Why I am leaving San Diego

[sdrealtor]

[quote=CA renter][quote=sdrealtor]I think it is comical when people beleive the forces fo supply and demand do not impact prices.[/quote]

All of those old people in the desirable, established neighborhoods represent future supply — one way or another (as rentals, or homes for sale). Even if their kids move it, they will free up one house as well.[/quote]

Absolutely it just slows the flow dramatically which helps demand pile up on itself which creates price supports. Not saying its right or wrong but again “it is what it is”.

[CA renter]

[quote=jstoesz][quote=sdrealtor]I think it is comical when people beleive the forces fo supply and demand do not impact prices.[/quote]

Have I stated the contrary? I willingly admit that they are at work. Free or nearly free money, combined with no compulsion to repay, and a vast sea of lemmings to hold the bag has sent the supply curve way to the right of saner markets.

Yup it is not supply and demand I am frustrated with. It is with the financial irresponsibility of my peers. And that has not even begun to correct.[/quote]

Well said, jstoesz.

We don’t know what true “supply and demand” are when supply is being artificially kept off the market (foreclosure moratoriums of various sorts that have been going on for years now, not to mention the loan mod merry-go-round, etc.) and demand is being artificially stimulated by tax credits, artificially-suppressed interest rates, and the threat of dollar devaluation.

This is exactly the problem. Buyers are being forced to buy in a market that is 100% rigged against them. Organic “supply and demand” are NOT what’s driving sales and prices in this market.

[CA renter]

[quote=jstoesz][quote=sdrealtor]I think it is comical when people beleive the forces fo supply and demand do not impact prices.[/quote]

Have I stated the contrary? I willingly admit that they are at work. Free or nearly free money, combined with no compulsion to repay, and a vast sea of lemmings to hold the bag has sent the supply curve way to the right of saner markets.

Yup it is not supply and demand I am frustrated with. It is with the financial irresponsibility of my peers. And that has not even begun to correct.[/quote]

Well said, jstoesz.

We don’t know what true “supply and demand” are when supply is being artificially kept off the market (foreclosure moratoriums of various sorts that have been going on for years now, not to mention the loan mod merry-go-round, etc.) and demand is being artificially stimulated by tax credits, artificially-suppressed interest rates, and the threat of dollar devaluation.

This is exactly the problem. Buyers are being forced to buy in a market that is 100% rigged against them. Organic “supply and demand” are NOT what’s driving sales and prices in this market.

[CA renter]

[quote=jstoesz][quote=sdrealtor]I think it is comical when people beleive the forces fo supply and demand do not impact prices.[/quote]

Have I stated the contrary? I willingly admit that they are at work. Free or nearly free money, combined with no compulsion to repay, and a vast sea of lemmings to hold the bag has sent the supply curve way to the right of saner markets.

Yup it is not supply and demand I am frustrated with. It is with the financial irresponsibility of my peers. And that has not even begun to correct.[/quote]

Well said, jstoesz.

We don’t know what true “supply and demand” are when supply is being artificially kept off the market (foreclosure moratoriums of various sorts that have been going on for years now, not to mention the loan mod merry-go-round, etc.) and demand is being artificially stimulated by tax credits, artificially-suppressed interest rates, and the threat of dollar devaluation.

This is exactly the problem. Buyers are being forced to buy in a market that is 100% rigged against them. Organic “supply and demand” are NOT what’s driving sales and prices in this market.

[CA renter]

[quote=jstoesz][quote=sdrealtor]I think it is comical when people beleive the forces fo supply and demand do not impact prices.[/quote]

Have I stated the contrary? I willingly admit that they are at work. Free or nearly free money, combined with no compulsion to repay, and a vast sea of lemmings to hold the bag has sent the supply curve way to the right of saner markets.

Yup it is not supply and demand I am frustrated with. It is with the financial irresponsibility of my peers. And that has not even begun to correct.[/quote]

Well said, jstoesz.

We don’t know what true “supply and demand” are when supply is being artificially kept off the market (foreclosure moratoriums of various sorts that have been going on for years now, not to mention the loan mod merry-go-round, etc.) and demand is being artificially stimulated by tax credits, artificially-suppressed interest rates, and the threat of dollar devaluation.

This is exactly the problem. Buyers are being forced to buy in a market that is 100% rigged against them. Organic “supply and demand” are NOT what’s driving sales and prices in this market.

[CA renter]

[quote=jstoesz][quote=sdrealtor]I think it is comical when people beleive the forces fo supply and demand do not impact prices.[/quote]

Have I stated the contrary? I willingly admit that they are at work. Free or nearly free money, combined with no compulsion to repay, and a vast sea of lemmings to hold the bag has sent the supply curve way to the right of saner markets.

Yup it is not supply and demand I am frustrated with. It is with the financial irresponsibility of my peers. And that has not even begun to correct.[/quote]

Well said, jstoesz.

We don’t know what true “supply and demand” are when supply is being artificially kept off the market (foreclosure moratoriums of various sorts that have been going on for years now, not to mention the loan mod merry-go-round, etc.) and demand is being artificially stimulated by tax credits, artificially-suppressed interest rates, and the threat of dollar devaluation.

