Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
temeculaguy
Participantsvelte, it was an analogy, not a comparison. I am warped, but that is not relevent for purposes of this discussion, using an unrelated topic to illustrate how something can be offensive to some and not to others, or offensive but neccesary, made it the perfect choice. There are only a handful of subjects that I use for analogies (wine, women, cigars, porn, sports), and of those five essential keys to happiness, it seemed the most aplicable at the time.
Participantsvelte, it was an analogy, not a comparison. I am warped, but that is not relevent for purposes of this discussion, using an unrelated topic to illustrate how something can be offensive to some and not to others, or offensive but neccesary, made it the perfect choice. There are only a handful of subjects that I use for analogies (wine, women, cigars, porn, sports), and of those five essential keys to happiness, it seemed the most aplicable at the time.
Participantsvelte, it was an analogy, not a comparison. I am warped, but that is not relevent for purposes of this discussion, using an unrelated topic to illustrate how something can be offensive to some and not to others, or offensive but neccesary, made it the perfect choice. There are only a handful of subjects that I use for analogies (wine, women, cigars, porn, sports), and of those five essential keys to happiness, it seemed the most aplicable at the time.
ParticipantRt. 66, it is not a 100 year proven affordability index and you wouldn’t chop off the top third (the ultra-rich do not represent any more than the top 1%). I’ll try an analogy. Let’s say you are at the river and you drive past a boat with 10 women wearing bikinis. The six women with fake boobs who are most proud of their investment decide to flash you. You decide to use those six to determine the average breast size of the women on the boat, therefore your average cup size is flawed. This is the reason pollsters only look at likely voters, not the population as a whole.
You are trying to use the numbers to determine a price based on ALL PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO BUY A HOUSE, the fact is, not all people buy homes.
BTW, ask around, many of us believed a Temecula home in the 2500 sq ft range would hit low to mid 2’s, because in 1998 that house was being sold for 170-190k, using a variety of formulas (not just the sky is falling ones) it was easy to see. It is also easy to see that the 65k median income of Temecula puts a median house in the 150-170 range, using your affordability parameters, and you know what, you can get a 1300-2000 sq footer for that, easily. But the formula cannot be carried to coastal S.D., Hawaii, and other areas, because there is a hell of a lot more to R/E than pure ratios.
Avoid the Bear kool-aid and the Bull kool-aid, drink water!
Good luck with that 165k in S.D.
ParticipantRt. 66, it is not a 100 year proven affordability index and you wouldn’t chop off the top third (the ultra-rich do not represent any more than the top 1%). I’ll try an analogy. Let’s say you are at the river and you drive past a boat with 10 women wearing bikinis. The six women with fake boobs who are most proud of their investment decide to flash you. You decide to use those six to determine the average breast size of the women on the boat, therefore your average cup size is flawed. This is the reason pollsters only look at likely voters, not the population as a whole.
You are trying to use the numbers to determine a price based on ALL PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO BUY A HOUSE, the fact is, not all people buy homes.
BTW, ask around, many of us believed a Temecula home in the 2500 sq ft range would hit low to mid 2’s, because in 1998 that house was being sold for 170-190k, using a variety of formulas (not just the sky is falling ones) it was easy to see. It is also easy to see that the 65k median income of Temecula puts a median house in the 150-170 range, using your affordability parameters, and you know what, you can get a 1300-2000 sq footer for that, easily. But the formula cannot be carried to coastal S.D., Hawaii, and other areas, because there is a hell of a lot more to R/E than pure ratios.
Avoid the Bear kool-aid and the Bull kool-aid, drink water!
Good luck with that 165k in S.D.
ParticipantRt. 66, it is not a 100 year proven affordability index and you wouldn’t chop off the top third (the ultra-rich do not represent any more than the top 1%). I’ll try an analogy. Let’s say you are at the river and you drive past a boat with 10 women wearing bikinis. The six women with fake boobs who are most proud of their investment decide to flash you. You decide to use those six to determine the average breast size of the women on the boat, therefore your average cup size is flawed. This is the reason pollsters only look at likely voters, not the population as a whole.
You are trying to use the numbers to determine a price based on ALL PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO BUY A HOUSE, the fact is, not all people buy homes.
