5 ms·
> where housing prices have actually gone down YoY in the last 30 years? That's taking inflation into account? Las Vegas seems to have kept steady, which makes
by jimmywanger 10y ago
> where housing prices have actually gone down YoY in the last 30 years?
That's taking inflation into account? Las Vegas seems to have kept steady, which makes sense. http://www.jparsons.net/housingbubble/las_vegas.html http://www.jparsons.net/housingbubble/las_vegas.html
So has Tampa. http://www.jparsons.net/housingbubble/tampa.html http://www.jparsons.net/housingbubble/tampa.html
- mdorazio 10y agoI don't consider either of those a desirable location, though. That's pretty key to this whole argument - SF and cities like it are places people actually want to move to rather than just buy properties there.
- jimmywanger 10y ago> I don't consider either of those a desirable location, though. Why not? Tampa has nice weather and no state income tax, and Las Vegas is a fun place to live. Without real, objective measures on "desirable location" you're basically stating a tautology. The only places with rising real estate prices are desirable locations, which are evincing desirability by rising real estate prices.
- mdorazio 10y agoI've spent quite a bit of time working in both locations and find them far inferior to many other US cities (SF, LA, NYC, Austin, Seattle, Portland, Chicago, Miami, Dallas, etc.) in terms of general quality of life for people under the age of 40. You're the first person I've met who really seems to think otherwise. It's not really a tautology when we could take a simple poll of our target population and find out which cities they would and would not want to move to. I'd be willing to bet that neither LV nor Tampa would be very far up that list. I wish there was better data on median rent prices over time per city so we could do a comparative analysis with real price info.