U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > District of Columbia > Washington, DC
 [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)
 
Old 11-03-2009, 03:52 PM
 
656 posts, read 1,195,978 times
Reputation: 84

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by KT13 View Post
So who do you think purchases your 'middle management housing'? Bill Gates or Paul Allen? Median income is a big influential factor as far as RE prices for what you call 'middle management housing' are concerned. So, how does this not matter?

Take two suburbs - one with lower median income and another one with higher median income, which one do you think will have higher RE prices?

Median income is usually not the best indicator of RE prices in places with mixed type of housing and mixed income. Like in Manhattan, there would be zip codes that are on the list of the wealthiest in the entire country but would have lower median income than some burbs in LE or DC. It is due to the fact that you have high density housing and more people per sq. ft making less money (e.g families occupying 1 bedroom apartments and people sharing with roommates). It's also due to the fact that even the wealthy area may still have lower income housing buildings in the area and the fact that some wealth (especially those who are truly rich) doesn't come from income (that's reported in the same manner as salaries in the upper middle class suburbs).

So, the median income in an upper middle class suburb full of predominantly single family homes and low density occupancy rates with the fairly socio-economically homogenous population (most of which derives their wealth from earned income) is likely to be higher than in places with high density and high diversity of population.

However, when you discuss prices in such predominantly single family communities, median income does matter because this is what's driving the costs of the RE in the area.
Again, median income is different from the wealth in the region, and lobbyists and the well connected can drive up the costs , while you do have wealthy folks who are making money in mc lean and the like, I wouldn't say its the median who are making the money which drives up costs, just as bill gates and paul allen may indirectly drive up housing costs to the middle consumer, those lobbyists and well connected business folks who set up contracts may do it but to a lesser extent.

Although in many areas what you are saying may be true such as in southern California and many suburbs, its a two-sided opinion because some argue that D.C. itself influences that prices outside in its sub rubs and vice-versa , a household is a household regardless of whether or nots its a single family home, in the case of D.C. they are multi-family dwellings mostly in the city-itself but to a lesser but significant extent outside the city although not as much as say new york city proper and many of its surrounding suburbs.

There are also higher median income places where the housing costs are much lower in the suburban single-family dwelling areas, I am not sure which position you are trying to argue.

 
Old 11-03-2009, 03:58 PM
 
656 posts, read 1,195,978 times
Reputation: 84
quote=cpterp;11463418]I didn't say it did. Wealth is attained from income. A person's wealth is defined by their assets, and for the vast majority of Americans that would be income, as well as homes and automobiles. For a very tiny proportion of Americans the majority of their net worth is mostly in securities, and in most cases (not including compensation) these securities are attained by way of income.There's no perfect statistic, but Median income is the best indicator of wealth when comparing states or counties, or other localities in this country. That my friend is a generally accepted fact, and it's what the CB and most private and government organizations use. Trust me, I know. When comparing countries you use per capita GDP, since you obviously can't find, or even accurately estimate, the incomes of most people living in the world like you can for American residents.

In your first sentence you give the exact reason why per capita income is not the best measure of wealth. Bill Gates, Paul Allen, and "others" would skew the per capita statistic by a substantial degree. If you have 5 people making $1bil a year, and 15 making 100K a year you have a per capita income of $250,075,000, but a median income of $100K. Which makes more sense?


I never said per capita income was the best way, but median can be misleading, if 20 people make 500k and 21 make 100k , the median is 100k.

In the case of D.C. its not that extreme but let's say a person making 150k jointly can afford a 700k home, it may be because a small minority of folks are driving up the cost of living especially in the suburbs.

This is true in mclean, va , its very expensive and although the median is halfway between 100 and 200k there are a significant amount of people who are making 500k+ , while they may not be billionares they are maybe millionares but not super millionares, so although you may not find that they drive up the cost of homes to say 20-30 million dollar condos , they do drive it up, hence the median because misleading when compared to areas with higher net worth individuals.

Cost-of-living and purchasing power definitely aren't "misleading," and they're directly related. In fact, factoring in COL would help your position.[/quote]
 
Old 11-03-2009, 04:56 PM
 
Location: Rockville, MD
3,548 posts, read 7,038,948 times
Reputation: 1341
Quote:
Originally Posted by tech2enable View Post
Again, median income is different from the wealth in the region, and lobbyists and the well connected can drive up the costs
There are a lot of lawyers, lobbyists, consultants and entrepreneurs here who are very wealthy. They don't drive up the cost--the market is what it is because so many of these people are here. You could make an identical argument about Manhattan--that all of the highly paid Wall Street execs are "driving up the cost" of real estate in Manhattan. Well, just so happens that Manhattan is one of the wealthiest enclaves in the U.S. As is the DC region.

Seriously, you've been putting forth this argument for months on this board. You're not getting anywhere with it, so enough already.
 
Old 11-03-2009, 04:58 PM
 
Location: Rockville, MD
3,548 posts, read 7,038,948 times
Reputation: 1341
Quote:
Originally Posted by tech2enable View Post
This is true in mclean, va , its very expensive and although the median is halfway between 100 and 200k there are a significant amount of people who are making 500k+ , while they may not be billionares they are maybe millionares but not super millionares, so although you may not find that they drive up the cost of homes to say 20-30 million dollar condos , they do drive it up, hence the median because misleading when compared to areas with higher net worth individuals.
I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say here. Your inability to proffer a sound argument is not aided by your inability to express yourself coherently.
 
