Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-02-2012, 04:02 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 32,877,652 times
Reputation: 2910

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
This is a meaningless abstraction that is of no use to an individual.
It is not an abstraction, it is what actually happens here. People ask about all over, not just the City.

Quote:
The most common focal point, by far, is Pittsburgh (the city).
The number of people coming to this forum exclusively looking at the City is a small minority. Most people are looking in at least some suburbs, and many people are looking exclusively in the suburbs.

Quote:
Firstly, you are cherry picking some date range.
I didn't "cherry pick" those years--those are the two base years in question.

Quote:
So what's the point? Did you think I was just talking about the last few years?
I don't think you are really talking about anything specific at all, but rather just trying to find whatever dark spots in the data will allow you to keep pushing certain debunked notions.

But anyway, my point was just that we actually do have a little information about all the residential properties in the City, and it doesn't appear to be wildly at variance with the HPI data we have been looking at (in fact, it implies higher appreciation rates in the City than the HPI is reporting for the Metro).

Quote:
that period was marked by national housing bubble and I don't think Pittsburgh was at all immune from its effects.
I don't know if I would use the word "immune", but all that has happened here since 2006 was a brief leveling of prices followed by a return to appreciation.

Quote:
I would expect, in the future, that Pittsburgh real estate roughly keeps up with inflation.
And that's normal for U.S. residential real estate in general (to average not much more than inflation).

Quote:
Umm...yeah Pittsburgh is just like any other MSA. This is too absurd to even address....
Silly me--asking you provide some sort of basis for your asserted reasons for ignoring the available data.

Last edited by BrianTH; 01-02-2012 at 04:41 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-02-2012, 06:14 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,460 posts, read 19,999,178 times
Reputation: 4365
Quote:
Originally Posted by greg42 View Post
What sort of commuting did you think I meant? Commuting to grandma's house? When I say reverse and alternate commuting, I'm still talking workplace.
No idea as your comments weren't really consistent with workplace commuting in/out of the city. I don't know, do you imagine that there are a lot of people with commutes greater than 60 minutes one way? I'm sure it happens, but I'm not sure why someone relocating to the city would be looking at areas with such long commutes...especially considering there is plenty of reasonably priced real estate in the region I'm defining.


Quote:
Originally Posted by greg42 View Post
Have you actually lived here and experienced the patterns, or are you insisting this based solely on maps and public transportation data and other such info?
Umm...yeah I lived in Pittsburgh for a number of years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2012, 06:24 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,460 posts, read 19,999,178 times
Reputation: 4365
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
It is not an abstraction, it is what actually happens here.
Umm...huh? You're talking about an aggregate....aggregates are abstractions....

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
The number of people coming to this forum exclusively looking at the City is a small minority.
Okay? Did you read anything I said...or were you responding to someone else? No idea why you think 2002 and 2010 are the "base years in question" either....


Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
...but rather just trying to find whatever dark spots in the data will allow you to keep pushing certain debunked notions.
Oh yes...let's not forget the "notions" you think I'm pushing.....even though I haven't even asserted them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
And that's normal for U.S. residential real estate in general (to average not much more than inflation).
Umm..yeah..but "US resident real estate" is an aggregate and I'm sure you can name this fallacy too....yet here you are employing it. The behavior of the aggregate says little about the behavior of individual components of the aggregate, in this case Pittsburgh... That is, my prediction of Pittsburgh real estate is in no sense vacuous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2012, 07:11 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 32,877,652 times
Reputation: 2910
Outlying counties are included in the OMB's definition of a CBSA (including MSAs) if at least 25% of the workers living in the outlying county commute into the central county, or at least 25% of the employed in the outlying county reside in the central county. See here (on p. 37250):

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defa...s-Complete.pdf

Last edited by BrianTH; 01-02-2012 at 07:21 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2012, 07:18 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 32,877,652 times
Reputation: 2910
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Umm...huh? You're talking about an aggregate....aggregates are abstractions....
No, I am talking about actual people. Like, for example, this one:

http://www.city-data.com/forum/22367297-post1.html

Again, we get people like that here all the time, which is part of why I am declining your invitation to artificially restrict our discussion to just the City.

Quote:
No idea why you think 2002 and 2010 are the "base years in question" either....
The 46% figure I quoted is from the Allegheny County reassessment results recently released. Allegheny County uses a base-year system. 2002 was the last base year, and 2010 is the new base year.