BTW, ask around, many of us believed a Temecula home in the 2500 sq ft range would hit low to mid 2’s, because in 1998 that house was being sold for 170-190k, using a variety of formulas (not just the sky is falling ones) it was easy to see. It is also easy to see that the 65k median income of Temecula puts a median house in the 150-170 range, using your affordability parameters, and you know what, you can get a 1300-2000 sq footer for that, easily. But the formula cannot be carried to coastal S.D., Hawaii, and other areas, because there is a hell of a lot more to R/E than pure ratios.
Avoid the Bear kool-aid and the Bull kool-aid, drink water!
Good luck with that 165k in S.D.
ParticipantRt. 66, it is not a 100 year proven affordability index and you wouldn’t chop off the top third (the ultra-rich do not represent any more than the top 1%). I’ll try an analogy. Let’s say you are at the river and you drive past a boat with 10 women wearing bikinis. The six women with fake boobs who are most proud of their investment decide to flash you. You decide to use those six to determine the average breast size of the women on the boat, therefore your average cup size is flawed. This is the reason pollsters only look at likely voters, not the population as a whole.
You are trying to use the numbers to determine a price based on ALL PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO BUY A HOUSE, the fact is, not all people buy homes.
BTW, ask around, many of us believed a Temecula home in the 2500 sq ft range would hit low to mid 2’s, because in 1998 that house was being sold for 170-190k, using a variety of formulas (not just the sky is falling ones) it was easy to see. It is also easy to see that the 65k median income of Temecula puts a median house in the 150-170 range, using your affordability parameters, and you know what, you can get a 1300-2000 sq footer for that, easily. But the formula cannot be carried to coastal S.D., Hawaii, and other areas, because there is a hell of a lot more to R/E than pure ratios.
Avoid the Bear kool-aid and the Bull kool-aid, drink water!
Good luck with that 165k in S.D.
ParticipantRt. 66, it is not a 100 year proven affordability index and you wouldn’t chop off the top third (the ultra-rich do not represent any more than the top 1%). I’ll try an analogy. Let’s say you are at the river and you drive past a boat with 10 women wearing bikinis. The six women with fake boobs who are most proud of their investment decide to flash you. You decide to use those six to determine the average breast size of the women on the boat, therefore your average cup size is flawed. This is the reason pollsters only look at likely voters, not the population as a whole.
You are trying to use the numbers to determine a price based on ALL PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO BUY A HOUSE, the fact is, not all people buy homes.
BTW, ask around, many of us believed a Temecula home in the 2500 sq ft range would hit low to mid 2’s, because in 1998 that house was being sold for 170-190k, using a variety of formulas (not just the sky is falling ones) it was easy to see. It is also easy to see that the 65k median income of Temecula puts a median house in the 150-170 range, using your affordability parameters, and you know what, you can get a 1300-2000 sq footer for that, easily. But the formula cannot be carried to coastal S.D., Hawaii, and other areas, because there is a hell of a lot more to R/E than pure ratios.
Avoid the Bear kool-aid and the Bull kool-aid, drink water!
Good luck with that 165k in S.D.
ParticipantThe misleading part about median income to median house it it fails to chop off the bottom 1/3 of earners who will not be/should not be buyers. S.D. is historically in the 4-7x median to median with some sub 4 years and the most recent bubble hitting 11. Apartments dwellers are included in the median income but the apartments themselves are not included in the median sales price because they are not sold individually. So you are including players into the statistical game on one side of the formula yet they aren’t on the other side. If nothing was rented and all apartments were individually owned as condos the numbers would be true, the current formula is flawed.
S.D. had a worse median to median ratio than detroit and I’ll bet Hawaii is worse than S.D., history of a particular market matter, not national or rustbelt numbers.
In fact I ran Lahaina in Maui, 61k median income, 1.8 million median home price
If rt.66 is right and we get to buy a pad on maui for 2.5x median income, I’ll pack my shit right now.
I actually like Southwest Maui better (Kihei, Wailea, Makena) and the median there was only 54k, the good news is that houses were much cheaper, 850k median, so when I can get one for 125k, I wont even bother packing, I’ll get new stuff once I get there.
