[EconProf]

BobS
Bugs please give us some evidence that “…actual rents are coming down.” That would be news to me.
Outside of hard-hit areas such as Temecula, I’d be surprised if you could find areas where house and apartment rents are coming down.
The best predictor of where rents are going is the vacancy rate. Right now I believe it is about 5% for San Diego overall, with some pockets where it is higher and some where it is lower.

[EconProf]

BobS
Bugs please give us some evidence that “…actual rents are coming down.” That would be news to me.
Outside of hard-hit areas such as Temecula, I’d be surprised if you could find areas where house and apartment rents are coming down.
The best predictor of where rents are going is the vacancy rate. Right now I believe it is about 5% for San Diego overall, with some pockets where it is higher and some where it is lower.

[EconProf]

BobS
Bugs please give us some evidence that “…actual rents are coming down.” That would be news to me.
Outside of hard-hit areas such as Temecula, I’d be surprised if you could find areas where house and apartment rents are coming down.
The best predictor of where rents are going is the vacancy rate. Right now I believe it is about 5% for San Diego overall, with some pockets where it is higher and some where it is lower.

[EconProf]

BobS
Bugs please give us some evidence that “…actual rents are coming down.” That would be news to me.
Outside of hard-hit areas such as Temecula, I’d be surprised if you could find areas where house and apartment rents are coming down.
The best predictor of where rents are going is the vacancy rate. Right now I believe it is about 5% for San Diego overall, with some pockets where it is higher and some where it is lower.

[EconProf]

BobS
Bugs please give us some evidence that “…actual rents are coming down.” That would be news to me.
Outside of hard-hit areas such as Temecula, I’d be surprised if you could find areas where house and apartment rents are coming down.
The best predictor of where rents are going is the vacancy rate. Right now I believe it is about 5% for San Diego overall, with some pockets where it is higher and some where it is lower.

[EconProf]

BobS
Sorry, peterb, you are wrong.
The definition of an unemployed person is “Someone who is out of work and actively looking for work”. It is compiled from actual door-to-door surveys.
Thus, it could be someone just entering the work force, and thus not entitled to unemployment compensation benefits. In fact, only about 40% of the unemployed actually get U. Comp. benefits.

[EconProf]

BobS
Sorry, peterb, you are wrong.
The definition of an unemployed person is “Someone who is out of work and actively looking for work”. It is compiled from actual door-to-door surveys.
Thus, it could be someone just entering the work force, and thus not entitled to unemployment compensation benefits. In fact, only about 40% of the unemployed actually get U. Comp. benefits.

[EconProf]

BobS
Sorry, peterb, you are wrong.
The definition of an unemployed person is “Someone who is out of work and actively looking for work”. It is compiled from actual door-to-door surveys.
Thus, it could be someone just entering the work force, and thus not entitled to unemployment compensation benefits. In fact, only about 40% of the unemployed actually get U. Comp. benefits.

[EconProf]

BobS
Sorry, peterb, you are wrong.
The definition of an unemployed person is “Someone who is out of work and actively looking for work”. It is compiled from actual door-to-door surveys.
Thus, it could be someone just entering the work force, and thus not entitled to unemployment compensation benefits. In fact, only about 40% of the unemployed actually get U. Comp. benefits.

[EconProf]

BobS
Sorry, peterb, you are wrong.
The definition of an unemployed person is “Someone who is out of work and actively looking for work”. It is compiled from actual door-to-door surveys.
Thus, it could be someone just entering the work force, and thus not entitled to unemployment compensation benefits. In fact, only about 40% of the unemployed actually get U. Comp. benefits.

[EconProf]

BobS
Some great insights here, especially for real estate investors who want to be ahead of the curve in picking places to invest in, or to work in.
Most telling was the comment that the emerging growth will be between the two coasts. If so, that would mark a reversal of the trend of the past few decades. All the big money in real estate appreciation has been in the land-scarce big cities abutting, and constrained by, water. Think Manhattan.
Now, perhaps, a sea-change has occurred in which the interior of the country will get the growth and jobs. Any future real estate price runups will be constrained because the appreciation in values was largely a land price runup. Building costs don’t vary that much region to region, but land values do, and this has favored coastal cities such as San Diego. Come to think of it, all the cities with an explosion in real estate values were on the water, except Vegas.
I would further refine the article’s conclusion to distinguish between the healthy, dynamic, low-unemployment states in the interior and the rust-belt upper midwest and northeast. The latter have lousy weather, strong unions, high taxes, and a big government mentality, generally speaking. The states west of the Mississipi and much of the South, on the other hand, have the pro-growth, limited government ingredients necessary for an optimistic future. Now, based on this article, they may also have long term industrial trends in their favor.