This is exactly the problem. Buyers are being forced to buy in a market that is 100% rigged against them. Organic “supply and demand” are NOT what’s driving sales and prices in this market.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Rustico]I was just curious, is this right?

“In Minneapolis, substantial housing development has brought the city’s population to 390,000 – close to the city’s population in the mid-1970s.”

San Diego city/county 1970

696,769/1,357,854

San Diego city/county currently

1,359,132/3,053,793[/quote]

Jstoesz, Rustico’s post, above, got me thinking . . . I didn’t realize your hometown of Minneapolis (“Twin Cities” area) was so much smaller than San Diego, or that it may have been “shedding” population over the years. So I took the liberty to see how its housing market is currently doing:

http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/stories/2010/10/11/daily47.html

Minneapolis / St. Paul Business Journal – by Chris Newmarker
Date: Thursday, October 14, 2010, 3:42pm CDT – Last Modified: Thursday, October 14, 2010, 3:50pm CDT
There are a lot of states where it’s better; there are a lot of states where it’s worse. Minnesota’s home foreclosure rate was 25th in the country in the third quarter, according to a report released Thursday by an online marketplace for foreclosed homes.
RealtyTrac’s U.S. Foreclosure Market Report showed 9,499 Minnesota homes, or one out of every 245 housing units in the state, receiving a foreclosure notice in the quarter ended Sept. 30. Foreclosure activity was up 5.56 percent from the previous quarter, but down 10.56 percent from the third quarter of 2009.
Across the country, default notices, scheduled auctions and bank repossessions were reported on 930,437 properties in the third quarter. It was a nearly 4 percent increase from the second quarter of 2010, but was down 1 percent from last year’s third quarter.
Minnesota’s foreclosure rate pales in comparison to the states with the highest rates. The top state, Nevada, had one out of 29 homes going into foreclosure. The second-highest state, Arizona, had a one out of 55 rate, and Florida came in third with one out of 56.
The foreclosure rate in the Twin Cities was worse than the state of Minnesota, according to RealtyTrac data. The 13-county metro area, which includes two Wisconsin counties, saw 8,739 homes, or one out of 154, go into foreclosure in the third quarter. It was an 8.59 percent increase from the second quarter, but a 10.53 percent decrease from the third quarter of 2009.
Anoka County had the worst foreclosure rate in the metro area, one out of 87, while Isanti County had the best, one out of 933. Isanti County, though, seems to have worked through a great deal of troubled properties already; it had the steepest year-over-year drop in foreclosure activity in the Twin Cities, with foreclosure activity down 37.04 percent.

(emphasis added)

Here’s Realty Trac’s most recent “Foreclosure Activity chart” for major US markets:
http://www.realtytrac.com/content/press-releases/third-quarter-foreclosure-activity-up-in-65-percent-of-us-metro-areas-but-down-in-hardest-hit-cities-6127

Sure, SD County is higher on the chart (35) than the “Twin Cities” (76). But if I am reading this right, the Minneapolis area currently has 154 properties in various stages of foreclosure for every 1000 properties to San Diego’s 82 per 1000. This indicates that a far greater proportion of its homeowners (to SD Co. homeowners) are in some stage of default or foreclosure. In addition, there were 8.59% MORE homeowners in Minneapolis in distress in Q3 2010 than in Q2 2010!

This chart seems to indicate that while SD’s foreclosures are going down, Minneapolis’ foreclosures are going up.

You may argue that lenders are not foreclosing timely on SD homeowners so there is a lot of “shadow inventory” that is not counted in Realty Trac’s chart. But if this is true, then those same lenders are holding paper on properties in Minneapolis where they are currently letting owners slide from mortgage payments, as well.

I combed this thread from start to finish and your underlying theme for leaving SD (besides it being “too expensive” to purchase RE in) is that SoCal or “Cal” residents are generally irresponsible, greedy, and lack character. Now of course, I don’t take any of this personally, but . . . could it be that you are just homesick . . . and want your life to be the way it was when you were growing up? Are you SURE that if you return to live in your beloved hometown that it will be the same as you left it?? This is essentially what you have stated here nine times in re: your SD “peers” . . . (emphasis added)

[quote=jstoesz]Ultimately, I have always wanted to move back home to Minneapolis. The land of responsible people, cheap beautiful old homes and neighborhoods, and cabins galore.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]If San Diego were filled with saner people, we would have gladly stayed, bought a house, and raised some kids.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]I am not trying to leave for the politics…I am trying to leave because of the pervasive values. The lack of responsibility and rampant materialism that is so ubiquitous in Southern California chiefly is the reason for my dislike of it here.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Is it that everyone is a scientist or engineer or is it that people here are stupid and willing to spend themselves into oblivion? I think the answer is yes, and yes…[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Wow bearishgurl, I appreciate the long response. You make some absolutely spot on points. I think there is plenty of whitewashing going on in my mind.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]The fact that even the nicer areas are so expensive has little to nothing to do with foreign money. It has everything to do with the fact the So. Californians are more willing to spend a larger percentage of their income on homes (kind of obvious I know). As to why this is…I blame the character/financial irresponsibility of the people…but that is just me.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]They banks were uniformly stupid across the country…what makes So Cal and the zonies so much worse off is their greed/stupidity/materialism/susceptibility to heard mentality…aka a general lack of character.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Californians on the aggregate are irresponsible with their money. It has been proven time and time again.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]I think it comical when people believe the S. California prices are justified. There is no good reason outside of widespread and long standing fiscal irresponsibility.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Have I stated the contrary? I willingly admit that they are at work. Free or nearly free money, combined with no compulsion to repay, and a vast sea of lemmings to hold the bag has sent the supply curve way to the right of saner markets.