Quote:
That is, my prediction of Pittsburgh real estate is in no sense vacuous.
I didn't say it was--predicting that Pittsburgh will continue to appreciate like a normal real estate market is a meaningful prediction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2012, 07:19 PM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
1,723 posts, read 2,215,691 times
Reputation: 1145
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Umm...yeah Pittsburgh is just like any other MSA. This is too absurd to even address....
I don't think you're 100% wrong about this. It just depends to what MSA you're comparing Pittsburgh. There are 366 of them so there is bound to be some variation and outliers within them. Plus, they can change over time, e.g., the original Pittsburgh MSA contained four counties, it now has seven (and a half).

I agree that sentiments about the Pittsburgh MSA can be more City centric compared to ones like Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington because City of Pittsburgh is THE major municipality (and a small one in terms of area). The Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington MSA has 9 municipalities with greater than 100,000 residents; after Pittsburgh, what is the largest here?

Regarding commute times and residential preferences, there is surely some significant decline in City oriented business/preference the father you travel from the core; I don't know what the percentage is, but I think you're on the right track with stating there is less population the farther you go out from the core. It's not like people outside a certain radius from the MSA principal city don't exist, it's just that there aren't as many of them here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2012, 07:21 PM
gg
 
Location: Pittsburgh
26,137 posts, read 25,783,846 times
Reputation: 17378
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Umm...huh? You're talking about an aggregate....aggregates are abstractions....


Okay? Did you read anything I said...or were you responding to someone else? No idea why you think 2002 and 2010 are the "base years in question" either....



Oh yes...let's not forget the "notions" you think I'm pushing.....even though I haven't even asserted them.


Umm..yeah..but "US resident real estate" is an aggregate and I'm sure you can name this fallacy too....yet here you are employing it. The behavior of the aggregate says little about the behavior of individual components of the aggregate, in this case Pittsburgh... That is, my prediction of Pittsburgh real estate is in no sense vacuous.
Nice post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2012, 07:52 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh area
9,912 posts, read 24,543,247 times
Reputation: 5162
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
No idea as your comments weren't really consistent with workplace commuting in/out of the city. I don't know, do you imagine that there are a lot of people with commutes greater than 60 minutes one way? I'm sure it happens, but I'm not sure why someone relocating to the city would be looking at areas with such long commutes...especially considering there is plenty of reasonably priced real estate in the region I'm defining.
Not talking over 60 minutes, no. Do you think we've only got 600k within 60 minutes?! Or 30-45 even? 30-45 is pretty commonplace.

Your range is at about 15-20 min tops with your population, centered on the city. There aren't enough variations in housing within that zone to nearly suit everyone's needs, most notably little to no recent/new construction.

For whatever it's worth. I don't really know why I'm arguing this now, just "Someone is wrong on the Internet!" syndrome.... http://xkcd.com/386/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2012, 09:01 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,460 posts, read 19,999,178 times
Reputation: 4365
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
No, I am talking about actual people.
Umm...no:

"when you look not just at each individual in isolation, but rather all of them together, we do indeed get people asking about locations all over the MSA."

That is an aggregate, one that isn't particularly relevant to an individual thinking about relocation to the area as such an individual will have a focal point (usually the city).


Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
The 46% figure I quoted is from the Allegheny County reassessment results recently released. Allegheny County uses a base-year system. 2002 was the last base year, and 2010 is the new base year.
The reason the date range is cherry picked is immaterial....the fact of the matter is that is just an arbitrary period that has little to do with anything I've said. But maybe you were responding to someone else?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2012, 09:24 PM
 
20,273 posts, read 32,877,652 times
Reputation: 2910
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
That is an aggregate
Call them whatever you want, I'm still talking about actual living, breathing, human beings who come here to ask questions about possible living locations.

Quote:
such an individual will have a focal point (usually the city).
That simply isn't true: only a minority of the people we get here are looking exclusively at the City.

Honestly, it is bizarre you would suppose otherwise. Only a small minority of the people in the Pittsburgh area actually live in the City of Pittsburgh. But there is not a City Data Cranberry, or City Data Peters Township, or so on. So OF COURSE the majority of people asking about locations here are not looking exclusively at the City. And you can keep insisting that is true, but it simply is not.

Quote:
The reason the date range is cherry picked is immaterial
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking_(fallacy)

Quote:
Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position.
I'm not "ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data," because that is the only date range available from the reassessment.

Of course if you think there is some other data we should be looking at, please, tell us what it is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top