When would be next housing Bottom?

Kenkoko said:
fortune11 said:
what has been the population change in the last 6 years ?  Doesn?t that have a bearing also ?

What?s the marginal income change in last 6 years  (top quartile of buyer pool) ? Forget median income, that?s meaningless when it comes to coastal states .

Absolute stats are not as meaningful as ?months of inventory ? which accounts for changes in the velocity of the market . I think USC had some good posts on that metric .
Click to expand...

We should definitely pay attention to potential change in the velocity of the market. Which is why I bring up Chinese FCBs because a mass selling in a short period of time will cause market disruption. This happened to Taipei RE (Taiwan) when Chinese pulled money out at rapid pace. RE value dropped 40% in a 5-6 years period. (during a bull market too)

If we are going to talk about population change, we should also mention the rapid change in Irvine demographics. The huge surge of Asian population is unseen in any other coastal area in LA or Orange county.

Irvine is not a wealth concentrated area like real coastal cities like Newport or even Mission Viejo. Look at the age discrepancy of the median Native-born age(25.9) to the median Foreign-born age (42.7) in Irvine. This kind of large gap is no where to be seen at any other city in LA or OC.

Also never hear anyone mention the poverty rate in Irvine is really high at 12.7%.  Yorba Linda is 3.83%, Mission Viejo is 4.75%, Newport is 6.5%.

Median income is probably meaningless for Newport Beach but I don't entirely agree with the notion that median income is meaningless to Irvine.
Click to expand...

It's happening in vancouver , BC as well.
 
fred.jpg
 
curious george said:
It's happening in vancouver , BC as well.
Click to expand...

Vancouver and Australia are tier 2 destination...they are basically targets now because it is much easier to get visa to Canada and Australia.  Tier 1 FCB came to US...top tier people went NYC, LA/OC, and Bay Area. 
 
Irvinecommuter said:
curious george said:
It's happening in vancouver , BC as well.
Click to expand...

Vancouver and Australia are tier 2 destination...they are basically targets now because it is much easier to get visa to Canada and Australia.  Tier 1 FCB came to US...top tier people went NYC, LA/OC, and Bay Area.
Click to expand...

Interesting .. when you say tier 2 - do you mean in terms of $$  . Or is it by social strata . Or is it by asset diversification?
Because there were certainly a few more expensive homes being sold in Vancouver than Irvine .
 
fortune11 said:
Irvinecommuter said:
curious george said:
It's happening in vancouver , BC as well.
Click to expand...

Vancouver and Australia are tier 2 destination...they are basically targets now because it is much easier to get visa to Canada and Australia.  Tier 1 FCB came to US...top tier people went NYC, LA/OC, and Bay Area.
Click to expand...

Interesting .. when you say tier 2 - do you mean in terms of $$  . Or is it by social strata . Or is it by asset diversification?
Because there were certainly a few more expensive homes being sold in Vancouver than Irvine .
Click to expand...

Price is a factor but it's really the green card...it is much easier to get one in Canada than US.  Richmond/Vancouver and Australia are the go to place for HK residents because of the British Empire thing. 

Now...the prices eventually got crazy in Canada and Australia because there was a limited number of US visa and the rest of the buyers went elsewhere. 

Irvine, NYC, LA etc were the first places to get the FCB money....then people went elsewhere. 
https://betterdwelling.com/city/van...y-of-foreign-buying-of-vancouver-real-estate/

Irvine got boost in 2012-2014...Vancouver start going crazy after 2014
https://infogram.com/real-estate-last-decade-1gxop47xkq1ypwy

US markets could have gotten even crazier had stuff like this didn't happen

During the past two USCIS Stakeholder?s Meetings on EB-5 issues, EB-5 stakeholders, including Greenberg Traurig, have questioned USCIS on its policy of allowing loans to be a source of an investor?s lawful capital.  For many years, USCIS has allowed investors to secure a loan by a relative?s property, so long as that relative gifted the use of the real property as collateral for the loan.