Yup it is not supply and demand I am frustrated with. It is with the financial irresponsibility of my peers. And that has not even begun to correct.[/quote]

The kind and gentle folk of MN seem to have pervasive issues with money management as well, even assuming they initially borrowed much less (than a CA borrower) when they purchased their properties!

Could the real problem here be that your value set might be different than many of your SoCal “peers?”

Nothing wrong with that, but does it REALLY make them any more “irresponsible and immoral” than the folks back in your hometown? Think about it.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Rustico]I was just curious, is this right?

“In Minneapolis, substantial housing development has brought the city’s population to 390,000 – close to the city’s population in the mid-1970s.”

San Diego city/county 1970

696,769/1,357,854

San Diego city/county currently

1,359,132/3,053,793[/quote]

Jstoesz, Rustico’s post, above, got me thinking . . . I didn’t realize your hometown of Minneapolis (“Twin Cities” area) was so much smaller than San Diego, or that it may have been “shedding” population over the years. So I took the liberty to see how its housing market is currently doing:

http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/stories/2010/10/11/daily47.html

Minneapolis / St. Paul Business Journal – by Chris Newmarker
Date: Thursday, October 14, 2010, 3:42pm CDT – Last Modified: Thursday, October 14, 2010, 3:50pm CDT
There are a lot of states where it’s better; there are a lot of states where it’s worse. Minnesota’s home foreclosure rate was 25th in the country in the third quarter, according to a report released Thursday by an online marketplace for foreclosed homes.
RealtyTrac’s U.S. Foreclosure Market Report showed 9,499 Minnesota homes, or one out of every 245 housing units in the state, receiving a foreclosure notice in the quarter ended Sept. 30. Foreclosure activity was up 5.56 percent from the previous quarter, but down 10.56 percent from the third quarter of 2009.
Across the country, default notices, scheduled auctions and bank repossessions were reported on 930,437 properties in the third quarter. It was a nearly 4 percent increase from the second quarter of 2010, but was down 1 percent from last year’s third quarter.
Minnesota’s foreclosure rate pales in comparison to the states with the highest rates. The top state, Nevada, had one out of 29 homes going into foreclosure. The second-highest state, Arizona, had a one out of 55 rate, and Florida came in third with one out of 56.
The foreclosure rate in the Twin Cities was worse than the state of Minnesota, according to RealtyTrac data. The 13-county metro area, which includes two Wisconsin counties, saw 8,739 homes, or one out of 154, go into foreclosure in the third quarter. It was an 8.59 percent increase from the second quarter, but a 10.53 percent decrease from the third quarter of 2009.
Anoka County had the worst foreclosure rate in the metro area, one out of 87, while Isanti County had the best, one out of 933. Isanti County, though, seems to have worked through a great deal of troubled properties already; it had the steepest year-over-year drop in foreclosure activity in the Twin Cities, with foreclosure activity down 37.04 percent.

(emphasis added)

Here’s Realty Trac’s most recent “Foreclosure Activity chart” for major US markets:
http://www.realtytrac.com/content/press-releases/third-quarter-foreclosure-activity-up-in-65-percent-of-us-metro-areas-but-down-in-hardest-hit-cities-6127

Sure, SD County is higher on the chart (35) than the “Twin Cities” (76). But if I am reading this right, the Minneapolis area currently has 154 properties in various stages of foreclosure for every 1000 properties to San Diego’s 82 per 1000. This indicates that a far greater proportion of its homeowners (to SD Co. homeowners) are in some stage of default or foreclosure. In addition, there were 8.59% MORE homeowners in Minneapolis in distress in Q3 2010 than in Q2 2010!

This chart seems to indicate that while SD’s foreclosures are going down, Minneapolis’ foreclosures are going up.

You may argue that lenders are not foreclosing timely on SD homeowners so there is a lot of “shadow inventory” that is not counted in Realty Trac’s chart. But if this is true, then those same lenders are holding paper on properties in Minneapolis where they are currently letting owners slide from mortgage payments, as well.

