OC is 7th least affordable housing market in US

asianinvasian_IHB

asianinvasian_IHB

New member
1) New York

2) San Francisco

3) San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles

4) Ocean City, NJ

5) Honolulu

6) Los Angeles

7) O.C.

8) Santa Cruz-Watsonville

9) Nassau-Suffolk, NY

10) Flagstaff, AZ





<a href="http://lansner.freedomblogging.com/2009/08/21/oc-housing-affordability/34463/">http://lansner.freedomblogging.com/2009/08/21/oc-housing-affordability/34463/</a>
 
[quote author="asianinvasian" date=1250915241]I guess they forgot to include Santa Ana and Costa Mesa when measuring OC</blockquote>Nope
 
I have the worst luck with real estate. We inherited a nice piece of heaven in the hills overlooking Morro Bay in San Luis Obispo. When my grandparents bought it you could build on the land. Now it's protected. Maybe we can still enjoy our ocean front property via a tent.
 
I am surprised Boston isn't in there. I lived that nightmare last year, and you could not give me one of those pieces of crap that go for 1 million. And rents were much higher too.
 
[quote author="gypsyuma" date=1250924315]I am surprised Boston isn't in there. I lived that nightmare last year, and you could not give me one of those pieces of crap that go for 1 million. And rents were much higher too.</blockquote>
Don't hold back now. But yeah, Boston is too damn cold in the winter and I hate the Red Sox and Celtics.
 
[quote author="asianinvasian" date=1250915241]I guess they forgot to include Santa Ana and Costa Mesa when measuring OC. I wonder where Irvine would rank.</blockquote>


They did that was why OC dropped to 7th from 1st.
 
[quote author="traceimage" date=1250920503]San Luis Obispo is 3rd? That's surprising.</blockquote>


Think so? It's insanely expensive and there's virtually zero employment base there. Lots of college students and norcal/socal expat retireees, and not much else thanks to a SLO county wide zero growth/NIMBY policy.
 
[quote author="usctrojanman29" date=1250930152][quote author="gypsyuma" date=1250924315]I am surprised Boston isn't in there. I lived that nightmare last year, and you could not give me one of those pieces of crap that go for 1 million. And rents were much higher too.</blockquote>
Don't hold back now. But yeah, Boston is too damn cold in the winter and I hate the Red Sox and Celtics.</blockquote>


Take a look at what $1 million buckaroos will get you where I lived in Boston.



http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/163-Waverley-Ave_Newton_MA_02458_1108757672



And my nightmare had to do with way more than the weather. Basically I lived in a cave that I paid $3000/month for, with absolutely no place to go since I am not into walking the Freedom Trail, and when I did venture out I was surrounded by people who had worse personalities than a band of rattle snakes. I could go on, but I am sure you get my point.



And the houses are crumbling money traps - especially since I am not into the Victorian look.



Sorry....... was having a flashback...... feeling better now.
 
See here for the actual release and you'll find a link to the raw data:

<a href="http://www.nahb.org/news_details.aspx?sectionID=135&newsID=9635">http://www.nahb.org/news_details.aspx?sectionID=135&newsID=9635</a>



And see here where CNN takes the same data (which is based on large and small <strong>metro areas</strong> and makes it look like Santa Ana is the 4th most unaffordable <strong>city</strong>:

<a href="http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/news/0908/gallery.Most_and_least_affordable_major_housing_markets/10.html">http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/news/0908/gallery.Most_and_least_affordable_major_housing_markets/10.html</a>



Misinformation (especially from CNN) sucks.
 
Gypsyuma-

That is a nasty house- but it is in Newton. I lived on Newbury and Exeter back in 1996 and commuted to Wellesley Hills for my job. Although Newton isn't my cup of tea either (and neither are those style houses), it's on the Green line and great for commuters to go into Boston. I used to have someone drive me from Wellesley Hills to the Newton train stop everyday and then i took the T.
 
I don't mean nasty in terms of being a dirty, worn-down home, but it is ugly escetically. Growing up in the Chicago burbs, there are many homes like that there as well. It is really ugly to have 1/2 brick 1/2 siding (and then have most likely the siding on the side). Also, it only has a 1-car garage. I feel sorry for the other person who has to park their car outside in Dec-April and have to trek through snow, slush, and cold windy weather to get to the house. And then in the mornings, scraping down your car. It's no fun let me tell you!
 
[quote author="zovall" date=1250970360]



Misinformation (especially from CNN) sucks.</blockquote>


Is it any different when Glenn Beck and Fox does it? CNN is almost unwatchable anymore.
 
[quote author="fadetogrey" date=1250980818]I've never been to Boston. What am I missing about that Newton house? It doesn't seem nasty from the pictures.</blockquote>


You really have to see it all in person to get the full effect. Not only are the houses all old and screaming from en era gone by in decor, nobody seems to know or care about landscaping. And the road leading up to that money trap is a single lane each way and full of pot-holes with no sidewalk, which makes it difficult to walk to that train to Boston.
 
[quote author="Mcdonna1980" date=1250921420]I have the worst luck with real estate. We inherited a nice piece of heaven in the hills overlooking Morro Bay in San Luis Obispo. When my grandparents bought it you could build on the land. Now it's protected. Maybe we can still enjoy our ocean front property via a tent.</blockquote>


If the government wants to completely or near-completely deprive you use of your land, I think they should be forced to purchase it from you, at market rates assuming no such restrictions, instead of just saying "you can't build there".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top