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.
Amen. More than a few school district administrators are paid more than the governor of 21 million people. I pay taxes to the state of New York, Monroe county, the town of Perinton and the Village of Fairport. And of course my platinum level school district.
It's no wonder Rochester is one of only 4 metros it's size or larger that has lost population since the 2010 census.
I’d be careful with the last line, as we’ve seen how losses were overestimated before the last official census and the area as of now hasn’t had a population loss in an official census yet.
Amen. More than a few school district administrators are paid more than the governor of 21 million people. I pay taxes to the state of New York, Monroe county, the town of Perinton and the Village of Fairport. And of course my platinum level school district.
It's no wonder Rochester is one of only 4 metros it's size or larger that has lost population since the 2010 census.
First of all, the census you are referring to is an estimate. Which means it's a guess. It's not a fact. The last census also greatly underestimated the Rochester metro and had us losing population with the estimates. It proved to be very much wrong.
Secondly, your conflating population with housing purchases. You should be looking at housing purchases. If taxes were that much of a hindrance or deterrent, then that should be reflected in the housing market here.
And in fact, it's the opposite. Ironically Rochester has one of the hotter real estate markets. Homes are on the market in the Rochester area much lower than the average, and have much lower inventory than average. Again if taxes were a hindrance or deterrent, then it should be a buyer's market. Homes staying on the market longer than average, and a large inventory. The reality is that the Rochester housing market is driven more by affordable homes than taxes preventing or deterring purchases.
While you may personally feel like moving away because of taxes, many more purchase because the homes are more affordable. Your anecdotal evidence is not fact.
I've said this many times. Taxes are high in Rochester. But taxes don't drive the housing market. Home prices drive the market.
And this isn't my opinion or a local realtor firm claiming that the housing market is hot in Rochester. This is the analysis from the largest realtor website in the country, Realtor.com.
Quote:
SANTA CLARA, Calif., Aug. 16, 2018 /PRNewswire/ -- Realtor.com®, the Home of Home Search, today released its July hottest markets list which reinforces home buyer interest is shifting away from pricey California to less expensive markets throughout the country. In fact, nearly a third of the markets were located in the affordable Midwest, which had a combined median list price well below the national average, according to the report.
Midland, Texas continued its streak in July as the the nation's hottest housing market for the fourth month in row. Driven by a surging oil economy, the median age of inventory in Midland is 29 days with homes receiving 2.4 times more listing views than the U.S. overall.
The remaining markets on the list, in rank order, are: Fort Wayne, Ind.; Boise City, Idaho; San Francisco; Columbus, Ohio; Colorado Springs, Colo.; Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, Mich.; Racine, Wis.; Vallejo-Fairfield, Calif.; Rochester, N.Y.; Sacramento; Janesville-Beloit, Wis.; Boston; Dallas; Pueblo, Colo.; Buffalo-Cheektowaga-Niagara Falls, N.Y.; Stockton-Lodi, Calif.; Fresno, Calif.; Odessa, Texas; and Grand Rapids-Wyoming, Mich.
This month 11 states are represented in the top 20 hottest, compared to eight a year ago. The combined median list price in the top 20 was $344,000 – the lowest price for the top 20 combined since realtor.com® started tracking in 2012. The largest geography represented on the list was the Midwest, which had a combined a median list price of $236,000, well below the national and top-20 list averages.
"With the median home list price hovering at a record level, affordable markets are very attractive for buyers, which is contributing to the popularity of many Midwestern markets," said Danielle Hale, chief economist at realtor.com®. "Although construction is increasing in many regions, inventory remains scarce due to strong buyer demand and years of underbuilding. Even these affordable markets run the risk of what we've seen elsewhere if they aren't able to keep pace with new construction.
Homes in these hot areas moved 17 to 30 days more quickly than the rest of the U.S. The time they spent on the market was on average four days fewer than last July. Buyer interest in these areas is also rising, with listing views 1.8 times higher than the national average and 16 percent higher than last year.
I’d be careful with the last line, as we’ve seen how losses were overestimated before the last official census and the area as of now hasn’t had a population loss in an official census yet.
The latest census data shows net negative 38,000 migrating to other parts of the US since 2010. That's close to 4% of the 1.07M population. Even if it's adjusted downward by a quarter, which I doubt, it's still 3% of the MSA moving out in under 10 years.