I combed this thread from start to finish and your underlying theme for leaving SD (besides it being “too expensive” to purchase RE in) is that SoCal or “Cal” residents are generally irresponsible, greedy, and lack character. Now of course, I don’t take any of this personally, but . . . could it be that you are just homesick . . . and want your life to be the way it was when you were growing up? Are you SURE that if you return to live in your beloved hometown that it will be the same as you left it?? This is essentially what you have stated here nine times in re: your SD “peers” . . . (emphasis added)

[quote=jstoesz]Ultimately, I have always wanted to move back home to Minneapolis. The land of responsible people, cheap beautiful old homes and neighborhoods, and cabins galore.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]If San Diego were filled with saner people, we would have gladly stayed, bought a house, and raised some kids.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]I am not trying to leave for the politics…I am trying to leave because of the pervasive values. The lack of responsibility and rampant materialism that is so ubiquitous in Southern California chiefly is the reason for my dislike of it here.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Is it that everyone is a scientist or engineer or is it that people here are stupid and willing to spend themselves into oblivion? I think the answer is yes, and yes…[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Wow bearishgurl, I appreciate the long response. You make some absolutely spot on points. I think there is plenty of whitewashing going on in my mind.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]The fact that even the nicer areas are so expensive has little to nothing to do with foreign money. It has everything to do with the fact the So. Californians are more willing to spend a larger percentage of their income on homes (kind of obvious I know). As to why this is…I blame the character/financial irresponsibility of the people…but that is just me.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]They banks were uniformly stupid across the country…what makes So Cal and the zonies so much worse off is their greed/stupidity/materialism/susceptibility to heard mentality…aka a general lack of character.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Californians on the aggregate are irresponsible with their money. It has been proven time and time again.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]I think it comical when people believe the S. California prices are justified. There is no good reason outside of widespread and long standing fiscal irresponsibility.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Have I stated the contrary? I willingly admit that they are at work. Free or nearly free money, combined with no compulsion to repay, and a vast sea of lemmings to hold the bag has sent the supply curve way to the right of saner markets.

Yup it is not supply and demand I am frustrated with. It is with the financial irresponsibility of my peers. And that has not even begun to correct.[/quote]

The kind and gentle folk of MN seem to have pervasive issues with money management as well, even assuming they initially borrowed much less (than a CA borrower) when they purchased their properties!

Could the real problem here be that your value set might be different than many of your SoCal “peers?”

Nothing wrong with that, but does it REALLY make them any more “irresponsible and immoral” than the folks back in your hometown? Think about it.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Rustico]I was just curious, is this right?

“In Minneapolis, substantial housing development has brought the city’s population to 390,000 – close to the city’s population in the mid-1970s.”

San Diego city/county 1970

696,769/1,357,854

San Diego city/county currently

1,359,132/3,053,793[/quote]

Jstoesz, Rustico’s post, above, got me thinking . . . I didn’t realize your hometown of Minneapolis (“Twin Cities” area) was so much smaller than San Diego, or that it may have been “shedding” population over the years. So I took the liberty to see how its housing market is currently doing:

http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/stories/2010/10/11/daily47.html

Minneapolis / St. Paul Business Journal – by Chris Newmarker
Date: Thursday, October 14, 2010, 3:42pm CDT – Last Modified: Thursday, October 14, 2010, 3:50pm CDT
There are a lot of states where it’s better; there are a lot of states where it’s worse. Minnesota’s home foreclosure rate was 25th in the country in the third quarter, according to a report released Thursday by an online marketplace for foreclosed homes.
RealtyTrac’s U.S. Foreclosure Market Report showed 9,499 Minnesota homes, or one out of every 245 housing units in the state, receiving a foreclosure notice in the quarter ended Sept. 30. Foreclosure activity was up 5.56 percent from the previous quarter, but down 10.56 percent from the third quarter of 2009.
Across the country, default notices, scheduled auctions and bank repossessions were reported on 930,437 properties in the third quarter. It was a nearly 4 percent increase from the second quarter of 2010, but was down 1 percent from last year’s third quarter.
Minnesota’s foreclosure rate pales in comparison to the states with the highest rates. The top state, Nevada, had one out of 29 homes going into foreclosure. The second-highest state, Arizona, had a one out of 55 rate, and Florida came in third with one out of 56.
The foreclosure rate in the Twin Cities was worse than the state of Minnesota, according to RealtyTrac data. The 13-county metro area, which includes two Wisconsin counties, saw 8,739 homes, or one out of 154, go into foreclosure in the third quarter. It was an 8.59 percent increase from the second quarter, but a 10.53 percent decrease from the third quarter of 2009.
Anoka County had the worst foreclosure rate in the metro area, one out of 87, while Isanti County had the best, one out of 933. Isanti County, though, seems to have worked through a great deal of troubled properties already; it had the steepest year-over-year drop in foreclosure activity in the Twin Cities, with foreclosure activity down 37.04 percent.

(emphasis added)

Here’s Realty Trac’s most recent “Foreclosure Activity chart” for major US markets:
http://www.realtytrac.com/content/press-releases/third-quarter-foreclosure-activity-up-in-65-percent-of-us-metro-areas-but-down-in-hardest-hit-cities-6127

Sure, SD County is higher on the chart (35) than the “Twin Cities” (76). But if I am reading this right, the Minneapolis area currently has 154 properties in various stages of foreclosure for every 1000 properties to San Diego’s 82 per 1000. This indicates that a far greater proportion of its homeowners (to SD Co. homeowners) are in some stage of default or foreclosure. In addition, there were 8.59% MORE homeowners in Minneapolis in distress in Q3 2010 than in Q2 2010!

