News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on California population declines for first time in more than a century. Parent comment

Re:California population declines for first time in more tha... by dragonwriter on Saturday May 08, 2021 @10:58AM (#27087707)
If you look at SF market history, you see mostly rapid growth with short term declines from peaks which are quickly erased.

Is there risk? Sure, but its hard to find a 5-10 year period where you lose even if you hit the bottom of one of the drops, which are usually only a year or two from the peak.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:California population declines for first time in more tha... by refurb on Saturday May 08, 2021 @08:06PM (#27091961)
10 years to recover from 2006 peak, not adjusting for inflation.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/SFXRSA

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:California population declines for first time in more tha... by jshen on Saturday May 08, 2021 @10:14PM (#27092582)
Right, so if you pick the absolute worst moment to buy, you still make a profit in 10 years. Sounds like a good bet to me, especially considering you have to live somewhere and pay rent or a mortgage.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:California population declines for first time in more tha... by refurb on Sunday May 09, 2021 @08:42PM (#27101386)
No, you’d break even after 10 years, actually less than even due to inflation. Then add on top maintenance, property taxes, opportunity cost of your down payment (market was up 107% over that period).

Again, not saying you can make good money but there is no reason why the opposite can’t happen.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:California population declines for first time in more tha... by jshen on Sunday May 09, 2021 @09:16PM (#27101631)
No one is saying it’s a sure thing, but the fact that you have to pick the absolute worst time, and it still is a positive return over ten years, really proves it’s a good bet.
[ Parent | on HN ]