patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,365,230 comments by 15,735 users - declarethecauses, Glock-n-Load online now
Requesting Insider Insight on Bay Area Real Estate Prices
2012 Feb 4, 1:55pm 4,482 views 16 comments
« First « Previous Comments 8 - 16 of 16 Search these comments
Bay Area land is expensive because we get paid more, and we get paid more because Bay Area land is expensive.
You can look back and see that areas in Boston, Mass and regions of Connecticut were much more expensive than SF or South Bays Palo Alto. SoCal was more expensive for decades past than NoCal. So the 'notion' BA land was more expensive was a more recent phenomenon.
You forget we in the Bay Area learned a bitter lesson from the 80s, that overspending (compensation) has led to dreadfull failure by private industries, leading to salary cuts, layoffs and out migration.
2) It's very unusual to have 4 children here. Random strangers who see my twins tell me I'm lucky to have gotten childbearing over with in one pregnancy - two children is considered the perfect family size in the Bay Area.
somethings never change ... its no wonder home prices were more tracking a single earner income vs what the realtors keep talking about..(dual income with credit to max limit).
I find that most homes that are for sale are presented pretty well , with fresh paint jobs and staging etc .
A more recent phenomenon.. and was not the norm past practive. Overall it hard to imagine someone exaggeration the value of a home based on temp presentation. At the end of the day its still a 50s Eichler...
Patrick
@
2012 Feb 5, 11:25am
For a good overview of the normal pricing and rents in the US:
Note that Bay Area prices are largely off that chart, to the right. There's something seriously wrong with prices here. Clearly still a huge bubble, IMHO.
And yes, the ground water is seriously polluted with carcinogens:
http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/show_story.php?source=patrick.net&id=22807
And note that Steve Jobs died of cancer in that same area. No proof, but I think there is definitely good reason for concern.
Patrick - Seriously?
I live down Waverley from the Jobs house - several of my neighbors have reached 100 (and died peacefully at home), while others are well into their 80s. Using your flawless logic, you could say that the polluted groundwater is causing these extended lifespans.
Patrick
@
2012 Feb 5, 12:53pm
I'm just saying there is definitely some carcinogen in the Palo Alto water supply. No proof you'll die from it. Just a cause for concern.
Some smokers live to be 100 too.
B.A.C.A.H.
@
2012 Feb 5, 12:55pm
Watch,
thomas and I are local kids, we've seen it all. Most of the rest are Immigrants to the Bay Area, either from other countries or other parts of the USA. Including even, Patrick himself.
Among the Immigrants, there's two attitudes: either the "something's wrong and distorted" side like Patrick or dunross would say, or else the Sky is the Limit Cool-Aid drinkers, like American Express Black himself.
If you wanna get honest input from a Local Kid who's not a kid anymore, name the date and time to meet at City Lights Expresso in downtown Santa Clara. Maybe thomas.wong will even join us.
1. Don't be worried about the toxic sites, worry about the air pollution where you are thinking of living. Soil is fine as long as you don't eat it. Water is fine if you use brita or similar or buy RO water. Who actually drinks tapwater anyway?
2. Earthquakes are no problem for houses made of wood. I lived through a big one here and the issue is houses shake and bounce off their foundations if they are not bolted down onto them. The fix may be expensive for houses that were not retrofitted like the ones were around here.
3. California is broke and they are going to look for money from homeowners who are trapped and can't leave easily. They know that the average family has no ability to scram when the property taxes go up.
The thing to worry most about is the huge cost of buying and the huge financial disaster that is California. See all those short brown girls pushing baby strollers around? They need your money. See those millionaire cops and firemen at the gym? They need your money.
I'm just saying there is definitely some carcinogen in the Palo Alto water supply. No proof you'll die from it. Just a cause for concern.
Some smokers live to be 100 too.
That is the cost of being called "Silicon" Valley... That is the cost of making semiconductor wafers, disk platters, circuit boards and many other components that require materials and chemical cleaning and acids.
Given all the state and EPA standards could we have manufacturing back in California ? Many would bar such manufacturing in the state. We could do it more smartly of course ...
Yes.. Keith Richards after all the smoking, pot/hash, coke, herion is still alive and may well reach 100 years old..
« First « Previous Comments 8 - 16 of 16 Search these comments
{My apology in advance for grammatical errors as I am typing this while doing other work.}
I moved to the Bay Area a couple years ago and was surprised with the high prices then and now given what one gets living here. I understand demand and supply dictate prices in the long run, but here is my confusion, and would love insight by local Bay Area residents (owners and renters). My family would like to own a home eventually, but just can't justify the prices, even though we can afford it (because I work in the Bay Area, I obviously need a place to live). Let me preface first that I enjoy living here primary due to the weather, terrain (mountains and oceans), and my job. But I generally have little respect for the home qualities and the attributes associated with them. There are plenty of nice, expensive, well-kept homes. But I am speaking in general for upper mid-price to lower price homes (largely representing most homes).
My perception of California Bay Area homes from an out-of-state perspective:
1) I was discouraged with how poorly most homes were kept up (at least get a paint job, right?). I felt like most homes had no upkeep and owners just let the homes "age" away. Most of the homes look old and worn. I am not arguing that there are structural issues, but I just feel like many of the homes look like people had better things to do than "pride of ownership" by keeping their homes updated or landscapes looking respectable. It could be a financial issue with most families, or they may have felt they had better things do to with their time.
2) Most homes are small by my standards (1300-1700 sqft) and some even approximately 1000 sgft with 2 or 3 bedrooms and 1 bathroom. I don't know how people can comfortable raise 2-4 children in these homes (but they have). Why are many homes relatively smaller? Is this typical for California?
3) Many areas - Alameda, Emeryville, Palo Alto, Martinez, etc, etc. had areas that were Super Fund sites at one point that were used as a toxic dumping site. Martinez is mentioned because of the oil refineries. I am not here to say that the entire Unites States is safe, but I would be interested in learning if there are higher cancer rates in the Bay Area than say places that were not near industrial plants or sites or previous toxic dump sites.
4) OK. Don't chuckle. But living on a earthquake fault line doesn't provide me much comfort. I would rather have 10 hurricanes and 10 tornadoes to deal with than 1 large earthquake (since earthquake is not predictable). I know most Californians don't worry about it, but probably because there isn't much they can do. Again, I just wonder if luck is running out.
5) A home in a state that is in financial trouble concerns me and you got to wonder that the governments (state and municipalities) are going to have to do including somehow amending propositions or collecting additional tax revenues to stay solvent. So that brings me to my point that it is also expensive living here (and I bet more expensive in the future).
So those are some of my thoughts. Again, I like living here for many reasons just less the traffic and home choices. However, if home prices were to drop to a respectable level, I would be more comfortable purchasing with no expectation of gains in the future, but just a simple place for my family to live.
Perhaps you can provide some insight whether I am missing the point or some of it makes sense.
Many thanks!
The Outsider
#housing