This chart seems to indicate that while SD’s foreclosures are going down, Minneapolis’ foreclosures are going up.

You may argue that lenders are not foreclosing timely on SD homeowners so there is a lot of “shadow inventory” that is not counted in Realty Trac’s chart. But if this is true, then those same lenders are holding paper on properties in Minneapolis where they are currently letting owners slide from mortgage payments, as well.

I combed this thread from start to finish and your underlying theme for leaving SD (besides it being “too expensive” to purchase RE in) is that SoCal or “Cal” residents are generally irresponsible, greedy, and lack character. Now of course, I don’t take any of this personally, but . . . could it be that you are just homesick . . . and want your life to be the way it was when you were growing up? Are you SURE that if you return to live in your beloved hometown that it will be the same as you left it?? This is essentially what you have stated here nine times in re: your SD “peers” . . . (emphasis added)

[quote=jstoesz]Ultimately, I have always wanted to move back home to Minneapolis. The land of responsible people, cheap beautiful old homes and neighborhoods, and cabins galore.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]If San Diego were filled with saner people, we would have gladly stayed, bought a house, and raised some kids.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]I am not trying to leave for the politics…I am trying to leave because of the pervasive values. The lack of responsibility and rampant materialism that is so ubiquitous in Southern California chiefly is the reason for my dislike of it here.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Is it that everyone is a scientist or engineer or is it that people here are stupid and willing to spend themselves into oblivion? I think the answer is yes, and yes…[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Wow bearishgurl, I appreciate the long response. You make some absolutely spot on points. I think there is plenty of whitewashing going on in my mind.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]The fact that even the nicer areas are so expensive has little to nothing to do with foreign money. It has everything to do with the fact the So. Californians are more willing to spend a larger percentage of their income on homes (kind of obvious I know). As to why this is…I blame the character/financial irresponsibility of the people…but that is just me.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]They banks were uniformly stupid across the country…what makes So Cal and the zonies so much worse off is their greed/stupidity/materialism/susceptibility to heard mentality…aka a general lack of character.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Californians on the aggregate are irresponsible with their money. It has been proven time and time again.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]I think it comical when people believe the S. California prices are justified. There is no good reason outside of widespread and long standing fiscal irresponsibility.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Have I stated the contrary? I willingly admit that they are at work. Free or nearly free money, combined with no compulsion to repay, and a vast sea of lemmings to hold the bag has sent the supply curve way to the right of saner markets.

Yup it is not supply and demand I am frustrated with. It is with the financial irresponsibility of my peers. And that has not even begun to correct.[/quote]

The kind and gentle folk of MN seem to have pervasive issues with money management as well, even assuming they initially borrowed much less (than a CA borrower) when they purchased their properties!

Could the real problem here be that your value set might be different than many of your SoCal “peers?”

Nothing wrong with that, but does it REALLY make them any more “irresponsible and immoral” than the folks back in your hometown? Think about it.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Rustico]I was just curious, is this right?

“In Minneapolis, substantial housing development has brought the city’s population to 390,000 – close to the city’s population in the mid-1970s.”

San Diego city/county 1970

696,769/1,357,854

San Diego city/county currently

1,359,132/3,053,793[/quote]

Jstoesz, Rustico’s post, above, got me thinking . . . I didn’t realize your hometown of Minneapolis (“Twin Cities” area) was so much smaller than San Diego, or that it may have been “shedding” population over the years. So I took the liberty to see how its housing market is currently doing:

http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/stories/2010/10/11/daily47.html

Minneapolis / St. Paul Business Journal – by Chris Newmarker
Date: Thursday, October 14, 2010, 3:42pm CDT – Last Modified: Thursday, October 14, 2010, 3:50pm CDT
There are a lot of states where it’s better; there are a lot of states where it’s worse. Minnesota’s home foreclosure rate was 25th in the country in the third quarter, according to a report released Thursday by an online marketplace for foreclosed homes.
RealtyTrac’s U.S. Foreclosure Market Report showed 9,499 Minnesota homes, or one out of every 245 housing units in the state, receiving a foreclosure notice in the quarter ended Sept. 30. Foreclosure activity was up 5.56 percent from the previous quarter, but down 10.56 percent from the third quarter of 2009.
Across the country, default notices, scheduled auctions and bank repossessions were reported on 930,437 properties in the third quarter. It was a nearly 4 percent increase from the second quarter of 2010, but was down 1 percent from last year’s third quarter.
Minnesota’s foreclosure rate pales in comparison to the states with the highest rates. The top state, Nevada, had one out of 29 homes going into foreclosure. The second-highest state, Arizona, had a one out of 55 rate, and Florida came in third with one out of 56.
The foreclosure rate in the Twin Cities was worse than the state of Minnesota, according to RealtyTrac data. The 13-county metro area, which includes two Wisconsin counties, saw 8,739 homes, or one out of 154, go into foreclosure in the third quarter. It was an 8.59 percent increase from the second quarter, but a 10.53 percent decrease from the third quarter of 2009.
Anoka County had the worst foreclosure rate in the metro area, one out of 87, while Isanti County had the best, one out of 933. Isanti County, though, seems to have worked through a great deal of troubled properties already; it had the steepest year-over-year drop in foreclosure activity in the Twin Cities, with foreclosure activity down 37.04 percent.

