What you're really saying is buying is always better ... unless it isn't.
Until people provide actual reliable data, these claims are just hyperbole. Moreover, the data must be apples to apples comparisons.
Seems to me many here just want to bag on California, mostly for (perceived) cultural differences--most of which are hyperbole as well. Go to any old 10-year old Saturday little league game in suburban CA, and it'll feel pretty much like one in suburban Iowa.
had I bought a house when I took a new job in 2006, my 20% down would've been wiped out in 2 years. that would've been tough to deal with. 2009 to 2018 is LONG time to recover your equity.
Until people provide actual reliable data, these claims are just hyperbole. Moreover, the data must be apples to apples comparisons.
Seems to me many here just want to bag on California, mostly for (perceived) cultural differences--most of which are hyperbole as well. Go to any old 10-year old Saturday little league game in suburban CA, and it'll feel pretty much like one in suburban Iowa.
Why are you stalking little leagues?
I really wish I would have bought when I moved up here in '98 but that was my third move between states in three years so I didn't know what the future would hold. Instead, I bought when the market was already high in late '04. Those six years were very lucrative years to miss out on, but one thing we can count on is that hind sight is 20/20.i think the rent/buy opinions vary based on if you've lived in different cities/states and different times in the real estate cycle.
i lived in cities the past 20 yrs where a $1 million+ condo rents for $2500/mo and a different city/year where a $400k house rents for $5,000/mo. it all depends on the market, taxes, tax rules, neighborhoods, etc.
and you think about things completely different when you move from CA to TX or Iowa to Denver or Cleveland to NYC. they seem like different planets when it comes to housing costs.
had I bought a house when I took a new job in 2006, my 20% down would've been wiped out in 2 years. that would've been tough to deal with. 2009 to 2018 is LONG time to recover your equity.
... Over a million more people moved out of California from 2006 to 2016 than moved in, according to a new report, due mainly to the high cost of housing that hits lower-income people the hardest.
“A strong economy can also be dysfunctional,” noted the report, a project of Next 10 and Beacon Economics. Housing costs are much higher in California than in other states, yet wages for workers in the lower income brackets aren’t. And the state attracts more highly-educated high-earners who can afford pricey homes.
There are many reasons for the housing crunch, but the lack of new construction may be the most significant. According to the report, from 2008 to 2017, an average of 24.7 new housing permits were filed for every 100 new residents in California. That’s well below the national average of 43.1 permits per 100 people. ...