bostonbubble.com Forum Index bostonbubble.com
Boston Bubble - Boston Real Estate Analysis
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

SPONSORED LINKS

Advertise on Boston Bubble
Buyer brokers and motivated
sellers, reach potential buyers.
www.bostonbubble.com

YOUR AD HERE

 
Go to: Boston real estate bubble fact list with references
More Boston Bubble News...
DISCLAIMER: The information provided on this website and in the associated forums comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY, expressed or implied. You assume all risk for your own use of the information provided as the accuracy of the information is in no way guaranteed. As always, cross check information that you would deem useful against multiple, reliable, independent resources. The opinions expressed belong to the individual authors and not necessarily to other parties.

Why aren't people mad at the situation?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    bostonbubble.com Forum Index -> Greater Boston Real Estate & Beyond
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
john p



Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 1820

PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:48 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the part you're right about is the war profiteers now entering the picture i.e. Haliburtons, but

I'd rather see people like Paulson, guys that came out of Goldman Sachs in charge than some executive from ACORN.

Deval Patrick had this guy from the Springfield "Urban League" on the Board of UMASS

http://www.amherstbulletin.com/story/id/63076/

http://www.springfieldul.org/About-Us.htm

This is the Springfield's Urban League's "Mission Statement"

Quote:
The mission of the Springfield Urban League, Inc. is to enable African-Americans, other minority groups, and the underprivileged to cultivate their potential and exercise their full human rights as American citizens.


Imagine if there was a group for the Irish, or Italians, or Polish and someone wanted to advocate for them. Would leading the Irish American's Advocacy Group be a basis for putting someone on an education board? Do you know of any Irish American Groups that write letters on behalf of Irish prisoners guilty of raping grandmothers?

Deval Patrick did when he worked for the NAACP.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/politics/candidates/articles/2006/10/04/april_patrick_letter/

Notice how Patrick plays the race card and calls the jurors bigots. Who was the real bigot?

http://www.boston.com/news/local/politics/candidates/articles/2006/10/04/patrick_tried_twice_to_aid_parole_bid/


If the times were the 60's I'd certainly cut them some slack because we had some severe racism, but we elected Deval Patrick, so we have to wonder how necessary having someone to advocate for a race perspective. I thought MLK told us to be colorblind, judge on the content of the character not the color of the skin. Doesn't that message need to reach all of us? Is it possible that minorities can be racist too? Regardless, any group that advocates based on race and doesn't offer their top billing to all people and don't have a colorblind perspective is walking a fine line.

Funny how socialism works and has already started, the original bailout plan included money for ACORN and the National Urban League.

http://sharprightturn.wordpress.com/2008/09/26/dems-add-pork-to-bail-out-plan-to-acorn-national-urban-league-and-laraza/

You know my heart goes out to minorities and poor people, but they too have to choose the right leaders, because if you get someone without integrity and you choose a leader based on the color of their skin you might end up with someone that doesn't really represent your interests.

Case in point: Deval Patrick being on the Board of Ameriquest, a predatory lender that targetted the poor and minorities.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/04/20/patrick_tied_to_company_under/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Boston ITer
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 10:26 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think that the difference between the Mass State governor and the President is that the state of Mass has traditionally allowed for wasteful govt to run abashed. At the same time, Patrick is trying to be a head administrator, and a two faced one at that.

Where BO differs is that he's a fraud from the get-go. He's basically trying everything in his power to be a hapless observer than a person who takes charge of anything. Unfortunately, that's not Presidential material but a committee steer man, if even that. So in essence, he's depended on the pre-existing DC Democratic machine to give him an agenda or a script to play out. All and all, he'll be blamed when things don't turn around, making him a one termer much like Carter back in '80, with the idea here being that his star chamber of Biden, Y, & Z don't get along and have a concerted plan of action.

I guess where I'm going with this is that this isn't a big deal. The offshoring will continue, R&D will be done in more emerging nations, and there'll be little circulation of wealth coming back to the US, as most of it will end up in east Asia. And as for the welfare state, it's kinda on its way when the average American worker knows that he can't compete against Asian countries for similar type of work.
Back to top
john p



Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 1820

PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 10:32 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's weird how you come up with a logical formula, kind of like forming your impressions of things and then when the reality shows up and follows the course of what you saw coming, it is kind of surreal. I said a socialist was coming in prior blogs before Obama was even considered a real candidate or announced for that matter. It is tough to see a turd like Obama float up the way he has. He's like the sleazebag guy that's getting the heartbroken girl on the rebound.