(emphasis added)

Here’s Realty Trac’s most recent “Foreclosure Activity chart” for major US markets:
http://www.realtytrac.com/content/press-releases/third-quarter-foreclosure-activity-up-in-65-percent-of-us-metro-areas-but-down-in-hardest-hit-cities-6127

Sure, SD County is higher on the chart (35) than the “Twin Cities” (76). But if I am reading this right, the Minneapolis area currently has 154 properties in various stages of foreclosure for every 1000 properties to San Diego’s 82 per 1000. This indicates that a far greater proportion of its homeowners (to SD Co. homeowners) are in some stage of default or foreclosure. In addition, there were 8.59% MORE homeowners in Minneapolis in distress in Q3 2010 than in Q2 2010!

This chart seems to indicate that while SD’s foreclosures are going down, Minneapolis’ foreclosures are going up.

You may argue that lenders are not foreclosing timely on SD homeowners so there is a lot of “shadow inventory” that is not counted in Realty Trac’s chart. But if this is true, then those same lenders are holding paper on properties in Minneapolis where they are currently letting owners slide from mortgage payments, as well.

I combed this thread from start to finish and your underlying theme for leaving SD (besides it being “too expensive” to purchase RE in) is that SoCal or “Cal” residents are generally irresponsible, greedy, and lack character. Now of course, I don’t take any of this personally, but . . . could it be that you are just homesick . . . and want your life to be the way it was when you were growing up? Are you SURE that if you return to live in your beloved hometown that it will be the same as you left it?? This is essentially what you have stated here nine times in re: your SD “peers” . . . (emphasis added)

[quote=jstoesz]Ultimately, I have always wanted to move back home to Minneapolis. The land of responsible people, cheap beautiful old homes and neighborhoods, and cabins galore.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]If San Diego were filled with saner people, we would have gladly stayed, bought a house, and raised some kids.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]I am not trying to leave for the politics…I am trying to leave because of the pervasive values. The lack of responsibility and rampant materialism that is so ubiquitous in Southern California chiefly is the reason for my dislike of it here.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Is it that everyone is a scientist or engineer or is it that people here are stupid and willing to spend themselves into oblivion? I think the answer is yes, and yes…[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Wow bearishgurl, I appreciate the long response. You make some absolutely spot on points. I think there is plenty of whitewashing going on in my mind.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]The fact that even the nicer areas are so expensive has little to nothing to do with foreign money. It has everything to do with the fact the So. Californians are more willing to spend a larger percentage of their income on homes (kind of obvious I know). As to why this is…I blame the character/financial irresponsibility of the people…but that is just me.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]They banks were uniformly stupid across the country…what makes So Cal and the zonies so much worse off is their greed/stupidity/materialism/susceptibility to heard mentality…aka a general lack of character.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Californians on the aggregate are irresponsible with their money. It has been proven time and time again.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]I think it comical when people believe the S. California prices are justified. There is no good reason outside of widespread and long standing fiscal irresponsibility.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Have I stated the contrary? I willingly admit that they are at work. Free or nearly free money, combined with no compulsion to repay, and a vast sea of lemmings to hold the bag has sent the supply curve way to the right of saner markets.

Yup it is not supply and demand I am frustrated with. It is with the financial irresponsibility of my peers. And that has not even begun to correct.[/quote]

The kind and gentle folk of MN seem to have pervasive issues with money management as well, even assuming they initially borrowed much less (than a CA borrower) when they purchased their properties!

Could the real problem here be that your value set might be different than many of your SoCal “peers?”

Nothing wrong with that, but does it REALLY make them any more “irresponsible and immoral” than the folks back in your hometown? Think about it.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Rustico]I was just curious, is this right?

“In Minneapolis, substantial housing development has brought the city’s population to 390,000 – close to the city’s population in the mid-1970s.”

San Diego city/county 1970

696,769/1,357,854

San Diego city/county currently

1,359,132/3,053,793[/quote]

Jstoesz, Rustico’s post, above, got me thinking . . . I didn’t realize your hometown of Minneapolis (“Twin Cities” area) was so much smaller than San Diego, or that it may have been “shedding” population over the years. So I took the liberty to see how its housing market is currently doing:

http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/stories/2010/10/11/daily47.html

