Posted on 10/03/2006 10:47:25 AM PDT by kiriath_jearim
Homeowners in every state but Alaska spent more of their incomes on housing costs last year than they did in 1999. Housing costs are defined as mortgage payments, taxes, insurance and utilities. Here are the median percentages of income spent on housing for each state:
State 2005 1999 Change
Ala. 17.5 16.7 0.8
Alaska 19.7 19.7 0.0
Ariz. 20.5 19.2 1.3
Ark. 17.1 16.2 0.9
Calif. 25.4 22.5 2.9
Colo. 22.8 20.1 2.7
Conn. 22.9 20.1 2.8
Del. 18.9 18.1 0.8
D.C. 21.3 18.8 2.5
Fla. 22.1 19.6 2.5
Ga. 20.2 18.6 1.6
Hawaii 21.2 20.9 0.3
Idaho 19.7 18.5 1.2
Ill. 22.0 18.8 3.2
Ind. 19.1 16.8 2.3
Iowa 18.3 16.2 2.1
Kan. 18.7 16.6 2.1
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
"Tooth Fairy Numbers"???
Calif. 25.4 22.5 2.9
to this:
Texas 19.9 17.4 2.5
I knew there was a reason I moved. 6% pay raise for changing zip codes. :o)
Released to counter the record-breaking stock market and continuing low unemployment figures.
If we had a truly objective media, Democrats couldn't win an election.
BTTT part 2.
Take a look at this:
Fla. 22.1 19.6 2.5
The percentage of income needed to pay for housing in 2005 was 22.1 percent.
In 1999 it was 19.6 percent.
According to the AP, this is a 2.5 percent increase which, according to them, means it takes 2.5 percent more of your income in 2005 than in 1999.
That is the absolute wrong way to look at the numbers.
Actually, this is a 12.8 percent increase from 1999 - 2005. For the mathematically challenged, this means it takes 12.8 percent more of your 2005 income to pay for housing then it did in 1999, not 2.5.
I get the impression that the same people who are complaining that the bubble in real estate prices may be coming to an end are now complaining that housing prices have disproportionately increased over the past few years.
They should pick one and stick with it.
Alaska seems to be up significantly for '06. We always get trends a little late.
I still pay the 6% premium to have the ocean nearby, redwood trees a couple minutes up the road, and skiing in the Sierras in the winter. High School sports are terrible here, though.
BS. Just another attempt to manipulate data to trash talk the economy. You cannot have both going up. The result of the housing boom has meant movement from renting to home ownership. Thus you have more landlords chasing fewer renters thus average rent is dropping. Obviously most renters pay more to own rather then rent. However owning is an investment, a form of saving rather then a cost like renting is. Therefore to categorize rent and home ownership in the same bucket as the NY Slimes did is intellectually dishonest. Switching from rent to own is to switch a greater portion of their income from consumption to saving.
Yeah, but -- whenever something goes down as a percentage of a 100% whole, something else has to go up. Food and clothing, as well as consumer durables (fridges, etc) continue to fall as a percentage of income, so something else has to go up. But you don't see those other articles.
A generation ago, food would be 20-25% of income. Now it is far less.
Thanks to teachers' unions, school taxes will compound over the life of a 30 year fixed mortgage and become higher than the monthly mortgage payments.
In many states the high cost of housing can be related to government rules and regulations. Certainly, the Democrat controlled, tax and spend states, top the list.
"Cost of Larger Houses Eating More of Income"
Or, as it is here in Houston:
Cost of Higher Property Taxes Eating More of Income
It makes sense that since more people own homes than before, they're spending more on it. Wouldn't you pay more to own than rent?
I just moved from:
Calif. 25.4 22.5 2.9
To:
Hawaii 21.2 20.9 0.3
Looks like a good move, better people, better food, better weather, and lower housing cost.
Good point, when (if) the "bubble" bursts, it will reverse this other effect.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.