Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
flyer
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=flyer]Good points, and I realize there are many reasons for the problem, but, my point is that, masses of desperate voters actually believe politicians can change their lives, and yet, these numbers tell a different story, so, from that perspective, I still think it will be interesting to see whether or not these numbers (and, consequently, voters lives) actually improve going forward or not. My guess would be not.[/quote]
Here’s an interesting article about slow growth.
Actually politicians can adopt more growth friendly policies. We, in USA, are doing better the rest of the world. But there were missed opportunity in infrastructure. It’s been 8 years since the recession and many workers’ skills have atrophied.
Basically, Trump supporters, low-education Whites in non-gateway cities are stagnating and they are looking for blame.[/quote]
“Less than 20 percent of American households even break the six-figure mark, according to Census Bureau data. But while many Americans still see that number as a prized income, it doesn’t necessarily roll out the red carpet anymore.”
Interesting and shocking (per above) that less than 20% of US households break the six-figure mark. With around 135 million households (2014) hopefully, among the 80% of the population left, more than just Trump supporters are questioning why they are in that financial position.
Candidates can talk about change all they want, but the numbers over the next four years will tell us everything we need to know. Sadly, the losers will be those who believed them.
ParticipantGood points, and I realize there are many reasons for the problem, but, my point is that, masses of desperate voters actually believe politicians can change their lives, and yet, these numbers tell a different story, so, from that perspective, I still think it will be interesting to see whether or not these numbers (and, consequently, voters lives) actually improve going forward or not. My guess would be not.
ParticipantWith more and and more of the population descending financially, it will be interesting to see if the new President can solve income inequality–an issue voters should realize may be one of the most critical issues of our lifetime.
Since this chasm continues to increase, this problem has, apparently, not been solved by either party so far, and it will definitely be interesting to see what the charts look like four years from now on an issue of such critical importance to so many.
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-ft-graphic-20160320-snap-htmlstory.html
ParticipantWith so many different opinions, it will be very interesting to see how this all plays out.
ParticipantPer:
“Lots of things have changed. Accept it. Higher expectations is what increasing standards of living is all about.Millennials are correct to expect better than previous generations. Remember we need young people more than they need us.”
BG, my response that you quoted relates to the comments above. My point was that if the majority of Millennials supposedly have increasing standards of living, it must be taking place in their minds, because it certainly doesn’t seem to be evident in real life where it matters most. Edit.
And to answer your other question, BG. I was working in the family real estate investment business as a teenager, before I went to college and then into aviation, so, yes, I was able to acquire the primary home and other properties in my 20’s. Granted, it was and is a family business, but I did all of the work, including, with my brothers, a complete remodel, with many more after that.
In addition, I think BG is and will do just fine in retirement. She has tons of friends and family, as well as great kids who are not far away, as many of us do. Don’t worry, we’ll all be great.
ParticipantI think the market itself will determine the future of real estate in CA. There will always be those who can easily afford to buy what they want, and others will be shut out, regardless of what anyone says or does not say, or wants or does not want.
Case in point. A couple of older members of the family recently passed on, and we had more cash offers than we would ever have imagined, with
30-day escrows. Over ten families who also made offers on the homes were completely shut out because they did not come in with cash, and most mentioned this had been happening to them time after time. Pure supply and demand. Accept it.As far as having higher or lower expectations from a generational perspective. As a Boomer, I can only speak for myself, and probably most of my family and friends, but we wouldn’t trade our lifestyle for anything even close to the standards of living many are settling for today.
Participant“flyer, your kids grew up inside the covenant, no? Do they and their peers (who also may have grown up inside the covenant) feel that they must have a comparable home in a comparable area for their first home? You’ve posted several times in the past here that your kids’ HS friends and your friends and neighbors’ kids became highly disillusioned and depressed because they were unable to land a job in their fields in SD after graduating from college so I was just wondering if they expected that they would be able to have their first home inside the covenant”
Yes, BG our kids grew up in RSF, and we’ve now been here for over 20 years. Along with our other investment properties, we invested in homes in CV for them many years ago. One still lives there, and the other two have kept their homes as rentals, since their careers took them elsewhere in CA.
Since we were in a position to do so, we tried to give them an edge in the real estate market, and this planning worked out well for them, but they clearly realize they were not entitled to any of this, and are very appreciative of our efforts.
In most of the cases in which their friends have wanted to stay in San Diego to pursue their desired careers and buy homes, but were unable to do so, they and/or their parents were not able to take the steps we took, so, in order to make use of their very expensive degrees, they have had to relocate, and not by choice.
I don’t know if these young people expected to easily walk into a life similar to what their parents provided for them with little or no effort on their part, but it does appear that many of them may have, based upon their disillusionment.
ParticipantBG, I completely understand where you are coming from, and I don’t believe anyone is entitled to anything. I’m simply discussing this issue from a scarcity of land perspective, not from the perspective you’ve been discussing. That’s an entirely different discussion, and one that I will leave in your able hands.
ParticipantIt’s true that a certain demographic of younger people don’t seem to mind living in high density areas, but, just for another frame of reference, all of the many young people we know who are our kids’ ages, professionals, married, in relationships, or otherwise, and have or want kids, without exception, would like to have SFH’s, as our kids’ have found they prefer after moving into their own homes.