I am not a bigot, it Colin Powell ran, I'd have his sign on my front lawn.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Boston ITer
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 10:43 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
He's like the sleazebag guy that's getting the heartbroken girl on the rebound.

I am not a bigot, it Colin Powell ran, I'd have his sign on my front lawn


Same here but instead, his party hung him out to dry. And that's the problem, we're in a situation now where instead of Presidential executive material, we have hack committee steer persons opting for the top job.

As of some ten years ago, it appeared that McCain could have been a sensible candidate but instead, he's a lost soul and a liability to his party. Really, we need more than someone trying to heal his Vietnam experience, during his time in office. McNamara and Johnson are both gone and the two societies are at peace.

So my answer here is that neither a Palin administration nor a BO facing (but Biden Troika) regime will make a change for the better. In the end, we still lose.
Back to top
john p



Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 1820

PostPosted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 10:51 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm more afraid of socialism. It's more than which hacks are behind the scene, it is the ideology that they subscribe to and impress upon us.

I'm more afraid of people subscribing to the delusion that government will work like this "

"Who thinks that Bill over here ought to pay for our bar tab? All in Favor.... the ayes have it!"

Aristotle warned about this sort of thing:

http://learnpolitics.blogspot.com/2007/06/aristotles-democracy-and-welfare-state.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
samz



Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Posts: 102
Location: Medford, MA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:32 am GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Boston ITer wrote:
I think that the difference between the Mass State governor and the President is that the state of Mass has traditionally allowed for wasteful govt to run abashed. At the same time, Patrick is trying to be a head administrator, and a two faced one at that.


I was discussing Massachusetts with a coworker who is very anti-socialism (and anti-social, for that matter). He's the kind of guy who doesn't want his taxes being used to help old people pay for heat. Maybe MA has a wasteful government, maybe it doesn't. But we're doing something right here...

I collected rankings by state and compared a couple of "liberal, big government" states to a couple of "conservative, small government states". Lower numbers are always better...

Code:

                                                        State Ranking
                                                      MA    VT    NV    AZ
National Science and Technology index                 #1   #22   #43   #17
"Smart" education ranking (21 factors)                #1    #2   #49   #50
Per-student education spending                        #5    #6   #46   #50
People with a bachelors degree                        #2    #6   #40   #20
Household  income                                     #5   #22   #17   #25
GDP                                                  #13   #50   #31   #20

Violent crime                                        #31    #1   #42   #34
Property crime                                        #6    #4   #42   #49
Rate of traffic fatalities                            #2    #1   #38   #47 (Montana: worst)

Doctors (per 100K pop)                                #1    #5   #47   #34

Deaths of infants per 1,000 live births               #4    #1   #23   #25
Deaths per 100,000 Children Aged 1-14                 #2    #2   #20   #20
Deaths per 100,000 Teens Aged 15-19                   #4    #8   #35   #38
Births to Teen Mothers (15-19) per 1,000 Teen Girls   #3    #2   #39   #46
Births to Women Receiving Late or No Prenatal Care    #6    #1   #39   #40
Children Living in Poverty                            #5   #11   #13   #36
Uninsured Children                                   #11   #18   #47   #45
Juvenile Incarceration Rate (per 100,000)            #12    #1   #42   #26
Child Abuse Fatalities per 100,000 Children           #6    #1   #40   #17
Per Capita Child Welfare Expenditures                 #7    #3   #44   #32
Child Vulnerability Index                             #2    #1   #43   #41
[/code]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
balor123



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 1204

PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 3:07 am GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

If this state is so great, then why are so many people leaving?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
samz



Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Posts: 102
Location: Medford, MA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:13 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

balor123 wrote:
If this state is so great, then why are so many people leaving?


I'm not sure -- I think I read on some website that housing is kind of expensive here. Wink

Where are they going?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
john p



Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 1820

PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 3:26 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

My view is we're a fiscally conservative and socially liberal State, which explains our typically Republican Executive with Democratic Lawmakers.

I actually like the balance because I'm like Scrooge with money but I think we should expand the blossom of freedom to all.

In my MBA they had one of these charts that talked about culture. on the "Y" axis you had the desire to get to know your coworkers and genuine concern for their welfare. On the "X" axis you had the desire to be the best of the best. They said the optimal culture of both drives was that of a tribe, you worked hard to survive and thrive but you cared and fought for your fellow man. I think Massachusetts has the values of this tribal mentality but falls short in execution because you have so many layers and generations of hacks. Further, for every bigot that mouthes off, they empower and give legitimacy to socialistic groups like Urban Leagues. Then, for every contractor that gouges the taxpayers you need more strict bidding laws which drive up the cost of projects. Then, for every greedy or lazy businessman that takes advantage of someone, you get more need for social programs and advocates/ community organizers. Then, for every person who votes Democrat to just go along with the herd, you get phonies that put on the Democrat uniform and fool everyone and give us policy that doesnt' even align with our values. We're loyal to a fault. We don't trust but verify.

