Comments on: Chart fun: Declining Real Estate Values

By: tinct

tinct — Thu, 29 May 2008 06:35:12 +0000

I absolutely agree with this !

By: 40YrOldRenter

40YrOldRenter — Wed, 28 May 2008 01:07:54 +0000

Missionite – You can tell that Timber is being facetious? I for one can’t imagine renting in my 30rs after 8 years of working. Well, maybe the cut off is 33 if I got a graduate degree.

I have started wondering if i’m a complete failure that i cannot put enough down (20%+) to buy a home for my own, and my family after 8+ years of working.

Unlike my fellow 40 Yr Old Renter at SS, i REFUSE to spend $3,500/month on rent, let alone $3,000+/rent.. so i suffer with my somewhat dilapidated place.

We need affordable housing for ALL in SF, and not just the well educated, risk takers who did well in school and landed good jobs!

40YOR

By: 40YrOldRenter

40YrOldRenter — Wed, 28 May 2008 01:04:20 +0000

Sophie – Just wondering what do you do for a living? I for one wouldn’t be happy to miss out on making hundreds of thousands of dollars over the past 10 years while still renting the same crappy apartment when I was 10 years younger!

Life is too short to keep renting a crappy place!

By: missionite

missionite — Wed, 28 May 2008 01:03:16 +0000

Timber/Prime etc. would you just please picka name and stick with it? [Editor's note: Amen! But as you all know, we're hands off.]

By: timber

timber — Wed, 28 May 2008 00:37:33 +0000

I definitely think staying in the same rent controlled apartment from 23-43 yrs old is the way to go. Save much more money this way! You’re absolutely right Sophie! No beating the quality of rent controlled apartments.

By: Sophie

Sophie — Tue, 27 May 2008 23:02:55 +0000

anon. is this a general question? or a question restricted to san francisco?

if it’s restricted to san francisco, are you taking into account RentControl or not?

if there should be a cookie-cutter answer:

if you are a renter (rent control) in SF – there is not even a shadow of a doubt that rent is the way to go (for 20+ years at the same spot).

If you are not in a controled rental but is absolutly sure to stay put 20+ years in the same spot – no doubt buying is the way to go.

In between – it “depends”

The other cookie cutter answer is that speculation is SPECULATION – some win and some loose

or to quote the love of my life: any investment has some chances to be a good one – but once people invest in that market to speculate it’s only days before the market collapses. So the trick is to sniff/find speculation and stay away from it. The day this or that nanomarket in SF becomes the speculation ground – bail out by selling to a speculator (and hopefully make a small but REAL profit), and pass him the certain future of loss.

(or the opposite: if you have some disposable money [as in you can loose it without deadly bleeding] jump in the speculation ring, and may the best poker player win!)

By: anon

anon — Tue, 27 May 2008 22:29:20 +0000

So rents have risen FASTER or slower than inflation? This is a pertinent question. If rents have risen FASTER than inflation, while home prices have risen FASTER than inflation, then it is better to own a home no?

By: Sophie

Sophie — Tue, 27 May 2008 21:12:25 +0000

anon. rents shouldnt be inflation ajusted.

rents are part of disposable income, and should be mesured as such. something like. % of – or the “1990=100″ and a red line going forward as income and a blue line going forward as rent. (and cost of living in green)

By: anon

anon — Tue, 27 May 2008 19:46:52 +0000

How are rents inflation adjusted?

By: missionite

missionite — Tue, 27 May 2008 04:43:47 +0000

I don’t believe your chart is inflation adjusted.

Here’s a chart that is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:EconomistHomePrices20050615.jpg

1990-2005 in Japan doesn’t look so good: