- This topic has 145 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 9 months ago by
(former)FormerSanDiegan.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 11, 2011 at 12:01 PM #695597May 11, 2011 at 12:30 PM #694417
bearishgurl
ParticipantThe NY Times article uses Monterey/Carmel, CA as an example of what will happen to the housing market when their conforming limit is reduced to $483,000. This new limit is MUCH lower because Salinas and surrounds (farming communites) are included in this housing area, dragging the sold comps down.
In the article, an older home in Monterey is pictured as currently listed for $820K. A flight attendant who recently purchased a house in Monterey is quoted as saying he recently bought there using a low-downpayment program and would not be able to buy there under the proposed new conforming limit. I wonder why a flight attendant would want to live so far from a major airport?
Last time I looked (a few mos ago), Monterey was a “retirement town” and had a nearby Navy installation “Pt. Mugu,” but little other industry and jobs. The Navy provides housing for its families stationed there. Persons who purchase in Monterey/Carmel would likely be retired and even have access to private planes. I don’t understand why its residents feel entitled to have the conforming limit remain at $729K. Why should the rest of the taxpayers bail out Fannie/Freddie when they are making RE loan guarantees to persons who voluntarily purchase in resort communities and other upper-tier communities?
I would be interested to know the percentage of property purchases in Monterey/Carmel which are all-cash sales.
May 11, 2011 at 12:30 PM #694500bearishgurl
ParticipantThe NY Times article uses Monterey/Carmel, CA as an example of what will happen to the housing market when their conforming limit is reduced to $483,000. This new limit is MUCH lower because Salinas and surrounds (farming communites) are included in this housing area, dragging the sold comps down.
In the article, an older home in Monterey is pictured as currently listed for $820K. A flight attendant who recently purchased a house in Monterey is quoted as saying he recently bought there using a low-downpayment program and would not be able to buy there under the proposed new conforming limit. I wonder why a flight attendant would want to live so far from a major airport?
Last time I looked (a few mos ago), Monterey was a “retirement town” and had a nearby Navy installation “Pt. Mugu,” but little other industry and jobs. The Navy provides housing for its families stationed there. Persons who purchase in Monterey/Carmel would likely be retired and even have access to private planes. I don’t understand why its residents feel entitled to have the conforming limit remain at $729K. Why should the rest of the taxpayers bail out Fannie/Freddie when they are making RE loan guarantees to persons who voluntarily purchase in resort communities and other upper-tier communities?
I would be interested to know the percentage of property purchases in Monterey/Carmel which are all-cash sales.
May 11, 2011 at 12:30 PM #695104bearishgurl
ParticipantThe NY Times article uses Monterey/Carmel, CA as an example of what will happen to the housing market when their conforming limit is reduced to $483,000. This new limit is MUCH lower because Salinas and surrounds (farming communites) are included in this housing area, dragging the sold comps down.
In the article, an older home in Monterey is pictured as currently listed for $820K. A flight attendant who recently purchased a house in Monterey is quoted as saying he recently bought there using a low-downpayment program and would not be able to buy there under the proposed new conforming limit. I wonder why a flight attendant would want to live so far from a major airport?
Last time I looked (a few mos ago), Monterey was a “retirement town” and had a nearby Navy installation “Pt. Mugu,” but little other industry and jobs. The Navy provides housing for its families stationed there. Persons who purchase in Monterey/Carmel would likely be retired and even have access to private planes. I don’t understand why its residents feel entitled to have the conforming limit remain at $729K. Why should the rest of the taxpayers bail out Fannie/Freddie when they are making RE loan guarantees to persons who voluntarily purchase in resort communities and other upper-tier communities?
I would be interested to know the percentage of property purchases in Monterey/Carmel which are all-cash sales.
May 11, 2011 at 12:30 PM #695254bearishgurl
ParticipantThe NY Times article uses Monterey/Carmel, CA as an example of what will happen to the housing market when their conforming limit is reduced to $483,000. This new limit is MUCH lower because Salinas and surrounds (farming communites) are included in this housing area, dragging the sold comps down.
