Mapping America

[ocrenter]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea]Of course the above is only looking at income. There could be few more tracts with high net wealth but smaller current income.

However, as far as I can think high income and high wealth are usually well correlated, so I wouldn’t expect a lot of them.[/quote]

certainly. I think that’s the real reason why the couple of CV tracts actually surpassed RSF Covenant as well as Fairbank Ranch.

It may be safe to use this info to figure out where “new money” is as opposed to “old money.” This also helps figure out which “newer” neighborhoods will have a better chance of becoming established well-to-do high end neighborhoods.

I saw this with Newport Beach as well, the older parts of Newport has less of the “over 200k” folks compared to the newer Newport Coast.

[ocrenter]

another interesting phenomonon as I play with the maps.

If I change the map to Asians, all of the sudden I would see an island of highly concentrated Asians at 40-50%, turns out of course it is a census tract covering a major university.

Unfortunately when I change the map to Blacks, all of the sudden I would see an island of highly concentrated population, which unfortunately is a census tract for a major incarceration facility.

[ocrenter]

another interesting phenomonon as I play with the maps.

If I change the map to Asians, all of the sudden I would see an island of highly concentrated Asians at 40-50%, turns out of course it is a census tract covering a major university.

Unfortunately when I change the map to Blacks, all of the sudden I would see an island of highly concentrated population, which unfortunately is a census tract for a major incarceration facility.

[ocrenter]

another interesting phenomonon as I play with the maps.

If I change the map to Asians, all of the sudden I would see an island of highly concentrated Asians at 40-50%, turns out of course it is a census tract covering a major university.

Unfortunately when I change the map to Blacks, all of the sudden I would see an island of highly concentrated population, which unfortunately is a census tract for a major incarceration facility.

[ocrenter]

another interesting phenomonon as I play with the maps.

If I change the map to Asians, all of the sudden I would see an island of highly concentrated Asians at 40-50%, turns out of course it is a census tract covering a major university.

Unfortunately when I change the map to Blacks, all of the sudden I would see an island of highly concentrated population, which unfortunately is a census tract for a major incarceration facility.

[ocrenter]

another interesting phenomonon as I play with the maps.

If I change the map to Asians, all of the sudden I would see an island of highly concentrated Asians at 40-50%, turns out of course it is a census tract covering a major university.

Unfortunately when I change the map to Blacks, all of the sudden I would see an island of highly concentrated population, which unfortunately is a census tract for a major incarceration facility.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=ocrenter]certainly. I think that’s the real reason why the couple of CV tracts actually surpassed RSF Covenant as well as Fairbank Ranch . . . [/quote]

I’d like to know what percentage of properties located INSIDE the covenant are paid off as opposed to the percentage paid off in CV (92130).

And, how many homeowners INSIDE the covenant have total encumbrances of <=$150K against their properties as opposed to CV?? These answers may not be very easy to obtain but will surely tell the tale, here :=]

[bearishgurl]

[quote=ocrenter]certainly. I think that’s the real reason why the couple of CV tracts actually surpassed RSF Covenant as well as Fairbank Ranch . . . [/quote]

I’d like to know what percentage of properties located INSIDE the covenant are paid off as opposed to the percentage paid off in CV (92130).

And, how many homeowners INSIDE the covenant have total encumbrances of <=$150K against their properties as opposed to CV?? These answers may not be very easy to obtain but will surely tell the tale, here :=]

[bearishgurl]

[quote=ocrenter]certainly. I think that’s the real reason why the couple of CV tracts actually surpassed RSF Covenant as well as Fairbank Ranch . . . [/quote]

I’d like to know what percentage of properties located INSIDE the covenant are paid off as opposed to the percentage paid off in CV (92130).