ParticipantThe misleading part about median income to median house it it fails to chop off the bottom 1/3 of earners who will not be/should not be buyers. S.D. is historically in the 4-7x median to median with some sub 4 years and the most recent bubble hitting 11. Apartments dwellers are included in the median income but the apartments themselves are not included in the median sales price because they are not sold individually. So you are including players into the statistical game on one side of the formula yet they aren’t on the other side. If nothing was rented and all apartments were individually owned as condos the numbers would be true, the current formula is flawed.
S.D. had a worse median to median ratio than detroit and I’ll bet Hawaii is worse than S.D., history of a particular market matter, not national or rustbelt numbers.
In fact I ran Lahaina in Maui, 61k median income, 1.8 million median home price
If rt.66 is right and we get to buy a pad on maui for 2.5x median income, I’ll pack my shit right now.
I actually like Southwest Maui better (Kihei, Wailea, Makena) and the median there was only 54k, the good news is that houses were much cheaper, 850k median, so when I can get one for 125k, I wont even bother packing, I’ll get new stuff once I get there.
ParticipantThe misleading part about median income to median house it it fails to chop off the bottom 1/3 of earners who will not be/should not be buyers. S.D. is historically in the 4-7x median to median with some sub 4 years and the most recent bubble hitting 11. Apartments dwellers are included in the median income but the apartments themselves are not included in the median sales price because they are not sold individually. So you are including players into the statistical game on one side of the formula yet they aren’t on the other side. If nothing was rented and all apartments were individually owned as condos the numbers would be true, the current formula is flawed.
S.D. had a worse median to median ratio than detroit and I’ll bet Hawaii is worse than S.D., history of a particular market matter, not national or rustbelt numbers.
In fact I ran Lahaina in Maui, 61k median income, 1.8 million median home price
If rt.66 is right and we get to buy a pad on maui for 2.5x median income, I’ll pack my shit right now.
I actually like Southwest Maui better (Kihei, Wailea, Makena) and the median there was only 54k, the good news is that houses were much cheaper, 850k median, so when I can get one for 125k, I wont even bother packing, I’ll get new stuff once I get there.
ParticipantThe misleading part about median income to median house it it fails to chop off the bottom 1/3 of earners who will not be/should not be buyers. S.D. is historically in the 4-7x median to median with some sub 4 years and the most recent bubble hitting 11. Apartments dwellers are included in the median income but the apartments themselves are not included in the median sales price because they are not sold individually. So you are including players into the statistical game on one side of the formula yet they aren’t on the other side. If nothing was rented and all apartments were individually owned as condos the numbers would be true, the current formula is flawed.
S.D. had a worse median to median ratio than detroit and I’ll bet Hawaii is worse than S.D., history of a particular market matter, not national or rustbelt numbers.
In fact I ran Lahaina in Maui, 61k median income, 1.8 million median home price
If rt.66 is right and we get to buy a pad on maui for 2.5x median income, I’ll pack my shit right now.
I actually like Southwest Maui better (Kihei, Wailea, Makena) and the median there was only 54k, the good news is that houses were much cheaper, 850k median, so when I can get one for 125k, I wont even bother packing, I’ll get new stuff once I get there.
ParticipantThe misleading part about median income to median house it it fails to chop off the bottom 1/3 of earners who will not be/should not be buyers. S.D. is historically in the 4-7x median to median with some sub 4 years and the most recent bubble hitting 11. Apartments dwellers are included in the median income but the apartments themselves are not included in the median sales price because they are not sold individually. So you are including players into the statistical game on one side of the formula yet they aren’t on the other side. If nothing was rented and all apartments were individually owned as condos the numbers would be true, the current formula is flawed.
S.D. had a worse median to median ratio than detroit and I’ll bet Hawaii is worse than S.D., history of a particular market matter, not national or rustbelt numbers.
In fact I ran Lahaina in Maui, 61k median income, 1.8 million median home price
If rt.66 is right and we get to buy a pad on maui for 2.5x median income, I’ll pack my shit right now.
I actually like Southwest Maui better (Kihei, Wailea, Makena) and the median there was only 54k, the good news is that houses were much cheaper, 850k median, so when I can get one for 125k, I wont even bother packing, I’ll get new stuff once I get there.
ParticipantApologies for both misreading veritas and threadjacking, I need to keep away from the keyboard when drinking. I’m up for another get together, I’ll drink with you and Mr. Ca Renter anytime.
-
AuthorPosts