I think we have our values in order but don't have the diagnostics, filters and metrics to protect ourselves.

As far as finances and price to earnings of real estate. If you buy a house you lock in your mortgage for 30 years. If you make a lot of money and it grows at a steady rate, you really have to be worried about the first five or so years of that 30 when times might be tight, but ten years in you're most likely better off than if you rented, because house prices usually go up in the course of ten years and you'd have to start a 30 year payment meter versus only having 20 years less. So if you make more money ("Superstar Cities" mentality) and you can lock in a mortgage you don't have to worry as much for the long term; it is just that first 5 years or so.

The problem is people don't have that comfort to weather that 5 year winter, rents have stayed pretty low relatively, and buying starter homes in the Boston area usually means buying a post WWII home because we don't build new starter homes like they do in the Carolinas and Floridas and Texas's etc. When you buy an older home you absorb risk for repairs, so people have been trending condos or moving further from the City to pick up a newer home. I would say that this is a meso/micro view and is critical now because the weather of this winter is harsh and holding on for some time might be critical.

I think my mind drifted this way for a reason. When you guys here all talk about our problems here in Massachusetts we shake our heads and can't believe a chart like what Sam showed us. This is because other States are worse. People are scratching their heads wondering why people were buying risky mortgages and it was because they thought that other investments were worse and higher risks. We think gas is expensive here, but in the Eurozone they're getting really killed.

Guys, step back and ask yourselves, what is dropping further, home prices or the DOW?

That doesn't mean buy a home now. I'd say buy if you can steal one, but it means think about where you park your future down payment. As you think about it, you'll be reliving the mentality of those that thought real estate was a better investment than the stock markets after the stock market bubble crashed.

Lastly, as we all know, home prices had a bubble, stocks had a bubble, but we should also know that we had government revenues of a bubble during the Clinton years. Democrats brag about surpluses but don't want to acknowledge that those were fantasy revenues that weren't based on fundamentals and because they weren't based on fundamentals they were going to come down regardless of who was President, then you add in a War on Terror and an aging Baby Boom that is tapping more and more into Medicare and Social Security and you can see the shape that any Administration would be in. Moving forward, we've got to get away from the mentality where people expect handouts. People who are not paying taxes and earn less than $30k can't expect to have $20k worth of health care. People who contributed to Social Security and Medicare were doing so when we didn't have modern health care as it is today and people were dying of common colds that turned into pnemonia. If they wanted world class health care and preventative medicine and treatments they should have been paying more and more all along up and to this point. Their contributions were relative to the care that was available when they made those contributions. Of course I think we should do everything to get the best care possible, but we have to be reasonable or otherwise, we try out a few years or so unrealistically and we fucking bankrupt the system and everyone else behind gets screwed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
samz



Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Posts: 102
Location: Medford, MA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 6:39 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

john p wrote:
My view is we're a fiscally conservative and socially liberal State, which explains our typically Republican Executive with Democratic Lawmakers.


I totally agree. Actually, I think our label "Taxachusetts" is not really earned. The total tax burden is MA (from local to state to federal) is somewhere in the middle of the pack.

Quote:
I think my mind drifted this way for a reason. When you guys here all talk about our problems here in Massachusetts we shake our heads and can't believe a chart like what Sam showed us. This is because other States are worse.


To be honest, I was pretty surprised. But I think it all boils down to education -- we've got pretty good systems, so people are well-educated, which attracts businesses that need skilled workers, etc.

Quote:
Lastly, as we all know, home prices had a bubble, stocks had a bubble, but we should also know that we had government revenues of a bubble during the Clinton years. Democrats brag about surpluses but don't want to acknowledge that those were fantasy revenues that weren't based on fundamentals and because they weren't based on fundamentals...


I'm not so sure -- is that true? Revenues at the federal level probably don't benefit much from a housing or stock bubble, especially when there's low capital gains taxes and no capital gains tax on a house sale.