In the article, an older home in Monterey is pictured as currently listed for $820K. A flight attendant who recently purchased a house in Monterey is quoted as saying he recently bought there using a low-downpayment program and would not be able to buy there under the proposed new conforming limit. I wonder why a flight attendant would want to live so far from a major airport?
Last time I looked (a few mos ago), Monterey was a “retirement town” and had a nearby Navy installation “Pt. Mugu,” but little other industry and jobs. The Navy provides housing for its families stationed there. Persons who purchase in Monterey/Carmel would likely be retired and even have access to private planes. I don’t understand why its residents feel entitled to have the conforming limit remain at $729K. Why should the rest of the taxpayers bail out Fannie/Freddie when they are making RE loan guarantees to persons who voluntarily purchase in resort communities and other upper-tier communities?
I would be interested to know the percentage of property purchases in Monterey/Carmel which are all-cash sales.
May 11, 2011 at 12:30 PM #695607bearishgurl
ParticipantThe NY Times article uses Monterey/Carmel, CA as an example of what will happen to the housing market when their conforming limit is reduced to $483,000. This new limit is MUCH lower because Salinas and surrounds (farming communites) are included in this housing area, dragging the sold comps down.
In the article, an older home in Monterey is pictured as currently listed for $820K. A flight attendant who recently purchased a house in Monterey is quoted as saying he recently bought there using a low-downpayment program and would not be able to buy there under the proposed new conforming limit. I wonder why a flight attendant would want to live so far from a major airport?
Last time I looked (a few mos ago), Monterey was a “retirement town” and had a nearby Navy installation “Pt. Mugu,” but little other industry and jobs. The Navy provides housing for its families stationed there. Persons who purchase in Monterey/Carmel would likely be retired and even have access to private planes. I don’t understand why its residents feel entitled to have the conforming limit remain at $729K. Why should the rest of the taxpayers bail out Fannie/Freddie when they are making RE loan guarantees to persons who voluntarily purchase in resort communities and other upper-tier communities?
I would be interested to know the percentage of property purchases in Monterey/Carmel which are all-cash sales.
May 11, 2011 at 12:52 PM #694432outtamojo
ParticipantI believe the military installation you are referring to was once called “Fort Ord ” that has been closed since 1994. Could you be referring to the DLI in Monterey?
May 11, 2011 at 12:52 PM #694516outtamojo
ParticipantI believe the military installation you are referring to was once called “Fort Ord ” that has been closed since 1994. Could you be referring to the DLI in Monterey?
May 11, 2011 at 12:52 PM #695119outtamojo
ParticipantI believe the military installation you are referring to was once called “Fort Ord ” that has been closed since 1994. Could you be referring to the DLI in Monterey?
May 11, 2011 at 12:52 PM #695269outtamojo
ParticipantI believe the military installation you are referring to was once called “Fort Ord ” that has been closed since 1994. Could you be referring to the DLI in Monterey?
May 11, 2011 at 12:52 PM #695622outtamojo
ParticipantI believe the military installation you are referring to was once called “Fort Ord ” that has been closed since 1994. Could you be referring to the DLI in Monterey?
May 11, 2011 at 1:00 PM #694442(former)FormerSanDiegan
ParticipantPoint Mugu is in ventura County, about 300 miles from Monterey.
May 11, 2011 at 1:00 PM #694526(former)FormerSanDiegan
ParticipantPoint Mugu is in ventura County, about 300 miles from Monterey.
May 11, 2011 at 1:00 PM #695130(former)FormerSanDiegan
ParticipantPoint Mugu is in ventura County, about 300 miles from Monterey.
May 11, 2011 at 1:00 PM #695279(former)FormerSanDiegan
ParticipantPoint Mugu is in ventura County, about 300 miles from Monterey.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.