« First « Previous Comments 141 - 144 of 144 Search these comments
perhaps you can provide reasons why SF Prime wasnt higher say mid 90s...it took nearly 15 yeas for prices to double since 1980 and than on a dime they doubled from 1998 to 2000 and doubled again, no such prior example for similar price inflation.
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/04/27/realestate/live-work-law-for-artists-roils-san-franciscans.html
A report released this month by the National Association of Home Builders put San Francisco's median residential price for 1996 at $285,000. With prices beginning at $175,000 to $200,000, lofts are the cheapest nonsubsidized units on the market, according to David Becker, a broker with Ritchie Commercial Real Estate. They are, nonetheless, still too expensive for the artists for whom they were intended, Ms. Hestor said.
Reversion to the mean is an interesting theory. What if the mean is misrepresented? Inflation as represented by the green line may not be as indicated in the graph. There are many debates as to whether the inflation is correctly measured. How come the inflation is so low when people in SFBA felt that the house prices and rents have skyrocketed? Thought one of the component in inflation is shelter.
yet Shiller will show we are back to normal prices be it Vegas Miami or even So Cal...
http://www.dqnews.com/Articles/2013/News/California/Southern-CA/RRSCA131112.aspx
yet Shiller will show we are back to normal prices be it Vegas Miami or even So
Cal...
It is in Vallejo, Stockton, Vegas, Miami and whatever, but not in San Francisco, San Jose, Virginia, etc. Revision to mean theory are junk because the underlying theory (when it is all said and done, bottom line) is everything/everywhere are constant.
Revision to mean theory are junk because the underlying theory (when it is all said and done, bottom line) is everything/everywhere are constant.
its no theory since its been documented by sales data across several decades.
only the RE interest on pnet are disputing Shillers data and conclusion.
Your disagreement will not change anything...
« First « Previous Comments 141 - 144 of 144 Search these comments
First some facts.
Decent Peninsula areas are Millbrae, Burlingame, parts of San Mateo, Foster City, Belmont, San Carlos, Menlo Park, Palo Alto and Mountain View
On redfin, there are very few houses under $600k in the areas I mentioned: redfin map showing houses under $600k
On the map we can see most of these lower priced houses (meaning those under $600k) are clustered in 3 areas: redwood city, the lower income east side of san mateo and east palo alto
if you want a bigger home it'll cost quite a bit more. A decent non-starter (meaning larger) house will start around $800k but can be much more if you want an established neighborhood (anything in Palo Alto).
If a household spends 30% of net pay on mortgage: $120k/year net; $210k/year gross.
If a household spends 50% of net pay on mortgage: $72k/year net; $120k/year gross
paycheck calculator
san francisco wages
san jose wages
looking at the median hourly rate, we can presume median wage is equal to or less than the mean wage.
meaning half the jobs probably make less than $61,940/$66,780.
you get paid more in san jose, so let's look at that city.
the mean wage for all occupational groups in SJ is under $100k, with the exception of: managers, engineers, lawyers.
there are 888k total jobs in san jose; 74k managers, 83k engineers, 6k lawyers for a total of 163k high paying jobs. that is 18% of all jobs.
this theory that most people in the bay area make $100k+ is nonsense. roughly 4 of 5 jobs pay under $100k.
Let's summarize the facts.
Now the analysis.
50% debt to net-income
you can have 2 people making the mean wage($60k+$60k=$120k); or one person making a high wage(at $120k) to afford a $600k mortgage. although they'll be paying 50% of their net take home for the mortgage+taxes.
but what is important is that there is no possible way (unless you have the mortgage fraud we had in 2005) that a single person with a median income can realistically afford this starter home. you need either two mean wages, or a high income wage at 50% of debt-to-net-income.
30% debt to net-income
if you do the more realistic scenario of 30% of net pay to pay a $600k mortgage; then you need one income of $210k/year or two high income wages (both at $105k/year or some combination) just to afford a starter home.
Conclusion
it's entirely unrealistic, without substantial price appreciation, for two high salaries to pay for a starter home that should be sold to the lower income demographic.
in a sane world, someone earning the mean wage or less would be buying this starter property(which would be priced much lower than $600k).
i'm hoping for people to come to this realization and maybe we'll see a return to sanity.
#housing