Minneapolis / St. Paul Business Journal – by Chris Newmarker
Date: Thursday, October 14, 2010, 3:42pm CDT – Last Modified: Thursday, October 14, 2010, 3:50pm CDT
There are a lot of states where it’s better; there are a lot of states where it’s worse. Minnesota’s home foreclosure rate was 25th in the country in the third quarter, according to a report released Thursday by an online marketplace for foreclosed homes.
RealtyTrac’s U.S. Foreclosure Market Report showed 9,499 Minnesota homes, or one out of every 245 housing units in the state, receiving a foreclosure notice in the quarter ended Sept. 30. Foreclosure activity was up 5.56 percent from the previous quarter, but down 10.56 percent from the third quarter of 2009.
Across the country, default notices, scheduled auctions and bank repossessions were reported on 930,437 properties in the third quarter. It was a nearly 4 percent increase from the second quarter of 2010, but was down 1 percent from last year’s third quarter.
Minnesota’s foreclosure rate pales in comparison to the states with the highest rates. The top state, Nevada, had one out of 29 homes going into foreclosure. The second-highest state, Arizona, had a one out of 55 rate, and Florida came in third with one out of 56.
The foreclosure rate in the Twin Cities was worse than the state of Minnesota, according to RealtyTrac data. The 13-county metro area, which includes two Wisconsin counties, saw 8,739 homes, or one out of 154, go into foreclosure in the third quarter. It was an 8.59 percent increase from the second quarter, but a 10.53 percent decrease from the third quarter of 2009.
Anoka County had the worst foreclosure rate in the metro area, one out of 87, while Isanti County had the best, one out of 933. Isanti County, though, seems to have worked through a great deal of troubled properties already; it had the steepest year-over-year drop in foreclosure activity in the Twin Cities, with foreclosure activity down 37.04 percent.

(emphasis added)

Here’s Realty Trac’s most recent “Foreclosure Activity chart” for major US markets:
http://www.realtytrac.com/content/press-releases/third-quarter-foreclosure-activity-up-in-65-percent-of-us-metro-areas-but-down-in-hardest-hit-cities-6127

Sure, SD County is higher on the chart (35) than the “Twin Cities” (76). But if I am reading this right, the Minneapolis area currently has 154 properties in various stages of foreclosure for every 1000 properties to San Diego’s 82 per 1000. This indicates that a far greater proportion of its homeowners (to SD Co. homeowners) are in some stage of default or foreclosure. In addition, there were 8.59% MORE homeowners in Minneapolis in distress in Q3 2010 than in Q2 2010!

This chart seems to indicate that while SD’s foreclosures are going down, Minneapolis’ foreclosures are going up.

You may argue that lenders are not foreclosing timely on SD homeowners so there is a lot of “shadow inventory” that is not counted in Realty Trac’s chart. But if this is true, then those same lenders are holding paper on properties in Minneapolis where they are currently letting owners slide from mortgage payments, as well.

I combed this thread from start to finish and your underlying theme for leaving SD (besides it being “too expensive” to purchase RE in) is that SoCal or “Cal” residents are generally irresponsible, greedy, and lack character. Now of course, I don’t take any of this personally, but . . . could it be that you are just homesick . . . and want your life to be the way it was when you were growing up? Are you SURE that if you return to live in your beloved hometown that it will be the same as you left it?? This is essentially what you have stated here nine times in re: your SD “peers” . . . (emphasis added)

[quote=jstoesz]Ultimately, I have always wanted to move back home to Minneapolis. The land of responsible people, cheap beautiful old homes and neighborhoods, and cabins galore.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]If San Diego were filled with saner people, we would have gladly stayed, bought a house, and raised some kids.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]I am not trying to leave for the politics…I am trying to leave because of the pervasive values. The lack of responsibility and rampant materialism that is so ubiquitous in Southern California chiefly is the reason for my dislike of it here.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Is it that everyone is a scientist or engineer or is it that people here are stupid and willing to spend themselves into oblivion? I think the answer is yes, and yes…[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Wow bearishgurl, I appreciate the long response. You make some absolutely spot on points. I think there is plenty of whitewashing going on in my mind.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]The fact that even the nicer areas are so expensive has little to nothing to do with foreign money. It has everything to do with the fact the So. Californians are more willing to spend a larger percentage of their income on homes (kind of obvious I know). As to why this is…I blame the character/financial irresponsibility of the people…but that is just me.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]They banks were uniformly stupid across the country…what makes So Cal and the zonies so much worse off is their greed/stupidity/materialism/susceptibility to heard mentality…aka a general lack of character.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Californians on the aggregate are irresponsible with their money. It has been proven time and time again.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]I think it comical when people believe the S. California prices are justified. There is no good reason outside of widespread and long standing fiscal irresponsibility.[/quote]

[quote=jstoesz]Have I stated the contrary? I willingly admit that they are at work. Free or nearly free money, combined with no compulsion to repay, and a vast sea of lemmings to hold the bag has sent the supply curve way to the right of saner markets.

Yup it is not supply and demand I am frustrated with. It is with the financial irresponsibility of my peers. And that has not even begun to correct.[/quote]

The kind and gentle folk of MN seem to have pervasive issues with money management as well, even assuming they initially borrowed much less (than a CA borrower) when they purchased their properties!

Could the real problem here be that your value set might be different than many of your SoCal “peers?”

Nothing wrong with that, but does it REALLY make them any more “irresponsible and immoral” than the folks back in your hometown? Think about it.

[jstoesz]

First off, I apologize in committing a sort of thread carpet bomb. I have one week to go at my current employer, and I am less than motivated to give it my all. Furthermore, my wife went to bed at 8:30 so I am pretty much left to flame wars on the internet.

Lets engage in a thought exercise.

Disclamer: I am less interested in what the SD market will be and more interested in what it should be. I think in all reality, it will be screwed, where I will always be dissatisfied with what my household’s 95fth percentile income bracket should be able to afford vs. what it will afford.

