[EconProf]

It is important to point out, or prove if possible, that the place was not painted when you moved in. Likewise with painting.
This is why it is vitally important, when first renting a place, to note all deficiencies in great detail (after you’ve lived there a week or so to see them all), then send this to landlord to acknowledge this.
I encourage this for all my tenants. Saves arguments when they leave as there is a paper trail. Surprisingly, I usually have to prod & prod them to submit the list.

[EconProf]

It is important to point out, or prove if possible, that the place was not painted when you moved in. Likewise with painting.
This is why it is vitally important, when first renting a place, to note all deficiencies in great detail (after you’ve lived there a week or so to see them all), then send this to landlord to acknowledge this.
I encourage this for all my tenants. Saves arguments when they leave as there is a paper trail. Surprisingly, I usually have to prod & prod them to submit the list.

[EconProf]

It is important to point out, or prove if possible, that the place was not painted when you moved in. Likewise with painting.
This is why it is vitally important, when first renting a place, to note all deficiencies in great detail (after you’ve lived there a week or so to see them all), then send this to landlord to acknowledge this.
I encourage this for all my tenants. Saves arguments when they leave as there is a paper trail. Surprisingly, I usually have to prod & prod them to submit the list.

[EconProf]

It is important to point out, or prove if possible, that the place was not painted when you moved in. Likewise with painting.
This is why it is vitally important, when first renting a place, to note all deficiencies in great detail (after you’ve lived there a week or so to see them all), then send this to landlord to acknowledge this.
I encourage this for all my tenants. Saves arguments when they leave as there is a paper trail. Surprisingly, I usually have to prod & prod them to submit the list.

[EconProf]

In the contest between buying new or used-and-nearly new, I’d suggest new. The deals are terrific, and I’ve heard of new car prices being less than some used car equivalent.
Besides, the hefty CA sales tax is tacked on to the used car, giving the state an inequitable windfall gain (that hurts the poor who must buy used). A car could theoretically change hands enough times that the sales tax collected by CA would exceed its price when new.
The way to beat this is to buy your car new and drive it into the ground.

[EconProf]

In the contest between buying new or used-and-nearly new, I’d suggest new. The deals are terrific, and I’ve heard of new car prices being less than some used car equivalent.
Besides, the hefty CA sales tax is tacked on to the used car, giving the state an inequitable windfall gain (that hurts the poor who must buy used). A car could theoretically change hands enough times that the sales tax collected by CA would exceed its price when new.
The way to beat this is to buy your car new and drive it into the ground.

[EconProf]

In the contest between buying new or used-and-nearly new, I’d suggest new. The deals are terrific, and I’ve heard of new car prices being less than some used car equivalent.
Besides, the hefty CA sales tax is tacked on to the used car, giving the state an inequitable windfall gain (that hurts the poor who must buy used). A car could theoretically change hands enough times that the sales tax collected by CA would exceed its price when new.
The way to beat this is to buy your car new and drive it into the ground.

[EconProf]

In the contest between buying new or used-and-nearly new, I’d suggest new. The deals are terrific, and I’ve heard of new car prices being less than some used car equivalent.
Besides, the hefty CA sales tax is tacked on to the used car, giving the state an inequitable windfall gain (that hurts the poor who must buy used). A car could theoretically change hands enough times that the sales tax collected by CA would exceed its price when new.
The way to beat this is to buy your car new and drive it into the ground.

[EconProf]

In the contest between buying new or used-and-nearly new, I’d suggest new. The deals are terrific, and I’ve heard of new car prices being less than some used car equivalent.
Besides, the hefty CA sales tax is tacked on to the used car, giving the state an inequitable windfall gain (that hurts the poor who must buy used). A car could theoretically change hands enough times that the sales tax collected by CA would exceed its price when new.
The way to beat this is to buy your car new and drive it into the ground.

[EconProf]

Back to the original LA Times article:
This site has long postulated that several conditions must exist before a bottom can be called. Some of them are now appearing in Phoenix: rents higher than mortgage payments, investors outbidding owner-occupiers, bidding wars. I’m adding to those positives the long-term demographic fundamentals of Phoenix and its more favorable business climate and suggesting it is at or near the bottom.

[EconProf]

Back to the original LA Times article:
This site has long postulated that several conditions must exist before a bottom can be called. Some of them are now appearing in Phoenix: rents higher than mortgage payments, investors outbidding owner-occupiers, bidding wars. I’m adding to those positives the long-term demographic fundamentals of Phoenix and its more favorable business climate and suggesting it is at or near the bottom.

[EconProf]

Back to the original LA Times article:
This site has long postulated that several conditions must exist before a bottom can be called. Some of them are now appearing in Phoenix: rents higher than mortgage payments, investors outbidding owner-occupiers, bidding wars. I’m adding to those positives the long-term demographic fundamentals of Phoenix and its more favorable business climate and suggesting it is at or near the bottom.

[EconProf]

Back to the original LA Times article:
This site has long postulated that several conditions must exist before a bottom can be called. Some of them are now appearing in Phoenix: rents higher than mortgage payments, investors outbidding owner-occupiers, bidding wars. I’m adding to those positives the long-term demographic fundamentals of Phoenix and its more favorable business climate and suggesting it is at or near the bottom.

[EconProf]

Back to the original LA Times article:
This site has long postulated that several conditions must exist before a bottom can be called. Some of them are now appearing in Phoenix: rents higher than mortgage payments, investors outbidding owner-occupiers, bidding wars. I’m adding to those positives the long-term demographic fundamentals of Phoenix and its more favorable business climate and suggesting it is at or near the bottom.

[EconProf]

I did read the whole article and found it balanced and informative. The Phoenix housing market is showing numerous signs of a bottoming out process, and I’d be an investor or owner-occupier there way before most anywhere in CA.
What Phoenix, and most of AZ has going for it that CA does not is demography. It still is the destination for retiring baby-boomers from the cold Midwest and East Coast, who now have the added incentive of a cheap Phoenix house or condo to buy. While CA drives taxpayers and businesses to neighboring states, AZ’s more sane government and lower cost of everything will attract them. California’s demographics are now changing rapidly and attracting tax users and pushing out taxpaying middle and upper income types.
CA will always have its weather and enclaves of the rich. But for economic and demographic reasons, its long-term prospects are bleak compared to other areas of the country.

[Author]

Posts