And, how many homeowners INSIDE the covenant have total encumbrances of <=$150K against their properties as opposed to CV?? These answers may not be very easy to obtain but will surely tell the tale, here :=]

[bearishgurl]

[quote=ocrenter]certainly. I think that’s the real reason why the couple of CV tracts actually surpassed RSF Covenant as well as Fairbank Ranch . . . [/quote]

I’d like to know what percentage of properties located INSIDE the covenant are paid off as opposed to the percentage paid off in CV (92130).

And, how many homeowners INSIDE the covenant have total encumbrances of <=$150K against their properties as opposed to CV?? These answers may not be very easy to obtain but will surely tell the tale, here :=]

[bearishgurl]

[quote=ocrenter]certainly. I think that’s the real reason why the couple of CV tracts actually surpassed RSF Covenant as well as Fairbank Ranch . . . [/quote]

I’d like to know what percentage of properties located INSIDE the covenant are paid off as opposed to the percentage paid off in CV (92130).

And, how many homeowners INSIDE the covenant have total encumbrances of <=$150K against their properties as opposed to CV?? These answers may not be very easy to obtain but will surely tell the tale, here :=]

[ocrenter]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=ocrenter]certainly. I think that’s the real reason why the couple of CV tracts actually surpassed RSF Covenant as well as Fairbank Ranch . . . [/quote]

I’d like to know what percentage of properties located INSIDE the covenant are paid off as opposed to the percentage paid off in CV (92130).

And, how many homeowners INSIDE the covenant have total encumbrances of <=$150K against their properties as opposed to CV?? These answers may not be very easy to obtain but will surely tell the tale, here :=][/quote] you can infer some of that by looking at the % with over 30% of income going to mortgage. and the Covenant vs the north CV tracts are really of no difference, all are within the 40-50% mark. And that doesn't really mean much as it simply means rich folks defer paying off their mortgage secondary to tax benefits.

[ocrenter]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=ocrenter]certainly. I think that’s the real reason why the couple of CV tracts actually surpassed RSF Covenant as well as Fairbank Ranch . . . [/quote]

I’d like to know what percentage of properties located INSIDE the covenant are paid off as opposed to the percentage paid off in CV (92130).

And, how many homeowners INSIDE the covenant have total encumbrances of <=$150K against their properties as opposed to CV?? These answers may not be very easy to obtain but will surely tell the tale, here :=][/quote] you can infer some of that by looking at the % with over 30% of income going to mortgage. and the Covenant vs the north CV tracts are really of no difference, all are within the 40-50% mark. And that doesn't really mean much as it simply means rich folks defer paying off their mortgage secondary to tax benefits.

[ocrenter]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=ocrenter]certainly. I think that’s the real reason why the couple of CV tracts actually surpassed RSF Covenant as well as Fairbank Ranch . . . [/quote]

I’d like to know what percentage of properties located INSIDE the covenant are paid off as opposed to the percentage paid off in CV (92130).

And, how many homeowners INSIDE the covenant have total encumbrances of <=$150K against their properties as opposed to CV?? These answers may not be very easy to obtain but will surely tell the tale, here :=][/quote] you can infer some of that by looking at the % with over 30% of income going to mortgage. and the Covenant vs the north CV tracts are really of no difference, all are within the 40-50% mark. And that doesn't really mean much as it simply means rich folks defer paying off their mortgage secondary to tax benefits.

[ocrenter]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=ocrenter]certainly. I think that’s the real reason why the couple of CV tracts actually surpassed RSF Covenant as well as Fairbank Ranch . . . [/quote]

I’d like to know what percentage of properties located INSIDE the covenant are paid off as opposed to the percentage paid off in CV (92130).

And, how many homeowners INSIDE the covenant have total encumbrances of <=$150K against their properties as opposed to CV?? These answers may not be very easy to obtain but will surely tell the tale, here :=][/quote] you can infer some of that by looking at the % with over 30% of income going to mortgage. and the Covenant vs the north CV tracts are really of no difference, all are within the 40-50% mark. And that doesn't really mean much as it simply means rich folks defer paying off their mortgage secondary to tax benefits.

[Author]

Posts