Why I am leaving San Diego

[bearishgurl]

[quote=jstoesz]you guys were talking about a neighborhood…rich’s charts are county wide.

Now have the incomes of those living in that neighborhood of clairemont gone up? That is harder data to find…

Here is the current.

http://realestate.aol.com/92117-neighborhood

Wow 7.7X annual household income…that’s real affordable![/quote]

jstoesz, I’m taking you at your (literal) word here. Maybe you and FSD SHOULD consider coming back to SD at some point!!

[jpinpb]

[quote=jstoesz]oh just to hammer my whole point home about how much homes cost here in relation to better neighborhoods in other cities.

This is the zip I grew up in.

http://realestate.aol.com/55419-neighborhood

3.2X !!!
income is 20k more and homes are almost 200k cheaper.[/quote]

Thanks for the link. 92110 is just as bad and 92109 is laughable

[jpinpb]

[quote=jstoesz]oh just to hammer my whole point home about how much homes cost here in relation to better neighborhoods in other cities.

This is the zip I grew up in.

http://realestate.aol.com/55419-neighborhood

3.2X !!!
income is 20k more and homes are almost 200k cheaper.[/quote]

Thanks for the link. 92110 is just as bad and 92109 is laughable

[jpinpb]

[quote=jstoesz]oh just to hammer my whole point home about how much homes cost here in relation to better neighborhoods in other cities.

This is the zip I grew up in.

http://realestate.aol.com/55419-neighborhood

3.2X !!!
income is 20k more and homes are almost 200k cheaper.[/quote]

Thanks for the link. 92110 is just as bad and 92109 is laughable

[jpinpb]

[quote=jstoesz]oh just to hammer my whole point home about how much homes cost here in relation to better neighborhoods in other cities.

This is the zip I grew up in.

http://realestate.aol.com/55419-neighborhood

3.2X !!!
income is 20k more and homes are almost 200k cheaper.[/quote]

Thanks for the link. 92110 is just as bad and 92109 is laughable

[jpinpb]

[quote=jstoesz]oh just to hammer my whole point home about how much homes cost here in relation to better neighborhoods in other cities.

This is the zip I grew up in.

http://realestate.aol.com/55419-neighborhood

3.2X !!!
income is 20k more and homes are almost 200k cheaper.[/quote]

Thanks for the link. 92110 is just as bad and 92109 is laughable

[jstoesz]

bearishgurl…

This probably gets argued monthly here. But it makes no difference if it is coastal or not. People who live in that zip code can only spend so much on housing. Living by the beach (if you call clairemont by the beach) doesn’t give you non-reportable income.

So either the place is swimming with imported retirees which in Clairemont I highly doubt. Or Californians are irresponsible SOB’s (this has been proven time and time again).

Oh, btw nice weather doesn’t give you unreported income either.

BTW, I like surfing but that is about all the beach is good for. It isn’t even that pretty, boring really. Now a frozen pond with which to play broom ball on…

[jstoesz]

bearishgurl…

This probably gets argued monthly here. But it makes no difference if it is coastal or not. People who live in that zip code can only spend so much on housing. Living by the beach (if you call clairemont by the beach) doesn’t give you non-reportable income.

So either the place is swimming with imported retirees which in Clairemont I highly doubt. Or Californians are irresponsible SOB’s (this has been proven time and time again).

Oh, btw nice weather doesn’t give you unreported income either.

BTW, I like surfing but that is about all the beach is good for. It isn’t even that pretty, boring really. Now a frozen pond with which to play broom ball on…

[jstoesz]

bearishgurl…

This probably gets argued monthly here. But it makes no difference if it is coastal or not. People who live in that zip code can only spend so much on housing. Living by the beach (if you call clairemont by the beach) doesn’t give you non-reportable income.

So either the place is swimming with imported retirees which in Clairemont I highly doubt. Or Californians are irresponsible SOB’s (this has been proven time and time again).

Oh, btw nice weather doesn’t give you unreported income either.

BTW, I like surfing but that is about all the beach is good for. It isn’t even that pretty, boring really. Now a frozen pond with which to play broom ball on…

[jstoesz]

bearishgurl…

This probably gets argued monthly here. But it makes no difference if it is coastal or not. People who live in that zip code can only spend so much on housing. Living by the beach (if you call clairemont by the beach) doesn’t give you non-reportable income.

