RE:"You are so off the mark...the housing market in several US regions was overheated long before Clinton's tax change."
Yes and no. Places like, FL, Arizona and NV were very reasonable.
It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that the US population has been shifting from the NE and Midwest to sunnier climates now for the past 50 years, would it now? It wouldn't have to do with the fact that S.CA is experiencing a steady out-migration and guess who are the two biggest recipients of that out migration? It wouldn't have to do with the fact that the West is running out of water and both NV and AZ are dependent on the Colorado which is also a major source of water for S. CA, now would it? Whenever there are limits to growth placed on places where people want to live, housing prices go up very quickly.
Now FLA's housing price growth is primarily centered on Miami and Fort Myers. Aside from the previously mentioned sun and longest coastline, Fort Meyer's and Miami's growth, strangely enough, is also caused by limits to their expansion. Miami is hemmed in by the Atlantic to the east and south and the Everglades and Lake Okeechebee to the north and west. Fort Meyer's is hemmed in by the Gulf to the east, by the Everglades and Lake Okeechebee to the south and east. It can only expand north. Coincidently, the greatest increase in prices has been Miami followed by Fort Meyers. In fact, that's why you're thinking of moving to Tampa where its less crowded and more affordable.
But Jimbo, you best get used to those higher prices because FLA too has a water problem and the close-in, buildable sites are filling up rapidly. You can't experience 30-40% population growth every ten years and expect it will be the same like it was when you were growing up. Unfortunately, other people like FLA for the same reasons you do. |
