Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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 05-27-2022, 01:19 PM
 
Location: Oregon, formerly Texas
10,075 posts, read 7,270,764 times
Reputation: 17151

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
Ahh so when you said 100% the last three years in your state you actually meant 2014-2022 (8 years) for one specific house, or 2017-2022 (5 years) for another specific house.

Thanks for clearing that up, I totally get it.
Yes and in my field, wages have gone up since 2014 by about 22%. That doesn't nearly make up for the difference and our applicant pools are absurdly dry and in quite a few cases garner ZERO applicants or at best people from hundreds of miles away that ask if they can do the job remote.

Businesses around town are literally going to high schools and begging the seniors to apply.

Either a wage-price spiral is going to happen, housing values need to decline, or we will not have a functioning economy. Something else I've seen businesses do is just close their doors when staffing dries up, & put a sign on the door that says something like "not enough staff today."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-27-2022, 01:24 PM
 
Location: Spain
12,722 posts, read 7,606,347 times
Reputation: 22639
Quote:
Originally Posted by redguard57 View Post
Yes and in my field, wages have gone up since 2014 by about 22%. That doesn't nearly make up for the difference and our applicant pools are absurdly dry and in quite a few cases garner ZERO applicants or at best people from hundreds of miles away that ask if they can do the job remote.

Businesses around town are literally going to high schools and begging the seniors to apply.

Either a wage-price spiral is going to happen, housing values need to decline, or we will not have a functioning economy. Something else I've seen businesses do is just close their doors when staffing dries up, & put a sign on the door that says something like "not enough staff today."
Yep I get it man, when I talk about housing prices in a state over the last three years I'm usually actually talking about 5-8 years for two houses.

Dude just stop, you've built this amazing reputation as a serial exaggerator and master of hyperbole on here but despite people pointing out to you that it doesn't bolster your argument you can't resist. Stop lying about everything and people will take you more seriously.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2022, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Oregon, formerly Texas
10,075 posts, read 7,270,764 times
Reputation: 17151
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
Yep I get it man, when I talk about housing prices in a state over the last three years I'm usually actually talking about 5-8 years for two houses.

Dude just stop, you've built this amazing reputation as a serial exaggerator and master of hyperbole on here but despite people pointing out to you that it doesn't bolster your argument you can't resist. Stop lying about everything and people will take you more seriously.
General problem is still real. Okay I stand corrected on the margins which were more acute to my two houses since I live in somewhat hotter market within the state. Doesn't make the problem not real.

Based on the numbers you pulled, statewide it's a 76% increase over 5 years. That is not good.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2022, 05:51 PM
 
Location: moved
13,680 posts, read 9,762,428 times
Reputation: 23548
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeemo View Post
Not "everyone" or even most who bought during the run-up is close to "maxed out" - most that bought recently conformed to the standards for mortgages with 28% or less in payments that is the standard for ensuring that the mortgage is affordable and within budget. The "run up" is just supply/demand economic forces - that is what is justifying these prices.
The "maxing out", or not maxing out, is a secondary debate. The primary debate is whether housing prices have risen too much, too fast... in which case, even prospective buyers who are flush with cash, ought to forebear.

Just as it's inadvisable to dump idle cash into the stock market at a presumptive high, so too with real estate. But with stocks we can buy incrementally, whether by dollar cost averaging, or some alternative. If we make a mistake, it's a small one, because of incremental contributions. With owner-occupied houses, we by definition buy exactly one. Housing therefore is much more of a leap of faith, and in buying a house, we have far less reliance on market-history and depend far more on serendipitous timing.

On in other words, with stocks it's time in the market, not market-timing... whereas with houses it's very much a matter of market timing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2022, 06:11 PM
 
5,527 posts, read 3,271,060 times
Reputation: 7764
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
On in other words, with stocks it's time in the market, not market-timing... whereas with houses it's very much a matter of market timing.
Buying an investment property is about timing the market.

Buying a primary residence is about timing when you are born.

