7 comments:

• Bill Herrin posted at 3:41 am on Thu, Nov 29, 2012.

  Posts: 3

  I was simply relating information I heard informally from some realtors who have clients who would like to buy in Lodi. I've also read similar things in The Record over the past year or so. I too found it surprising that this would be the case, which is why I posed it as a bit of a mystery during the talk. Given that solid data on the issue is virtually impossible to come by, who knows what the reality is. Your experience is what one would expect.

  • Link

   

• Darrell Baumbach posted at 9:04 pm on Wed, Nov 28, 2012.

  Posts: 9403

  Elise Middlecamp posted…So if you're just interested in money, I can see where it would all come down to which party is legislating. However, as an actual family in a home, I appreciate much of what California has to offer. However, as an actual family in a home, I appreciate much of what California has to offer.

  Great post and I can appreciate that you like what California has to offer. I love California and especially Lodi as it is a comfortable place to raise a family as I have done. However, the reality is that politicians makes rules, regulations and mandates that affect the quality of life. Since it is an anti-business state, it is getting harder to get a good job that makes the house payment. Without jobs, how can one enjoy the nature greatness that attracts people to come.
  

  • Link

   

• Elise Middlecamp posted at 7:26 pm on Wed, Nov 28, 2012.

  Posts: 15

  I disagree with Darrell. We are not so fortunate to be able to pay for a home with cash, and in fact we're considered first time home buyers. If any metric of the nation would be useful in this discussion, I feel Lodi ought to focus some attention on first time home buyers; by and large people who are not at the end of their careers and will be part of the forthcoming economy.

  That said, it seems more like there is a conspiracy among banks to keep homes off the market to maintain artificially high home values. We can all agree that monetary economics in the USA are entirely out of balance with respect to the whole earning spectrum. Are the banks in Lodi just not interested in preventing further social immobilization? Are they maintaining these homes, upgrades included, so as to not stiff families with rundown properties?

  I have a different perspective. I'm looking for a place to raise a family, not make a profit or shuffle investments (as much as I'd love to be in such a position). So if you're just interested in money, I can see where it would all come down to which party is legislating. However, as an actual family in a home, I appreciate much of what California has to offer. That others deride this state as some mockery of capitalism and social responsibility is obtuse and insulting to those less fortunate, and frankly speaks to the hyper-partisanship that has brought this country to this sad state of gridlock over the past 25 years. Not a feat to be proud of as a nation, and while it was chronologically impossible for us to have a hand in making the mess we're certainly dealing with the various consequences.

  • Link

   

• Darrell Baumbach posted at 11:18 am on Wed, Nov 28, 2012.

  Posts: 9403

  Can you please expand on this last post... I recently was searching for homes in Lodi for my sister who just sold her home in Hawaii. We had so many homes to choose from. After careful review, she decided to buy in Missouri instead. Wise decision.

  I also last summer went to open houses to consider buying a second home for my wife and I. There was an endless supply of homes for sale. After finding many deals we could take, I decided against it in fear of owning any more real estate in California. Now that Democrats have a super majority in California, the risk is even higher as more taxes and regulations are inevitable. I too am thankful I did not buy.

  I find your conclusion odd based on my personal experience. I would appreciate why you conclude there are no homes for sale?

  • Link

   

• Bill Herrin posted at 10:00 am on Wed, Nov 28, 2012.

  Posts: 3

  Regarding forecasting, I should be more clear. Forecasts are useful as a guide to the future. That's why they're so valuable to so many. But even the best forecasts, like those done at Pacific's Forecasting Center, involve at least some uncertainty. So people would be wise to continually monitor how forecasts change as time passes and to be nimble planners. I think that's the best way to use the information forecasts provide.

  • Link

   

• Bill Herrin posted at 9:54 am on Wed, Nov 28, 2012.

  Posts: 3

  But the lack of homes for sale isn't the same thing as there not being any home buyers. There apparently are quite a few buyers, many of whom can buy with cash. there simply aren't homes to offer. In economic terms, the problem is not on the demand side. It's a supply issue.

  • Link

   

• Darrell Baumbach posted at 7:59 am on Wed, Nov 28, 2012.

  Posts: 9403

  Herrin was puzzled by the lack of homes for sale in Lodi, since foreclosure rates in this area are among the highest in the country

  That is easy.. If Lodi was transported magically to Texas, real estate sales would increase. Since Lodi is located in a state liberalism dominates, ( highest taxes and anti business environment) obviously, who wants to buy now?

  • Link