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.
I used the first poll that came up in search results.
How old are you again? Did it never occur to you that not all 7 million people missing from the NYC CSA in your chart are from wealthy people from CT? Let's see, Bridgeport metro makes up 900,000 (compare that to San Jose's 1.8 million--that 4% of NYC metro vs. 24% of SF metro). Did it never occur to you that SF CSA may very well pass NYC by adding San Jose? Yet, you have not shown any facts to suggest that NYC remains on top....none. You simply assume that it does.
is something wrong with your eyes? the number of millioniares in san jose listed on that chart!
I'm really amazed. You have no idea what you're talking about. This is troll-like. You apparently don't know what CSA or MSA is, or have any idea what I've been talking about for the past ten posts.
You apparently don't know how to add, since there is not 4.8 million people in the Bay Area, there is more like 7.4 million. So your numbers are still wrong.
I lived in thee Outer Richmond area of San Francisco. Most of the people there were elderly Chinese or Russians who bought in the 60s or 70s for around $30K. Those houses are selling well over $1 million each. So these people may be cash poor and shopping at Goodwill but their net worth is well over $1 million.
I lived in thee Outer Richmond area of San Francisco. Most of the people there were elderly Chinese or Russians who bought in the 60s or 70s for around $30K. Those houses are selling well over $1 million each. So these people may be cash poor and shopping at Goodwill but their net worth is well over $1 million.
Interesting Point.
Owner-Occupied Housing Units Valued at $1 Million+, 2008
New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA 334,861...7.5% of all owner-occupied housing units.
San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA 291,155...18.8% of all owner-occupied housing units
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA 288,803...9.3% of all owner-occupied housing units
Owner-Occupied Housing Units Valued at $500,000+, 2008
New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA 1,733,122...39.4% of all owner-occupied housing units.
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA 1,450,972...46.8% of all owner-occupied housing units
San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA 1,070,330...69.2% of all owner-occupied housing units
I'm really amazed. You have no idea what you're talking about. This is troll-like. You apparently don't know what CSA or MSA is, or have any idea what I've been talking about for the past ten posts.
Owner-Occupied Housing Units Valued at $1 Million+, 2008
New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA 334,861...7.5% of all owner-occupied housing units.
San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA 291,155...18.8% of all owner-occupied housing units
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA 288,803...9.3% of all owner-occupied housing units
Owner-Occupied Housing Units Valued at $500,000+, 2008
New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA 1,733,122...39.4% of all owner-occupied housing units.
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA 1,450,972...46.8% of all owner-occupied housing units
San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA 1,070,330...69.2% of all owner-occupied housing units
How old are you again? Did it never occur to you that not all 7 million people missing from the NYC CSA in your chart are from wealthy people from CT? Let's see, Bridgeport metro makes up 900,000 (compare that to San Jose's 1.8 million--that 4% of NYC metro vs. 24% of SF metro). Did it never occur to you that SF CSA may very well pass NYC by adding San Jose? Yet, you have not shown any facts to suggest that NYC remains on top....none. You simply assume that it does.
Since there are lots of inept readers here, I'll step in and help you guys out; the chart reads "ADULT POPULATION" . The population figures are accurate. There aren't 7M adults in the Bay Area and there aren't 19M adults in NYC's metro. Would it make sense for minors to be computed in this particular list? How many millionaire minors live in the United States?
I hate to repeat myself, but I'll do it again for the last time; New York is the wealthiest city when it comes to the rich. New York has by far the largest population of wealthy people- be it billionaires or millionaires. New York's metropolitan area also boasts the most millionaire households by percentage when it comes to major metropolitan areas. What New York isn't, however, is richest when it comes to the masses/middle classes.
And that silly, "percentage of homes valued > $1M " (RE: % of overvalued homes) is the reason why California lead the way when it came to driving his country into recession. The chart should read, "number of idiots who can't afford their homes 2008". I would love to see the revised, post-housing meltdown fugues for a laugh. For the love of God, look at comical ratio of homes valued at $1M in Los Angeles to how low the city ranks when it comes to millionaire households.
And you wonder why these areas are shedding millionaires at a much more accelerated pace than New York. We deserve this economic mess we're in, and I am enjoying every second of it.
Last edited by downtownsnob; 09-30-2009 at 03:18 PM..
You two are dopes, and I was waiting until jaredm6 (or his opponents) would revert to the chart where it clearly reads "adult population". Reading is your friend. Minors are very rarely millionaires, so they are logically excluded from the figures. The chart is accurate.
I hate to repeat myself, but I'll do it again for the last time; New York is the wealthiest city when it comes to the rich. New York has by far the largest population of wealthy people- be it billionaires or millionaires. New York's metropolitan area also boasts the most millionaire households by percentage when it comes to major metropolitan areas. What New York isn't, however, is richest when it comes to the masses/middle classes.
And that silly, "percentage of homes valued > $1M " (RE: % of overvalued homes) is the reason why California lead the way when it came to driving his country into recession. The chart should read, "number of idiots who can't afford their homes 2008". I would love to see the revised, post-housing meltdown fugues for a laugh. Look at comical ratio of homes valued at $1M in Los Angeles and look how low the city ranks when it comes to millionaire households.
This is way out of line. My only contention was that SF's CSA consists of 6 components, not two as stated by your friend.
Monclair's data points speak for themselves without the insults.
Your friend has been pushing this topic for some time now. I can tell by the writing style and pattern. //www.city-data.com/forum/city-...re-losses.html
Major complex going on with that guy. Seek help!!!
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.
So your numbers are still wrong.
