Shift In the SF
Enjoyed reading your article today. I've been a comemrcial banker in
the
East
Bay Area of California for the past 15 years, and as part of my job I
review
personal financial statements. I've noticed a generally distrurbing
theme,
that
the vast mojorioty of baby boomers (the largest demogrohpic) have
60-90% of
their net worth tied up in real estate, and for most it's their primary
residence, and/or a second home or rental.
The big problem with California real estate comes with the demographic
switch,
when the baby boomer hits retirement in a few years and realizes, "oh
no, I
don't have enough money to retire on". All that equity in my house
generates
zero income to support their retirement. And they have insuffieicent
assets
outside of their home to support them.
They may collectively come to this thought, and we'll see a significant
rise
in
homes for sale in 3-5 years, as the baby boomer tries to cure their
retirement
picture. Now you can't sell your home in say San Jose and move east
within
California and really make that work financially, at least not for
long.
For
the average baby boomer, they will need to sell and move to some
cheaper,
much
cheaper state.
At that point in time, there becomes a real disconnect in market
forces.
The
gerenation behind the bay boomer is much smaller, and frankly can't
afford
these
homes at todays prices. The following generation does not have the
income
nor
large equity down to make it happen, so in essence the viable demand
will
fall
far short of this significant supply. Econ 101 = increase supply and
decrease
demand = much lower prices.
It's very easy to see this problem when you get to look at so many
personal
financial statements, like I do. When the domino falls it won't be fun
to
be a
California Resident unless you rent, have no debt, and have most of
your
money
in cash and gold/sivler.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