The cadence of life dictates when you buy your home. Some people are lucky, others aren't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2022, 06:11 PM
 
30,906 posts, read 37,042,263 times
Reputation: 34558
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncole1 View Post
Can anyone look at this graph....and then honestly say we are not in a bubble? Keep in mind these numbers ARE ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION!!!


https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CSUSHPINSA
Who knows if this guy is correct? And the title is a bit sensational (he only expects a 30% drop in certain markets), but his is an interesting and well thought out thesis.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSqrUT3IEEA&t=2010s
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2022, 06:16 PM
 
5,527 posts, read 3,271,060 times
Reputation: 7764
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
Who knows if this guy is correct? And the title is a bit sensational (he only expects a 30% drop in certain markets), but his is an interesting and well thought out thesis.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSqrUT3IEEA&t=2010s
I would be suspicious of this guy.

I once briefly watched a thumbnail preview of one of his videos on YouTube. It was pretty sensational at the time, but like all bears the market may be catching up to his prediction.

Why I would be suspicious, is that after I briefly watched part of that video my feed was flooded with videos from him and others who were even bigger doomers like Epic Economist. It seemed like an unhealthy YouTube nexus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2022, 11:42 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
6,913 posts, read 3,401,782 times
Reputation: 8630
Quote:
Originally Posted by redguard57 View Post
Yeah the rural areas with like 4k people and no jobs have only risen by 70%.
According to Redfin, Oregon's median home value is around $518,800, Portland's is about $565,000. The real estate appreciation rate in Oregon and Portland has been about 45% and 33% respectively over the last three years, that is not close to 100%. The rest of OR has risen faster than Portland, closing the gap in prices significantly. Here is Redfins data on Oregon https://www.redfin.com/state/Oregon/housing-market and Portland https://www.redfin.com/city/30772/OR...housing-market .

With 20% down, a monthly payment would be about $2500 so a salary right about $100K would be able to buy the average house in Portland, about $90K required in the rest of the state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2022, 12:03 AM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
6,913 posts, read 3,401,782 times
Reputation: 8630
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
The "maxing out", or not maxing out, is a secondary debate. The primary debate is whether housing prices have risen too much, too fast... in which case, even prospective buyers who are flush with cash, ought to forebear.

Just as it's inadvisable to dump idle cash into the stock market at a presumptive high, so too with real estate. But with stocks we can buy incrementally, whether by dollar cost averaging, or some alternative. If we make a mistake, it's a small one, because of incremental contributions. With owner-occupied houses, we by definition buy exactly one. Housing therefore is much more of a leap of faith, and in buying a house, we have far less reliance on market-history and depend far more on serendipitous timing.

On in other words, with stocks it's time in the market, not market-timing... whereas with houses it's very much a matter of market timing.
That many are "maxed out" was a claim that I was responding to and is part of the primary debate because if most are "maxed out" then prices can not appreciate and would be a sign of a bubble - but I believe few are maxed out. It is very presumptive to say that the topic of maxed is a secondary debate, because it really is not.

Housing is really not a leap of faith because it is replacing the rent that would be required in its place - if the house never appreciated, you would still have the value regardless of any appreciation instead of lost toward rent payments. Also I have more than one owner occupied house currently - some do have more than one at a time.

Long term for both houses and stocks, it is not about timing - both will recoup from a downturn.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2022, 12:29 AM
 
1,655 posts, read 779,530 times
Reputation: 2042
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
Who knows if this guy is correct? And the title is a bit sensational (he only expects a 30% drop in certain markets), but his is an interesting and well thought out thesis.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSqrUT3IEEA&t=2010s
On the bright side for those that have bought within the last ~12 years, it seems like a 30% drop would only roll things back to maybe values of ~2 years ago. Even for those that bought within the last year that could be made up relatively quickly if increases then revert back to historical norms of 4-5% per year. What 5 or 6 years?
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:


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 > General Forums > Economics

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