First of all, the census you are referring to is an estimate. Which means it's a guess. It's not a fact. The last census also greatly underestimated the Rochester metro and had us losing population with the estimates. It proved to be very much wrong.
Secondly, your conflating population with housing purchases. You should be looking at housing purchases. If taxes were that much of a hindrance or deterrent, then that should be reflected in the housing market here.
And in fact, it's the opposite. Ironically Rochester has one of the hotter real estate markets. Homes are on the market in the Rochester area much lower than the average, and have much lower inventory than average. Again if taxes were a hindrance or deterrent, then it should be a buyer's market. Homes staying on the market longer than average, and a large inventory. The reality is that the Rochester housing market is driven more by affordable homes than taxes preventing or deterring purchases.
While you may personally feel like moving away because of taxes, many more purchase because the homes are more affordable. Your anecdotal evidence is not fact.
I've said this many times. Taxes are high in Rochester. But taxes don't drive the housing market. Home prices drive the market.
And this isn't my opinion or a local realtor firm claiming that the housing market is hot in Rochester. This is the analysis from the largest realtor website in the country, Realtor.com.
Actually, I didn't mention real estate at all in my post.
Since I don't have it handy and since you know so much about these things, maybe you can share comparative price appreciation data in this red hot housing market.
The latest census data shows net negative 38,000 migrating to other parts of the US since 2010. That's close to 4% of the 1.07M population. Even if it's adjusted downward by a quarter, which I doubt, it's still 3% of the MSA moving out in under 10 years.
That is an estimate. There is no concrete data since 2010. The same thing happened in 2009. The estimates had the Rochester metro losing thousands. The estimates were proven to be significantly wrong and Rochester actually gained thousands
Actually, I didn't mention real estate at all in my post.
Since I don't have it handy and since you know so much about these things, maybe you can share comparative price appreciation data in this red hot housing market.
I know you didn't mention real estate. That was my point. You can't measure the performance of a tire without using data from a car. Taxes are an independent variable that goes into home prices and affordability and sales. Your mortgage includes taxes. So it directly affects your ability to buy a home.
Home sales and affordable prices show that taxes are not inhibiting home purchasing or demand for homes. Because the over all mortgage is affordable including taxes.
For your last question the median price is up 9 percent year over year to 152k
That is an estimate. There is no concrete data since 2010. The same thing happened in 2009. The estimates had the Rochester metro losing thousands. The estimates were proven to be significantly wrong and Rochester actually gained thousands
^This and ironically if you look at the Combined Statistical Area, which includes the Batavia and Seneca Falls micro areas, the area shows a slight growth. That is according to 2010 to 2017 estimates. So, you may also see some people just moving a little bit further out as well.
Status:
"Let this year be over..."
(set 16 days ago)
Location: Where my bills arrive
19,219 posts, read 17,075,134 times
Reputation: 15537
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod
^This and ironically if you look at the Combined Statistical Area, which includes the Batavia and Seneca Falls micro areas, the area shows a slight growth. That is according to 2010 to 2017 estimates. So, you may also see some people just moving a little bit further out as well.
But at some point you must stick to a measurable standard that can used for comparison if not a city proper at least a county. Batavia may have received influx from Buffalo's eastern areas and Seneca Falls seems equal between 2 cities who can say where to give the credit.
The down side of computers is people can cobble together statistics anyway they like to prove/disprove a point they are trying to make, after a while it gets ridicules. Just watch the evening news where this is the 4th time in the last 9.5 years that this has occurred on a .....
That is an estimate. There is no concrete data since 2010. The same thing happened in 2009. The estimates had the Rochester metro losing thousands. The estimates were proven to be significantly wrong and Rochester actually gained thousands
The 2010 actual was higher than the 2009 estimate. Therefore, the 2018 actual is higher than the 2018 estimate.
I know you didn't mention real estate. That was my point. You can't measure the performance of a tire without using data from a car.
Home sales and affordable prices show that taxes are not inhibiting home purchasing or demand for homes. Because the over all mortgage is affordable including taxes.
Again, I didn't mention real estate but since you did high taxes absolutely impacts affordability. In a lower tax area, a $300k home could have the same total monthly cost as a $200k home in a high tax area. And more of the payment will go towards equity, bringing additional economic benefits to the homeowner.
How do you know that high taxes are not impeding demand for housing? On what do you base that?
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.
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.