Old 11-03-2009, 05:26 PM
 
583 posts, read 1,070,781 times
Reputation: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by tech2enable View Post
Again, median income is different from the wealth in the region, and lobbyists and the well connected can drive up the costs , while you do have wealthy folks who are making money in mc lean and the like, I wouldn't say its the median who are making the money which drives up costs, just as bill gates and paul allen may indirectly drive up housing costs to the middle consumer, those lobbyists and well connected business folks who set up contracts may do it but to a lesser extent.

Although in many areas what you are saying may be true such as in southern California and many suburbs, its a two-sided opinion because some argue that D.C. itself influences that prices outside in its sub rubs and vice-versa , a household is a household regardless of whether or nots its a single family home, in the case of D.C. they are multi-family dwellings mostly in the city-itself but to a lesser but significant extent outside the city although not as much as say new york city proper and many of its surrounding suburbs.

There are also higher median income places where the housing costs are much lower in the suburban single-family dwelling areas, I am not sure which position you are trying to argue.
This post makes no sense, i have no clue what you are trying to say here. I thought I was pretty clear. If we are talking about suburbs such as McLean or Fairfax Country, most of housing stock is single family homes and most people living there are deriving their wealth from income (e.g. they report income and that is what's going towards the statistics such as median income of the area). So median income of the area is more relevant in this situation than some illusive wealth of some conspiratorial multi-millionaire corrupt contractors you keep bringing up.

also, most people don't buy homes cash as you must be aware if you have been in the US for a while. It is quite possible for a family with the combined income of 200K (not unusual for this area) to afford a home that costs 800K-900K and it's even possible to get a home over 1 million or at least it was when the mortgage lending was looser.
 
Old 11-03-2009, 06:59 PM
 
Location: SE
331 posts, read 998,463 times
Reputation: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14thandYou View Post
Nope. San Francisco probably comes the closest, but it still has neighborhoods like Hunter's Point that are far from gentrified.
Thanks. I'm really trying to find out how and why some people here think that NE/SE would ever be totally gentrified.
 
Old 11-03-2009, 07:18 PM
 
Location: Rockville, MD
3,548 posts, read 7,038,948 times
Reputation: 1341
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaisedWell View Post
Thanks. I'm really trying to find out how and why some people here think that NE/SE would ever be totally gentrified.
Well, that's basically what I'm saying. DC won't ever fully gentrify, at least not in our lifetimes. This talk of Anacostia, or Deanwood, or Ivy City or whatever gentrifying within the next couple of decades isn't grounded in reality. Perhaps those areas will marginally improve versus what they are now, but you will not get the next Columbia Heights, or even Petworth, there.
 
Old 11-03-2009, 07:42 PM
 
Location: SE
331 posts, read 998,463 times
Reputation: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14thandYou View Post
Well, that's basically what I'm saying. DC won't ever fully gentrify, at least not in our lifetimes. This talk of Anacostia, or Deanwood, or Ivy City or whatever gentrifying within the next couple of decades isn't grounded in reality. Perhaps those areas will marginally improve versus what they are now, but you will not get the next Columbia Heights, or even Petworth, there.
Thanks for your reply. I don't see this happening either.

It that was the case, then let the gentrification continue to no end!

To answer the original question, yes I can see poor hill interns living on my stretch of neighborhood on Pennsylvania Avenue in Prince Georges. Giant's just built a bigger store and the old one is vacant. That could be my Whole Foods. Another vacant store around the corner could be my Trader Joe's. There is already a Starbucks nearby. But if that were to happen then I couldn't afford to live here anymore on my school teacher's salary.
 
Old 11-03-2009, 10:14 PM
 
Location: Germantown, MD
1,359 posts, read 3,046,263 times
Reputation: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by tech2enable View Post

I never said per capita income was the best way, but median can be misleading, if 20 people make 500k and 21 make 100k , the median is 100k.

In the case of D.C. its not that extreme but let's say a person making 150k jointly can afford a 700k home, it may be because a small minority of folks are driving up the cost of living especially in the suburbs.

This is true in mclean, va , its very expensive and although the median is halfway between 100 and 200k there are a significant amount of people who are making 500k+ , while they may not be billionares they are maybe millionares but not super millionares, so although you may not find that they drive up the cost of homes to say 20-30 million dollar condos , they do drive it up, hence the median because misleading when compared to areas with higher net worth individuals.
Why do you post in red?

In reality you'll never find such a large split in incomes near the median (ie. there won't be a 400K gap between the top an bottom 50%, unless the town actually does have 41 people) assuming a normal distribution. There still may be extremities on either end though which skew the per capita data, as I've posted repeatedly before. Since you constantly bash the median income as a measure of wealth, may I ask what you think is an appropriate measure? [this should be good]

Uh, the rest of your post doesn't really make much sense. The only thing I understand is that the median in McLean (one of the top 10 wealthiest "towns" along with Bethesda and Potomac) is between 100K and 200K, yet you claim a "significant" number of people make >500K. Well, this just proves my point. The majority of people living in McLean definitely do not make more than $500K per year, and the $100-200K is way more realistic, and that's why the median income is in that range.

$20-30million condos? lol You're joking right? If such things exist in McLean, how many of them could there possibly be, and how is that relevant to this discussion?
 
Old 11-04-2009, 11:24 AM
 
437 posts, read 990,104 times
Reputation: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpterp View Post
Uh, the rest of your post doesn't really make much sense.
CPTerp, Tech2Enable lives in NYC apparently, I don't know if he's ever even lived here. He probably has no clue. So I wouldn't get too worked up over it.
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.


Closed Thread



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 > District of Columbia > Washington, DC
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top