USCIS, however, has recently changed its policy through the course of adjudicating I-526 Petitions and many stakeholders have reported that I-526 Petitions are being denied when the investor does not wholly own the real property used to collateralize a loan.  Following its April 22, 2015, stakeholders call, USCIS issued a written summary of the Immigrant Investor Program Office?s (IPO) Deputy Chief?s remarks on the issue.  USCIS now is stating that proceeds from a loan may qualify as capital of the investor provided that: (1) the investor is personally and primarily liable for the loan and (2) the value of the collateralized asset actually owned by the investor must meet or exceed the value of the loan.  In practice, many stakeholders are reporting Requests for Evidence (RFEs), Notices of Intent to Deny (NOIDs) and denials of petitions stating that where the investor does not personally own the entire property, it cannot be used as the collateral for a loan.  In other words, USCIS seems to be stating that the investor may only use loan proceeds as a source of funds if the loan is collateralized by the investor?s property and the investor solely owns the property, i.e. not jointly with a third party such as a parent, sibling or child.  USCIS seems to be continuing to approve cases where investor owns the property with his or her spouse.
Click to expand...
https://www.eb5insights.com/2015/05...he-use-of-loan-proceeds-as-a-source-of-funds/

The price of a U.S. Green Card held steady for the past 27 years at $500,000 USD, under an investment immigration program known as EB-5. That will almost certainly change this year, when the U.S. Congress votes on raising the investor's Green Card minimum to $1.3 million. So what is a millionaire to do when the U.S. tells them to take their money elsewhere?

Apparently, they look to Canada, where immigrant investor programs are seeing a flood of interest and applications from discouraged would-be U.S. immigrants, seeking to take their money to more welcoming shores.

Qualified applicants flooded one such Canadian program in the province of Manitoba after the U.S. policy shift was announced in October. With investment minimums ranging from $115,000-$300,000 USD, the Canadian options are significantly cheaper than their southern counterparts as well.

Visas-for-dollars migration programs exist the world over, but no country can match the variety and affordability on offer in Canada. While Canada's infamous Federal Entrepreneur Investment Program was scrapped in 2014, to the dismay of 64,000 applicants who were shut out, there remain over a dozen smaller and less costly investor visa programs on offer.
Click to expand...
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/vanessa-routley/canada-investor-immigrants_b_14825250.html
 
And if there is still a debate as to why Chinese/HK people are buying overseas:

More than 40 per cent of the breadwinners for recent millionaire migrant households in Canada appear to have exited the country, although many left families behind there, according to new census data that illustrate the extent of a widespread phenomenon among rich Hong Kong and mainland Chinese immigrants.

Overall, only 52.6 per cent of the 52,507 investor migrant households that moved to Canada between 1986 and the May 2016 census still had their original breadwinner, or ?principal applicant?, living in Canada, according to the South China Morning Post?s analysis of the data.
Click to expand...
https://www.scmp.com/news/world/uni...llionaire-migrants-are-exiting-canada-leaving

Another piece of evidence further supporting the argument of status as a driver of emigration: Many Chinese millionaires do not live abroad, instead opting to ?immigrate and stay home.? They continue to run their businesses in China after gaining a prized green card or other residence permit. Wealthy Chinese tend to be less familiar with foreign markets or job opportunities, and their business expertise cannot be fully utilized abroad. They also face language and cultural barriers. As the Financial Times noted in 2015, respondents listed ?lack of knowledge about foreign regulations and markets? as the second and third most significant problems associated with overseas investment. It is easier for Chinese businesses to turn a profit at home, where markets are less mature than in the industrialized world.

The business of wealthy Chinese, in essence, is largely confined to China, and over the short term they are unlikely to leave permanently. Their main goals in applying for foreign visas are to facilitate the education of their children at respected overseas institutions and make international travel more convenient. As a result, these millionaires often allow their family members to be the principal applicants, in order to avoid the required duration of residence. Others apply for visas from host countries with less demanding requirements, primarily for easier access to other countries, according to a 2014 Migration Policy Institute (MPI) report.
Click to expand...
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/art...tion-allure-investor-visas-among-chinas-elite
 
One more thing to add to the post above...the collateral loan thing was a big deal because it was an easy way to get money out of China.  They would have their relatives  "buy" the properties outright...then use that collateral to get business loans to set up "businesses" to get green cards for themselves and their family. 

Chinese government was not doing much tracing back then and a person buying a house in the US was not a big deal and the rich people don't get directly related to the transaction so it does not look like they are trying to flee the US.  Much easier for the buyer to say "hey, my dad is buying a house in the US because the pollution is so bad in Beijing". 



 
fortune11 said:
That?s a pretty high poverty rate for Irvine ! How does it compare to the national average
Click to expand...

National poverty rate is 12.3. Pretty much the same as Irvine.

But Irvine poverty rate is very high compared to every other city in south OC. I think the next highest is Lake Forest at 7.45%. The rest are around 5%.
 