If every family in SD conformed to the US standard of financial responsibility, where would home prices be? If San Diegons spent within there means in the same way that most midwesterners spent what would home prices be? Do utility bills and prop 13 make up for the prices?

That is the question. If this is out of step in SD, aren’t you nervous about the fiscal future of california?

Is the power of immigrating retirees, prop 13, and the beauty of La Jolla enough to justify the prices in a family oriented community like Clairemont (not a very nice place by midwest standards)?

This is the fact of life that someone from a backwoods unenlightened place like MN is up against. I could have a good, financially secure life, with lots and lots of recreation for an affordable price someplace else. And no jobs in CA do not pay more, this is an absurd fallacy.

Do immigrating retirees, the beach and weather (bullshit), and growth really explain the out of step prices? or is it that s. Californians are really that stupid/financially irresponsible to keep the scam going?

I am going with stupid and financially irresponsible…

[jstoesz]

First off, I apologize in committing a sort of thread carpet bomb. I have one week to go at my current employer, and I am less than motivated to give it my all. Furthermore, my wife went to bed at 8:30 so I am pretty much left to flame wars on the internet.

Lets engage in a thought exercise.

Disclamer: I am less interested in what the SD market will be and more interested in what it should be. I think in all reality, it will be screwed, where I will always be dissatisfied with what my household’s 95fth percentile income bracket should be able to afford vs. what it will afford.

If every family in SD conformed to the US standard of financial responsibility, where would home prices be? If San Diegons spent within there means in the same way that most midwesterners spent what would home prices be? Do utility bills and prop 13 make up for the prices?

That is the question. If this is out of step in SD, aren’t you nervous about the fiscal future of california?

Is the power of immigrating retirees, prop 13, and the beauty of La Jolla enough to justify the prices in a family oriented community like Clairemont (not a very nice place by midwest standards)?

This is the fact of life that someone from a backwoods unenlightened place like MN is up against. I could have a good, financially secure life, with lots and lots of recreation for an affordable price someplace else. And no jobs in CA do not pay more, this is an absurd fallacy.

Do immigrating retirees, the beach and weather (bullshit), and growth really explain the out of step prices? or is it that s. Californians are really that stupid/financially irresponsible to keep the scam going?

I am going with stupid and financially irresponsible…

[jstoesz]

First off, I apologize in committing a sort of thread carpet bomb. I have one week to go at my current employer, and I am less than motivated to give it my all. Furthermore, my wife went to bed at 8:30 so I am pretty much left to flame wars on the internet.

Lets engage in a thought exercise.

Disclamer: I am less interested in what the SD market will be and more interested in what it should be. I think in all reality, it will be screwed, where I will always be dissatisfied with what my household’s 95fth percentile income bracket should be able to afford vs. what it will afford.

If every family in SD conformed to the US standard of financial responsibility, where would home prices be? If San Diegons spent within there means in the same way that most midwesterners spent what would home prices be? Do utility bills and prop 13 make up for the prices?

That is the question. If this is out of step in SD, aren’t you nervous about the fiscal future of california?

Is the power of immigrating retirees, prop 13, and the beauty of La Jolla enough to justify the prices in a family oriented community like Clairemont (not a very nice place by midwest standards)?

This is the fact of life that someone from a backwoods unenlightened place like MN is up against. I could have a good, financially secure life, with lots and lots of recreation for an affordable price someplace else. And no jobs in CA do not pay more, this is an absurd fallacy.

Do immigrating retirees, the beach and weather (bullshit), and growth really explain the out of step prices? or is it that s. Californians are really that stupid/financially irresponsible to keep the scam going?

I am going with stupid and financially irresponsible…

[jstoesz]

First off, I apologize in committing a sort of thread carpet bomb. I have one week to go at my current employer, and I am less than motivated to give it my all. Furthermore, my wife went to bed at 8:30 so I am pretty much left to flame wars on the internet.

Lets engage in a thought exercise.

Disclamer: I am less interested in what the SD market will be and more interested in what it should be. I think in all reality, it will be screwed, where I will always be dissatisfied with what my household’s 95fth percentile income bracket should be able to afford vs. what it will afford.

If every family in SD conformed to the US standard of financial responsibility, where would home prices be? If San Diegons spent within there means in the same way that most midwesterners spent what would home prices be? Do utility bills and prop 13 make up for the prices?

That is the question. If this is out of step in SD, aren’t you nervous about the fiscal future of california?

Is the power of immigrating retirees, prop 13, and the beauty of La Jolla enough to justify the prices in a family oriented community like Clairemont (not a very nice place by midwest standards)?

This is the fact of life that someone from a backwoods unenlightened place like MN is up against. I could have a good, financially secure life, with lots and lots of recreation for an affordable price someplace else. And no jobs in CA do not pay more, this is an absurd fallacy.

Do immigrating retirees, the beach and weather (bullshit), and growth really explain the out of step prices? or is it that s. Californians are really that stupid/financially irresponsible to keep the scam going?

I am going with stupid and financially irresponsible…

[Author]

Posts