount is anyone’s guess, but to be sure, there will be fewer dollars in the hands of consumers, resulting in a negative effect on the economy.

My best guess is that the economy follows the Japanese model, drifting marginally lower year after year, with the housing market following the lead of the general economy.

[denverite]

There are some considerations that rarely are mentioned. First, the past 20 years have seen increasingly reduced tax burdens, coinciding with increased federal and state spending that has been financed with ever increasing cheap money and personal and government debt resulting in bubble driven economies. Using these years as a baseline, should inflate the ratio of house-to-income price, as more dollars become available to each individual as a percent of income.

Although the governments are currently supporting the housing market, that will eventually slow. We can’t, IMO, continue those actions forever. But in the interim, we have replaced personal debt with even more government debt. That’s almost certainly not sustainable.

Eventually the piper must be paid. We are starting to see some significant downsizing in state and local governments, which will have a tendency to depress the economy.

Most economists agree that higher taxes will be forthcoming reversing the trend of the last 20 years. The absolute amount is anyone’s guess, but to be sure, there will be fewer dollars in the hands of consumers, resulting in a negative effect on the economy.

My best guess is that the economy follows the Japanese model, drifting marginally lower year after year, with the housing market following the lead of the general economy.

[denverite]

There are some considerations that rarely are mentioned. First, the past 20 years have seen increasingly reduced tax burdens, coinciding with increased federal and state spending that has been financed with ever increasing cheap money and personal and government debt resulting in bubble driven economies. Using these years as a baseline, should inflate the ratio of house-to-income price, as more dollars become available to each individual as a percent of income.

Although the governments are currently supporting the housing market, that will eventually slow. We can’t, IMO, continue those actions forever. But in the interim, we have replaced personal debt with even more government debt. That’s almost certainly not sustainable.

Eventually the piper must be paid. We are starting to see some significant downsizing in state and local governments, which will have a tendency to depress the economy.

Most economists agree that higher taxes will be forthcoming reversing the trend of the last 20 years. The absolute amount is anyone’s guess, but to be sure, there will be fewer dollars in the hands of consumers, resulting in a negative effect on the economy.

My best guess is that the economy follows the Japanese model, drifting marginally lower year after year, with the housing market following the lead of the general economy.

[denverite]

There are some considerations that rarely are mentioned. First, the past 20 years have seen increasingly reduced tax burdens, coinciding with increased federal and state spending that has been financed with ever increasing cheap money and personal and government debt resulting in bubble driven economies. Using these years as a baseline, should inflate the ratio of house-to-income price, as more dollars become available to each individual as a percent of income.

Although the governments are currently supporting the housing market, that will eventually slow. We can’t, IMO, continue those actions forever. But in the interim, we have replaced personal debt with even more government debt. That’s almost certainly not sustainable.

Eventually the piper must be paid. We are starting to see some significant downsizing in state and local governments, which will have a tendency to depress the economy.

Most economists agree that higher taxes will be forthcoming reversing the trend of the last 20 years. The absolute amount is anyone’s guess, but to be sure, there will be fewer dollars in the hands of consumers, resulting in a negative effect on the economy.

My best guess is that the economy follows the Japanese model, drifting marginally lower year after year, with the housing market following the lead of the general economy.

[Author]

Posts