So either the place is swimming with imported retirees which in Clairemont I highly doubt. Or Californians are irresponsible SOB’s (this has been proven time and time again).

Oh, btw nice weather doesn’t give you unreported income either.

BTW, I like surfing but that is about all the beach is good for. It isn’t even that pretty, boring really. Now a frozen pond with which to play broom ball on…

[jstoesz]

bearishgurl…

This probably gets argued monthly here. But it makes no difference if it is coastal or not. People who live in that zip code can only spend so much on housing. Living by the beach (if you call clairemont by the beach) doesn’t give you non-reportable income.

So either the place is swimming with imported retirees which in Clairemont I highly doubt. Or Californians are irresponsible SOB’s (this has been proven time and time again).

Oh, btw nice weather doesn’t give you unreported income either.

BTW, I like surfing but that is about all the beach is good for. It isn’t even that pretty, boring really. Now a frozen pond with which to play broom ball on…

[UCGal]

[quote=jstoesz]bearishgurl…

So either the place is swimming with imported retirees which in Clairemont I highly doubt. Or Californians are irresponsible SOB’s (this has been proven time and time again).

[/quote]

Or they bought 40-50 years ago when the ratio was better.

I know that’s true in Clairemont… lots of old retired folks there who’ve lived there since the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s.

Same is true for my ‘hood across the canyon, University City… I’d say 1/3 of the residents are older, been there forever types. And some of the folks replacing these older, been-there-forever types are the grown kids. (Raising my hand.) My block is about 1/3 original or close to original owners. 1/3 folks who bought in the last 10-15 years. Another 5-10% on my block is the adult kids who bought the house from their parents when they died or downsized.

Very few people paid current prices/values.

[UCGal]

[quote=jstoesz]bearishgurl…

So either the place is swimming with imported retirees which in Clairemont I highly doubt. Or Californians are irresponsible SOB’s (this has been proven time and time again).

[/quote]

Or they bought 40-50 years ago when the ratio was better.

I know that’s true in Clairemont… lots of old retired folks there who’ve lived there since the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s.

Same is true for my ‘hood across the canyon, University City… I’d say 1/3 of the residents are older, been there forever types. And some of the folks replacing these older, been-there-forever types are the grown kids. (Raising my hand.) My block is about 1/3 original or close to original owners. 1/3 folks who bought in the last 10-15 years. Another 5-10% on my block is the adult kids who bought the house from their parents when they died or downsized.

Very few people paid current prices/values.

[UCGal]

[quote=jstoesz]bearishgurl…

So either the place is swimming with imported retirees which in Clairemont I highly doubt. Or Californians are irresponsible SOB’s (this has been proven time and time again).

[/quote]

Or they bought 40-50 years ago when the ratio was better.

I know that’s true in Clairemont… lots of old retired folks there who’ve lived there since the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s.

Same is true for my ‘hood across the canyon, University City… I’d say 1/3 of the residents are older, been there forever types. And some of the folks replacing these older, been-there-forever types are the grown kids. (Raising my hand.) My block is about 1/3 original or close to original owners. 1/3 folks who bought in the last 10-15 years. Another 5-10% on my block is the adult kids who bought the house from their parents when they died or downsized.

Very few people paid current prices/values.

[UCGal]

[quote=jstoesz]bearishgurl…

So either the place is swimming with imported retirees which in Clairemont I highly doubt. Or Californians are irresponsible SOB’s (this has been proven time and time again).

[/quote]

Or they bought 40-50 years ago when the ratio was better.

I know that’s true in Clairemont… lots of old retired folks there who’ve lived there since the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s.

Same is true for my ‘hood across the canyon, University City… I’d say 1/3 of the residents are older, been there forever types. And some of the folks replacing these older, been-there-forever types are the grown kids. (Raising my hand.) My block is about 1/3 original or close to original owners. 1/3 folks who bought in the last 10-15 years. Another 5-10% on my block is the adult kids who bought the house from their parents when they died or downsized.

Very few people paid current prices/values.

[Author]

Posts