Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
permabear
Participant[quote=AN][quote=permabear][quote=SD Realtor]The median home price has never matched up to any other averages, not now, not 10 years ago, not 20 years ago. It is doubtful that they ever will.[/quote]
Even in San Diego, 200k is a GOOD salary. Look at any of the city-data.com stats and it’s in the minority of incomes, even in 92127 or 92130. People earning 200k should have a nice selection of 4x-5x income homes to choose from, eg, 800k-1M.[/quote]
Did you cut and paste this post from 2005? I see plenty of great houses in the 800k-1M range. People making 200k+ have to look for a smaller place a way out? What’s considered small (4000 sq-ft)?[/quote]I’m looking at 92131, 92127, and 92064. If you’re making 200k, you’re in the top 5% of earners for any of those areas. That means you should be able to afford the top 5% of homes. I know 92131 inside out, and here’s what I see.
Here’s a home that’s in the top 5% in 92131, at $1.2M:
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Diego/10746-Edenoaks-St-92131/home/4835892
Not selling. Here’s another one, at $1.1M (started at 1.2):
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Diego/12469-Rue-Fountainbleau-92131/home/4832657
Backs to a major street, not selling. Here’s another one, down in the 800k range:
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Diego/10318-Walnutdale-St-92131/home/4832693
Fell out – “need new buyer”. Good value for the home itself, but no backyard.
I’ve been in all of those homes, and they’re nice. But if you’re making 200k all but the last one are too expensive, even by SD standards. And the last one is a heavily remodeled tract home; it’s not in the same league as the first two. Would love to see counterexamples.
Participant[quote=AN][quote=permabear][quote=SD Realtor]The median home price has never matched up to any other averages, not now, not 10 years ago, not 20 years ago. It is doubtful that they ever will.[/quote]
Even in San Diego, 200k is a GOOD salary. Look at any of the city-data.com stats and it’s in the minority of incomes, even in 92127 or 92130. People earning 200k should have a nice selection of 4x-5x income homes to choose from, eg, 800k-1M.[/quote]
Did you cut and paste this post from 2005? I see plenty of great houses in the 800k-1M range. People making 200k+ have to look for a smaller place a way out? What’s considered small (4000 sq-ft)?[/quote]I’m looking at 92131, 92127, and 92064. If you’re making 200k, you’re in the top 5% of earners for any of those areas. That means you should be able to afford the top 5% of homes. I know 92131 inside out, and here’s what I see.
Here’s a home that’s in the top 5% in 92131, at $1.2M:
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Diego/10746-Edenoaks-St-92131/home/4835892
Not selling. Here’s another one, at $1.1M (started at 1.2):
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Diego/12469-Rue-Fountainbleau-92131/home/4832657
Backs to a major street, not selling. Here’s another one, down in the 800k range:
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Diego/10318-Walnutdale-St-92131/home/4832693
Fell out – “need new buyer”. Good value for the home itself, but no backyard.
I’ve been in all of those homes, and they’re nice. But if you’re making 200k all but the last one are too expensive, even by SD standards. And the last one is a heavily remodeled tract home; it’s not in the same league as the first two. Would love to see counterexamples.
ParticipantYou guys have it all wrong. Spending on infrastructure and strengthening our country is SO postwar.
What we need now is tax cuts for the top 1%. C’mon, get with the program. Who wants to pay for stoopid stuff like modern roads and education?
ParticipantYou guys have it all wrong. Spending on infrastructure and strengthening our country is SO postwar.
What we need now is tax cuts for the top 1%. C’mon, get with the program. Who wants to pay for stoopid stuff like modern roads and education?
ParticipantYou guys have it all wrong. Spending on infrastructure and strengthening our country is SO postwar.
What we need now is tax cuts for the top 1%. C’mon, get with the program. Who wants to pay for stoopid stuff like modern roads and education?
ParticipantYou guys have it all wrong. Spending on infrastructure and strengthening our country is SO postwar.
What we need now is tax cuts for the top 1%. C’mon, get with the program. Who wants to pay for stoopid stuff like modern roads and education?
ParticipantYou guys have it all wrong. Spending on infrastructure and strengthening our country is SO postwar.
What we need now is tax cuts for the top 1%. C’mon, get with the program. Who wants to pay for stoopid stuff like modern roads and education?
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]The median home price has never matched up to any other averages, not now, not 10 years ago, not 20 years ago. It is doubtful that they ever will.[/quote]
Yes, but they were closer, say in the late 90’s (after real estate had recovered from the early 90’s crash and before the Greenspan bubble).
Though, I do recall there were a ton of buyers at those levels (I bought a place in ’98). And that was when Qualcomm and other companies were still relatively modest in size. But then again, we had FAR less housing units.