From that perspective, many are unable to get what they really want, and it doesn’t look like that situation will improve going forward in CA–especially in SAN–per the scarcity of land.
ParticipantInteresting article:
By Lisa Halverstadt | January 9, 2015
True Statement: “San Diego today is the largest city in the United States that has run out of raw land. Except in the largely industrial Otay Mesa area, it is simply not possible for San Diego to continue growing in this traditional way,” former San Diego planning director Bill Fulton wrote in a Jan. 3 U-T San Diego op-ed.
Determination: True
Analysis: San Diego is in the midst of a major push-pull over the future of development.
Planners and transit advocates argue the city needs to embrace more urban development and density, and some residents resist, concerned that development could tarnish their neighborhoods.
Planning guru Bill Fulton, who was at the front lines of that debate as the city’s planning director, claimed in a recent U-T San Diego op-ed that the suburban build-out San Diego’s long embraced just won’t work anymore. There simply isn’t space for it – and that means a new development reality.
“San Diego today is the largest city in the United States that has run out of raw land,” wrote Fulton, who now leads Rice University’s Kinder Institute for Urban Research. “Except in the largely industrial Otay Mesa area, it is simply not possible for San Diego to continue growing in this traditional way.”
He’s mostly on point.
A 2009 analysis by the San Diego Association of Governments, the region’s planning agency, found just 5,280 acres of vacant land in San Diego, a city that spans about 342 square miles. This means only about 2 percent of city land is vacant.
Local real estate experts say much of that open acreage isn’t development-ready or ideal for building.
In some cases, the open plots are smaller than most developers prefer or are within protected areas where building isn’t allowed. Or they have terrain that makes construction nearly impossible.
This means increased density is a necessity “unless we are willing to go back in and fill the canyons and reclaim some of the lands we set aside for habitat,” said Russ Valone, a local real estate analyst who assisted with the 2009 SANDAG review.
That’s because the regional planning agency estimates the population of the city alone will grow by more 590,000 residents by 2050, largely due to local births.
Those new residents will need to live somewhere, and there’s not much space left for large master-planned communities, particularly in the center of the city. Planners envision more San Diegans living in multi-family buildings and closer to transit stations.
There is some green space left in Otay Mesa, though much of that’ll be for businesses. There’s also still some acreage available in northern parts of the city such as Carmel Valley, Black Mountain Ranch and Torrey Highlands.
But there’s not much, and areas like Rancho Bernardo and Rancho Peñasquitos, which were once ripe for development, aren’t anymore, Valone said.
“If you want to buy a home on a new detached lot, that is a dying breed,” Valone said. “It is a concept that is headed toward extinction.”
The city is running out of green space and much of the land that remains is in some way claimed or unviable. There is little raw land left anywhere inside the city limits,” Fulton said.
In many cases, remaining open spaces are already spoken for in the form of entitlements and plans.
So San Diego does seem likely to be the biggest U.S. city currently grappling with a debate over urban development forced by the city’s dearth of raw land.
San Diego has responded with a series of policy decisions, including a 2008 general plan update that encourages more urbanized development. Now, as the city gets to work revising and creating several new community plans, the shift will likely be more apparent throughout the city.
That won’t translate into transit projects or high rises in every neighborhood but it will mean a focus shift away from cars and toward multi-family properties and dense development along transit corridors.”
Per the article, with only 2 percent of city land vacant, it’s clear that the magnitude of dense developments will be self-limiting by virtue of the scarcity of land, and that SFH’s may be highly coveted as we move forward.
Of course, as TS mentioned, housing options expand as you move further away from the city, but my comments, and as noted in the article, concern the lack of buildable land left within 10-15 miles of the coast–which is where many people prefer to live.
ParticipantFrom what my developer friends tell me, the lack of buildable land here will be
self-limiting as far as development goes, so regardless of whether you’re for or against it won’t, imo, really matter.Over the many decades our family has been investing in real estate in San Diego, we have never seen a time when fewer and fewer people can afford housing here, and the stats show it may only get worse as time goes on. Definitely a challenging situation for many.
ParticipantSince I don’t see how all parties concerned with regard to law enforcement issues will ever be able to come to terms with one another (those serving, and those they serve) imo, things can only get worse.
I’d be glad to be proven wrong, but at the very least, it seems to be clear that there will, most likely, be fewer and fewer individuals willing to serve the law enforcement needs of the populace going forward, and it will be interesting to see where that takes us as a society.
ParticipantClearly, what’s going on in law enforcement today is tragic from all perspectives.
Of the stellar individuals we have known over the years in law enforcement, all were glad to get out and collect their small fortunes. After their experiences, none we know have ever encouraged their family and/or friends to serve.
On that note, police recruits are down 90% in some areas, and as things get worse, no doubt there will be more and more early retirements and fewer applicants, so it will be interesting to see how society functions, should we ever get to the point where those in need call and no one answers.
ParticipantGlad Rich limits discussions regarding hot button issues–especially wrt politics and especially during this political season–when, imo, we have a choice of choosing one form of sewage over another, so, except for this comment, I’m glad to know there are built-in restraints so I’m not tempted to rail on that topic.
In the end, I doubt if any of our posts will change the course of human history, but I really enjoy reading all of the different, sometimes extreme and lengthy opinions on this site. That’s what keeps it both informative and entertaining.
-
AuthorPosts
