September 28, 2006 at 9:41 PM #7627adminKeymaster
[img_assist|nid=1717|title=Church attendance vs. increase in home price|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=400|height=267]
Spurious correlation, or causation? Will the upcoming depression bring the coastal non-believers to their senses?September 28, 2006 at 10:24 PM #36792AnonymousGuest
I value your well thought out input jg, but please keep religion in “off topic.” To me your graph proves “Religion is the opium of the people (masses)” Karl Marx.September 28, 2006 at 10:43 PM #36795DanielParticipant
I posted this answer at the end of the thread that brought up this topic (“Did High Tech Incomes…”). I see that it’s now spawned a new thread, so I’m going to re-post it here, just to make it visible:
“On a related note, why did SD housing prices rise higher than Austin’s?”
My answer has been and will be all along: zoning and building restrictions. This is the only thing that all bubble areas have in common, and differ markedly from non-bubble areas. Income gap? No, look at San Diego and Austin. Fresno isn’t full of high rollers, either. Sunshine tax? No, Seattle and Boston are bubblicious despite the weather. Quality of life? There are very nice cities in Colorado and Utah that have sane prices. And there are overpriced hellholes all over inland California.
But: all bubble areas have city or state governments that place a lot of restrictions on buiding (environmental studies, long and expensive approvals, etc). Non-bubble areas do not. Here’s your answer.
Incidentally, this may have something to do with the political affiliation of the population (democrats tend to favor slow-growth policies, while republicans tend to let the free market build whatever it wants). That makes blue states more prone to RE bubbles. Since political affiliation also correlates with religion, voila, you have your explanation for the post above!September 28, 2006 at 10:49 PM #36796JESParticipant
JG – Where do you find this stuff! Please don’t move the thread as sparkey suggested…it belongs right here.September 28, 2006 at 10:59 PM #36797PerryChaseParticipant
Daniel is right on. Many Communist countries (Russia and Vietnam are examples) have some big real estate bubles (way more than San Diego) because of corruption and restrictions on building. Communists don’t exactly believe in God.September 29, 2006 at 2:28 AM #36802sdduuuudeParticipant
I’m trying to find a state in the upper left hand corner that I’d want to live in and can’t seem to find one.September 29, 2006 at 7:46 AM #36808blahblahblahParticipant
It’s not really government regulation that keeps those Austin prices “low” in relation to California prices. As any Texan knows, there are three things that keep your Texas property value from rising as much as a property on the coast. One is the high property taxes, which start at 2.2% and can approach 3% in the nicer areas (Texas has no state income tax and schools are funded almost completely from local property tax.) Two is the abundance of land which means that new houses are always being built, far more than in California. Three is the high energy costs; those 3000sf monsters are expensive to heat in the winter and really expensive to cool in the summer. $500/month electric bills are not at all uncommon in Texas. Oh, and your home insurance is going to be higher too because of the floods, hail, and tornadoes. Add all of these things up and your Texas bargain isn’t such a great deal anymore. Plus, you’re living in f***ing Texas! Fire ants! Rednecks in giant pickup trucks! 110 degree heat and 80% humidity! Wal-Mart on every corner! Really, really, REALLY F***ING FAT PEOPLE! It’s just a terrible place and by the way, I earned the right to say this because I LIVED THERE FOR 34 YEARS. Oh, and it wasn’t always so terrible. The houses used to be nice and small, the yards were big, it wasn’t as hot, the people weren’t as fat, and we didn’t have fire ants or Wal-Mart when I was a kid. I’m not sure what happened to the place but I sure don’t like it. I was sad when I left…September 29, 2006 at 8:03 AM #36809LookoutBelowParticipant
That was a wonderful description of Texas ! I totally agree, I visited there once (never again) their waves in south Texas totally suck and the water looks like chocolate milk. I saw a small hammerhead shark cruising around while I was standing in chest deep water 300 yards from shore and never did get to the break, especially with that damned shark swimming around, I went back in and ate oysters and marvelled at how and why people would live here.
Sorr….y off topic rant, but I had to comment.September 29, 2006 at 8:55 AM #36818powaysellerParticipant
Put the religion and the opium and anything else related to housing on this thread, please. jg showed an interesting correlation. (What’s up with being politically correct – that reminds me of Glorian Steinem staying in the 80’s that research into differences between boys and girls brain should not be done.)September 29, 2006 at 9:26 AM #36822blahblahblahParticipant
Maybe this is related to the correlation between church attendance and divorce. Divorce is higher in the red states (where church attendance is higher) than in the blue. Divorced couples have less money to spend and have to divide their resources among two residences.
Just a thought…September 29, 2006 at 9:28 AM #36824CarlsbadlivingParticipant
I think that Daniel is on the right track. Building regulations have something to do with it. I work as a land planning consultant. My company would not exist without the extensive land development regulations and the difficulty involved in SoCal development. California has long been ground zero for environmental efforts. We are forced to protect the wetlands, the bluffs, the canyons, the hillsides, etc. What’s there to protect in Kansas? Why would the environmentalists make a stink about a new subdivision on the outskirts of Omaha?
However, this is not new and has for some time caused prices to be more expensive in California. And things ARE getting worse, each year there are new regulations and more red tape to fight through. And we are slowly running out of land, but the end is a long time off. But I think that people buy into all of this. They believe that things are different here, that we are out of land, that EVERYONE wants to live here, and then they take action. Go to any Planning Commission or City Council hearing and listen to the NIMBYs. Once their house is built and they get moved in they don’t want any more development. They say “This place is special so let’s protect it”. It’s perfect for them. They can protest and pass initiatives forcing slow-growth development and that ends up limiting supply and forcing prices up. Who wouldn’t want fewer people moving in and higher property values? And then everyone realizes what’s happening and think that they must buy at any price if they ever want a chance to own in this paradise, then things spiral out of control.
But in the end you can’t have both. You can’t cut the supply, increase the price and expect it to last. As we see now, people will take their money and leave, and nobody will come to replace them. It has to reach equilibrium. Something has to give. The prices have to come down or the incomes have to come up.
I can’t predict the future, but it’s impossible to imagine it getting any cheaper to build here but at the same time I also can’t imagine incomes here suddenly skyrocketing. What does that mean? Most likely, sizeable price drops.September 29, 2006 at 1:30 PM #36853CardiffBaseballParticipant
Of course Texans are bigger, and that might explain why the Austin based football teams bitch slapped the SoCal team on their home field. Too many health nutty, vegans leads to less physical football teams?
Ah hell I am generalizing as much as Concho, once in awhile you see a tough player from out here.September 30, 2006 at 8:18 AM #36886OwnerOfCaliforniaParticipant
Too many health nutty, vegans leads to less physical football teams?
heh, you know that could describe Austin-based football teams as well? Pretty even match-up if you ask me 🙂September 30, 2006 at 9:35 AM #36887PerryChaseParticipant
The Red States are not anymore virtuous. They commit more sins so they have a lot more to repent!
I was just talking to my sister-in-law who’s from small town Kentucky. She said that the rate of teen pregnancy there is sky high. In fact, her brother who’s married just got some other girl pregnant. So much for the virtuous heartland. Why do think that religious people have so many children? Because they fxxx like rabbits!September 30, 2006 at 10:07 AM #368924plexownerParticipant
Question: What do you call the period of history when the Church dominated all aspects of western life?
Answer: The Dark Ages
Question: What do you call the period of history after the shackles of the Church were thrown off?
Answer: The Age of Enlightenment
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.