[EconProf]

BobS
Some great insights here, especially for real estate investors who want to be ahead of the curve in picking places to invest in, or to work in.
Most telling was the comment that the emerging growth will be between the two coasts. If so, that would mark a reversal of the trend of the past few decades. All the big money in real estate appreciation has been in the land-scarce big cities abutting, and constrained by, water. Think Manhattan.
Now, perhaps, a sea-change has occurred in which the interior of the country will get the growth and jobs. Any future real estate price runups will be constrained because the appreciation in values was largely a land price runup. Building costs don’t vary that much region to region, but land values do, and this has favored coastal cities such as San Diego. Come to think of it, all the cities with an explosion in real estate values were on the water, except Vegas.
I would further refine the article’s conclusion to distinguish between the healthy, dynamic, low-unemployment states in the interior and the rust-belt upper midwest and northeast. The latter have lousy weather, strong unions, high taxes, and a big government mentality, generally speaking. The states west of the Mississipi and much of the South, on the other hand, have the pro-growth, limited government ingredients necessary for an optimistic future. Now, based on this article, they may also have long term industrial trends in their favor.

[EconProf]

BobS
Some great insights here, especially for real estate investors who want to be ahead of the curve in picking places to invest in, or to work in.
Most telling was the comment that the emerging growth will be between the two coasts. If so, that would mark a reversal of the trend of the past few decades. All the big money in real estate appreciation has been in the land-scarce big cities abutting, and constrained by, water. Think Manhattan.
Now, perhaps, a sea-change has occurred in which the interior of the country will get the growth and jobs. Any future real estate price runups will be constrained because the appreciation in values was largely a land price runup. Building costs don’t vary that much region to region, but land values do, and this has favored coastal cities such as San Diego. Come to think of it, all the cities with an explosion in real estate values were on the water, except Vegas.
I would further refine the article’s conclusion to distinguish between the healthy, dynamic, low-unemployment states in the interior and the rust-belt upper midwest and northeast. The latter have lousy weather, strong unions, high taxes, and a big government mentality, generally speaking. The states west of the Mississipi and much of the South, on the other hand, have the pro-growth, limited government ingredients necessary for an optimistic future. Now, based on this article, they may also have long term industrial trends in their favor.

[EconProf]

BobS
Some great insights here, especially for real estate investors who want to be ahead of the curve in picking places to invest in, or to work in.
Most telling was the comment that the emerging growth will be between the two coasts. If so, that would mark a reversal of the trend of the past few decades. All the big money in real estate appreciation has been in the land-scarce big cities abutting, and constrained by, water. Think Manhattan.
Now, perhaps, a sea-change has occurred in which the interior of the country will get the growth and jobs. Any future real estate price runups will be constrained because the appreciation in values was largely a land price runup. Building costs don’t vary that much region to region, but land values do, and this has favored coastal cities such as San Diego. Come to think of it, all the cities with an explosion in real estate values were on the water, except Vegas.
I would further refine the article’s conclusion to distinguish between the healthy, dynamic, low-unemployment states in the interior and the rust-belt upper midwest and northeast. The latter have lousy weather, strong unions, high taxes, and a big government mentality, generally speaking. The states west of the Mississipi and much of the South, on the other hand, have the pro-growth, limited government ingredients necessary for an optimistic future. Now, based on this article, they may also have long term industrial trends in their favor.

[EconProf]

BobS
Some great insights here, especially for real estate investors who want to be ahead of the curve in picking places to invest in, or to work in.
Most telling was the comment that the emerging growth will be between the two coasts. If so, that would mark a reversal of the trend of the past few decades. All the big money in real estate appreciation has been in the land-scarce big cities abutting, and constrained by, water. Think Manhattan.
Now, perhaps, a sea-change has occurred in which the interior of the country will get the growth and jobs. Any future real estate price runups will be constrained because the appreciation in values was largely a land price runup. Building costs don’t vary that much region to region, but land values do, and this has favored coastal cities such as San Diego. Come to think of it, all the cities with an explosion in real estate values were on the water, except Vegas.
I would further refine the article’s conclusion to distinguish between the healthy, dynamic, low-unemployment states in the interior and the rust-belt upper midwest and northeast. The latter have lousy weather, strong unions, high taxes, and a big government mentality, generally speaking. The states west of the Mississipi and much of the South, on the other hand, have the pro-growth, limited government ingredients necessary for an optimistic future. Now, based on this article, they may also have long term industrial trends in their favor.

[Author]

Posts