- This topic has 1,443 replies, 45 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 3 months ago by
an.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 11, 2010 at 2:41 PM #630740November 11, 2010 at 2:47 PM #629649
jstoesz
ParticipantI think Occams razor applies here.
Californians on the aggregate are irresponsible with their money. It has been proven time and time again. The reason why Clairemont cost so much has nothing to do with the old fogies, or weather, or the beach, and everything to do with people willing to spend more of their income on a house than other parts of the country.
November 11, 2010 at 2:47 PM #629727jstoesz
ParticipantI think Occams razor applies here.
Californians on the aggregate are irresponsible with their money. It has been proven time and time again. The reason why Clairemont cost so much has nothing to do with the old fogies, or weather, or the beach, and everything to do with people willing to spend more of their income on a house than other parts of the country.
November 11, 2010 at 2:47 PM #630301jstoesz
ParticipantI think Occams razor applies here.
Californians on the aggregate are irresponsible with their money. It has been proven time and time again. The reason why Clairemont cost so much has nothing to do with the old fogies, or weather, or the beach, and everything to do with people willing to spend more of their income on a house than other parts of the country.
November 11, 2010 at 2:47 PM #630428jstoesz
ParticipantI think Occams razor applies here.
Californians on the aggregate are irresponsible with their money. It has been proven time and time again. The reason why Clairemont cost so much has nothing to do with the old fogies, or weather, or the beach, and everything to do with people willing to spend more of their income on a house than other parts of the country.
November 11, 2010 at 2:47 PM #630745jstoesz
ParticipantI think Occams razor applies here.
Californians on the aggregate are irresponsible with their money. It has been proven time and time again. The reason why Clairemont cost so much has nothing to do with the old fogies, or weather, or the beach, and everything to do with people willing to spend more of their income on a house than other parts of the country.
November 11, 2010 at 2:53 PM #629654bearishgurl
Participant[quote=jstoesz]Imported retirees bring in new money which skews the data.[/quote]
Unless they are very wealthy retirees, who typically seek out coastal (read: beach), or golf course properties (read: Palm Sprs) in CA, we don’t get many “imported” retirees here, jstoesz. A retiree from your hometown of “55419” typically can’t afford to retire here if they have lived in “55419” all of their lives!
And, I can assure you that if my “wealthy” relatives from “7****” got a wild hair up their a$$ someday and decided to shop in SD County for a “retirement” or “vacation” home, they WOULD NOT be shopping in 92111 or 92117!!
The vast majority of SD County’s “retirees” have lived in coastal CA all or nearly all of their adult lives. Many, many are natives.
November 11, 2010 at 2:53 PM #629732bearishgurl
Participant[quote=jstoesz]Imported retirees bring in new money which skews the data.[/quote]
Unless they are very wealthy retirees, who typically seek out coastal (read: beach), or golf course properties (read: Palm Sprs) in CA, we don’t get many “imported” retirees here, jstoesz. A retiree from your hometown of “55419” typically can’t afford to retire here if they have lived in “55419” all of their lives!
And, I can assure you that if my “wealthy” relatives from “7****” got a wild hair up their a$$ someday and decided to shop in SD County for a “retirement” or “vacation” home, they WOULD NOT be shopping in 92111 or 92117!!
The vast majority of SD County’s “retirees” have lived in coastal CA all or nearly all of their adult lives. Many, many are natives.
November 11, 2010 at 2:53 PM #630306bearishgurl
Participant[quote=jstoesz]Imported retirees bring in new money which skews the data.[/quote]
Unless they are very wealthy retirees, who typically seek out coastal (read: beach), or golf course properties (read: Palm Sprs) in CA, we don’t get many “imported” retirees here, jstoesz. A retiree from your hometown of “55419” typically can’t afford to retire here if they have lived in “55419” all of their lives!
And, I can assure you that if my “wealthy” relatives from “7****” got a wild hair up their a$$ someday and decided to shop in SD County for a “retirement” or “vacation” home, they WOULD NOT be shopping in 92111 or 92117!!
The vast majority of SD County’s “retirees” have lived in coastal CA all or nearly all of their adult lives. Many, many are natives.
November 11, 2010 at 2:53 PM #630433bearishgurl
Participant[quote=jstoesz]Imported retirees bring in new money which skews the data.[/quote]
Unless they are very wealthy retirees, who typically seek out coastal (read: beach), or golf course properties (read: Palm Sprs) in CA, we don’t get many “imported” retirees here, jstoesz. A retiree from your hometown of “55419” typically can’t afford to retire here if they have lived in “55419” all of their lives!
And, I can assure you that if my “wealthy” relatives from “7****” got a wild hair up their a$$ someday and decided to shop in SD County for a “retirement” or “vacation” home, they WOULD NOT be shopping in 92111 or 92117!!
The vast majority of SD County’s “retirees” have lived in coastal CA all or nearly all of their adult lives. Many, many are natives.
November 11, 2010 at 2:53 PM #630750bearishgurl
Participant[quote=jstoesz]Imported retirees bring in new money which skews the data.[/quote]
Unless they are very wealthy retirees, who typically seek out coastal (read: beach), or golf course properties (read: Palm Sprs) in CA, we don’t get many “imported” retirees here, jstoesz. A retiree from your hometown of “55419” typically can’t afford to retire here if they have lived in “55419” all of their lives!
And, I can assure you that if my “wealthy” relatives from “7****” got a wild hair up their a$$ someday and decided to shop in SD County for a “retirement” or “vacation” home, they WOULD NOT be shopping in 92111 or 92117!!
The vast majority of SD County’s “retirees” have lived in coastal CA all or nearly all of their adult lives. Many, many are natives.
November 11, 2010 at 2:57 PM #629659bearishgurl
Participant[quote=jstoesz]. . . My point is that if that zip code has a lot of old people move in after they retired then the data is skewed with a lower median income with respect to home price. But there is no reason to suspect that given the median age.[/quote]
jstoesz, get a clue! No one “moved in” after they retired! They NEVER LEFT!!
After adding in SS, these household’s income is the same as it’s always been. Most were one-income households!
November 11, 2010 at 2:57 PM #629737bearishgurl
Participant[quote=jstoesz]. . . My point is that if that zip code has a lot of old people move in after they retired then the data is skewed with a lower median income with respect to home price. But there is no reason to suspect that given the median age.[/quote]
jstoesz, get a clue! No one “moved in” after they retired! They NEVER LEFT!!
After adding in SS, these household’s income is the same as it’s always been. Most were one-income households!
November 11, 2010 at 2:57 PM #630311bearishgurl
Participant[quote=jstoesz]. . . My point is that if that zip code has a lot of old people move in after they retired then the data is skewed with a lower median income with respect to home price. But there is no reason to suspect that given the median age.[/quote]
jstoesz, get a clue! No one “moved in” after they retired! They NEVER LEFT!!
After adding in SS, these household’s income is the same as it’s always been. Most were one-income households!
November 11, 2010 at 2:57 PM #630438bearishgurl
Participant[quote=jstoesz]. . . My point is that if that zip code has a lot of old people move in after they retired then the data is skewed with a lower median income with respect to home price. But there is no reason to suspect that given the median age.[/quote]
jstoesz, get a clue! No one “moved in” after they retired! They NEVER LEFT!!
After adding in SS, these household’s income is the same as it’s always been. Most were one-income households!
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.