It still seems like we’re at unsustainable levels. I have a few friends with great incomes (combined in the 200’s) and they are having to look for smaller places a ways out. My friends who have decent incomes (combined in the mid 100’s) have no options. I have a few single friends in the low 100’s… good luck.
Even in San Diego, 200k is a GOOD salary. Look at any of the city-data.com stats and it’s in the minority of incomes, even in 92127 or 92130. People earning 200k should have a nice selection of 4x-5x income homes to choose from, eg, 800k-1M.
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]The median home price has never matched up to any other averages, not now, not 10 years ago, not 20 years ago. It is doubtful that they ever will.[/quote]
Yes, but they were closer, say in the late 90’s (after real estate had recovered from the early 90’s crash and before the Greenspan bubble).
Though, I do recall there were a ton of buyers at those levels (I bought a place in ’98). And that was when Qualcomm and other companies were still relatively modest in size. But then again, we had FAR less housing units.
It still seems like we’re at unsustainable levels. I have a few friends with great incomes (combined in the 200’s) and they are having to look for smaller places a ways out. My friends who have decent incomes (combined in the mid 100’s) have no options. I have a few single friends in the low 100’s… good luck.
Even in San Diego, 200k is a GOOD salary. Look at any of the city-data.com stats and it’s in the minority of incomes, even in 92127 or 92130. People earning 200k should have a nice selection of 4x-5x income homes to choose from, eg, 800k-1M.
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]The median home price has never matched up to any other averages, not now, not 10 years ago, not 20 years ago. It is doubtful that they ever will.[/quote]
Yes, but they were closer, say in the late 90’s (after real estate had recovered from the early 90’s crash and before the Greenspan bubble).
Though, I do recall there were a ton of buyers at those levels (I bought a place in ’98). And that was when Qualcomm and other companies were still relatively modest in size. But then again, we had FAR less housing units.
It still seems like we’re at unsustainable levels. I have a few friends with great incomes (combined in the 200’s) and they are having to look for smaller places a ways out. My friends who have decent incomes (combined in the mid 100’s) have no options. I have a few single friends in the low 100’s… good luck.
Even in San Diego, 200k is a GOOD salary. Look at any of the city-data.com stats and it’s in the minority of incomes, even in 92127 or 92130. People earning 200k should have a nice selection of 4x-5x income homes to choose from, eg, 800k-1M.
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]The median home price has never matched up to any other averages, not now, not 10 years ago, not 20 years ago. It is doubtful that they ever will.[/quote]
Yes, but they were closer, say in the late 90’s (after real estate had recovered from the early 90’s crash and before the Greenspan bubble).
Though, I do recall there were a ton of buyers at those levels (I bought a place in ’98). And that was when Qualcomm and other companies were still relatively modest in size. But then again, we had FAR less housing units.
It still seems like we’re at unsustainable levels. I have a few friends with great incomes (combined in the 200’s) and they are having to look for smaller places a ways out. My friends who have decent incomes (combined in the mid 100’s) have no options. I have a few single friends in the low 100’s… good luck.
Even in San Diego, 200k is a GOOD salary. Look at any of the city-data.com stats and it’s in the minority of incomes, even in 92127 or 92130. People earning 200k should have a nice selection of 4x-5x income homes to choose from, eg, 800k-1M.
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]The median home price has never matched up to any other averages, not now, not 10 years ago, not 20 years ago. It is doubtful that they ever will.[/quote]
Yes, but they were closer, say in the late 90’s (after real estate had recovered from the early 90’s crash and before the Greenspan bubble).
Though, I do recall there were a ton of buyers at those levels (I bought a place in ’98). And that was when Qualcomm and other companies were still relatively modest in size. But then again, we had FAR less housing units.
It still seems like we’re at unsustainable levels. I have a few friends with great incomes (combined in the 200’s) and they are having to look for smaller places a ways out. My friends who have decent incomes (combined in the mid 100’s) have no options. I have a few single friends in the low 100’s… good luck.
Even in San Diego, 200k is a GOOD salary. Look at any of the city-data.com stats and it’s in the minority of incomes, even in 92127 or 92130. People earning 200k should have a nice selection of 4x-5x income homes to choose from, eg, 800k-1M.
ParticipantNah, you’ve got to read up on the history of Assange. Plenty of corroborated accounts as to how he’s been extremely anti-establishment since his college years. I think he’s one of those guys who would love to see the world burn. But as a means to an end – peeling away the ridiculous corporate-owned fabrication passing for “free press” in the US these days – he’s fantastic.
ParticipantNah, you’ve got to read up on the history of Assange. Plenty of corroborated accounts as to how he’s been extremely anti-establishment since his college years. I think he’s one of those guys who would love to see the world burn. But as a means to an end – peeling away the ridiculous corporate-owned fabrication passing for “free press” in the US these days – he’s fantastic.
-
AuthorPosts