While we are on the subject of Irvine poverty rate, Katie Porter was just on TV last week going hard at Jamie Dimon  (CEO of Chase) about a Irvine woman working at Chase for $16 per hour.

It's kinda of hilarious and sad to watch. I have nothing against the spirit of fighting for a higher wage.

But someone should tell her that Chase will just automate that job anyway. What good is a promise to boost the wage of a job that's just going to evaporate soon? So many of our elected officials are so damn clueless.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOfx931LNJ0
 
Minimum wage has little bearing on if a job gets automated.

Companies are replacing labor w machines whenever they can and especially when they think customers will like the experience . This is the logic WSJ has drilled into generations of readers with their op-eds. The actual evidence is not there.

As to banks, notice that banks don?t really use designations like ?bank teller?anymore . They have upgraded their skill set to be more wholistic sales and service associates. This would have happened regardless of the minimum wage
 
Kenkoko said:
fortune11 said:
That?s a pretty high poverty rate for Irvine ! How does it compare to the national average
Click to expand...

National poverty rate is 12.3. Pretty much the same as Irvine.

But Irvine poverty rate is very high compared to every other city in south OC. I think the next highest is Lake Forest at 7.45%. The rest are around 5%.
Click to expand...

Drive through lake forest and drive through irvine

How does this make logical sense ? I am genuinely curious . Where exactly is this poverty located .
 
Who?s filling out these surveys, fcb kids? Of course they?re poverty level (on paper)
 
AW said:
Who?s filling out these surveys, fcb kids? Of course they?re poverty level (on paper)
Click to expand...

That's actually not correct. 

The largest group is White. 14,232 White are below poverty level in Irvine. (39%)
 
Ever wonder where all those business owners in Westminster and Garden Grove lives? Irvine and quite a few of them lives in Shady Cayon and Turtle Ridge.

Their business is CASH only. No credit cards. No checks. And guess what no traces. Tax time is great for them as they declared "poor" and barely making it.

This fit into your poverty, poverty level is on paper for them. Reality, they got more money to burn you alive.

Stats and poverty rates does a poor job of linking them to their hidden money.
 
fortune11 said:
Minimum wage has little bearing on if a job gets automated.

Companies are replacing labor w machines whenever they can and especially when they think customers will like the experience . This is the logic WSJ has drilled into generations of readers with their op-eds. The actual evidence is not there.

As to banks, notice that banks don?t really use designations like ?bank teller?anymore . They have upgraded their skill set to be more wholistic sales and service associates. This would have happened regardless of the minimum wage
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with that in general. Business will automate jobs away when they can. But raising the min wage will only speed that up, especially for jobs already at the margins.

Last year my boss decided to keep our billing department (humans) even tho software was already cheaper by about 6-8%. This year the entire department is gutted because people in the billing department complained about being overworked and asked for raises.
 
Compressed-Village said:
Ever wonder where all those business owners in Westminster and Garden Grove lives? Irvine and quite a few of them lives in Shady Cayon and Turtle Ridge.

Their business is CASH only. No credit cards. No checks. And guess what no traces. Tax time is great for them as they declared "poor" and barely making it.

This fit into your poverty, poverty level is on paper for them. Reality, they got more money to burn you alive.

Stats and poverty rates does a poor job of linking them to their hidden money.
Click to expand...

Stats do not back up your narrative tho.

40% of Irvine's poverty is age 18-24
the next 15% is age 25-34

These are not your business owners in Westminster and Garden Grove
 
Kenkoko said:
Compressed-Village said:
Ever wonder where all those business owners in Westminster and Garden Grove lives? Irvine and quite a few of them lives in Shady Cayon and Turtle Ridge.

Their business is CASH only. No credit cards. No checks. And guess what no traces. Tax time is great for them as they declared "poor" and barely making it.

This fit into your poverty, poverty level is on paper for them. Reality, they got more money to burn you alive.

Stats and poverty rates does a poor job of linking them to their hidden money.
Click to expand...

Stats do not back up your narrative tho.

40% of Irvine's poverty is age 18-24
the next 15% is age 25-34

These are not your business owners in Westminster and Garden Grove
Click to expand...
So they?re more like stay at home millennials or like aunt becky?s kid (aka rich parents)

Drive around Irvine and I hardly believe that percentage is truly representative of the ?poverty? populace.  Look at the cars on the road, around the shopping plazas. You want to see a city high in poverty, cars on those roads are a good 10-20 yrs older on average. 
 
The poverty and income stats are distorted due to UCI students. Most cities don?t have 15-20% of their adult population as college students.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top