Quote:
... they were going to come down regardless of who was President, then you add in a War on Terror and an aging Baby Boom that is tapping more and more into Medicare and Social Security and you can see the shape that any Administration would be in. Moving forward, we've got to get away from the mentality where people expect handouts. People who are not paying taxes and earn less than $30k can't expect to have $20k worth of health care. People who contributed to Social Security and Medicare were doing so when we didn't have modern health care as it is today and people were dying of common colds that turned into pnemonia. If they wanted world class health care and preventative medicine and treatments they should have been paying more and more all along up and to this point. Their contributions were relative to the care that was available when they made those contributions. Of course I think we should do everything to get the best care possible, but we have to be reasonable or otherwise, we try out a few years or so unrealistically and we fucking bankrupt the system and everyone else behind gets screwed.


There's a guy in my office who says, basically, if you're poor and sick, you die. Too bad. So, maybe we need something in between.

I did see something interesting about the administrative overhead of health insurance. Individual policies incur about 25% admin overhead (all the people you need to hire to screen customers and then deny coverage), group policies incur about half that -- 12%. Medicare has about a 3% admin overhead. Whether or not you think we should be handing out "free" healthcare, that's a pretty good level of efficiency.

But there definitely needs to be *some* downward pressure on the cost of healthcare, regardless of who pays. Healthcare is a weird case, from a market perspective. On the one hand, the demand is totally inelastic -- if you need a treatment you don't have a choice. In addition, most people don't have a deep understand of their condition and the treatment options, so being a "fully informed" player in the market is hard. On the other hand, if someone else picks up the tab, then the market becomes highly distorted.

I don't know what the answer is here. I think we want to help people out with things like food, housing, education, and health care. In fact, I think we all benefit if the population in general is healthy and well-educated. But we don't want free handouts to take over the whole system, and we don't want to distort the market so much that it breaks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
john p



Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 1820

PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:36 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

It sounds like that guy in your office may have some issues. Look at me calling the kettle black... Many Republicans do have hearts, they just exercise rationality and have as thick skin as possible so that they don't ask society for help when they can suck it up or struggle through on their own. The wimpy Democrats seem like those soccer players that roll around crying on the ground to encourage the referee to throw a flag. Republicans like the image of John Wayne and the Cowboy because they were stoic and exemplified the values of self reliance and being able to weather quite a bit. Of course, you see some corporations rolling around like babies wanting a handout.

I think that attitudes change over time. Years ago, beating your wife was a "family matter", and now, thankfully it is a crime. Priests used to see raping a child as a "moral" issue that you pray to get forgiveness and thankfully it is a crime and you go to jail.

Other attitudes are of a different nature. I'm on a town finance committee and we have Seniors pushing for a nice new Senior Center. Pretty much they want something that prior generations never had and they want future generations to pay for.

The same sort of thing goes for Heath Care. If you have an emergency, the hospitals treat you. I never go to the doctors and go to the dentist about once every few years. What scares me is some person who pays no taxes and sits at home and watches t.v. and eats doritos and gets so fat that their joints deteriorate, and they get on "disability", one of those riding machines, and then they want to get rehab/ massages and if anyone stops them, you get some Community Organizer harrasing them and then we have to pay for the nonsense in our courts, and think about all the wasted time when these deadbeats tie up the phone lines and what if some bleeding heart takes up their cause and wastes their State salary and spends hours on the phone with them. Just add up the wasted money. The truth is people did used to die. People did live with back problems, hobble around with canes, live with bad teeth etc.

The flip side is, my wife asked that I do one thing for our wedding; she asked that I go to the doctor for my chronic cough (which is caused by alergies). I have been living with it for over 20 years. I went to a doctor for an intial visit and the guy bills me, no lie, $1,200. I refused to pay and negotiated it down to like $250. I mean, think about someone who pays no taxes going in for 10 visits for their alergies, who pays for that? What about the deadbeat that wants to go to one of those sleep clinics to fix his snoring? We have people on disability painting houses, posing in body building competitions, skiing, etc.

My issue is that we need to stabilize a value structure before we do anything. Values are so, so important. If people value government's time, they won't waste it when they call someone or they'll go online to get information. If people are honest, they won't take advantage of social programs. If there is no justice you create moral hazards and everything corrodes. Obama scares me because he doesn't as Napoleon says "Hardens the Troops". He makes people like the soccer players that flail around on the ground crying like a baby in order to get a hand out. That sort of stuff should not be rewarded, there are consequences for not working hard and building a career. Honestly, some people just don't try in life and they deserve to live in squalor. Hell, I lived in a rat hole apartment until I was like 34 and upgraded to a crappy apartment until I was 36, so I don't have any compassion for someone who doesn't put forth 20 percent of the effort I do at work and they want to live much better than I did. I never asked for anything extra and it took a real long time to break through, but it was industrious values that did it not some hand out.

I kind of agree with you, we need to bring down that $1,200 office visit cost and my addition is that we need to toughen up some people and get their expectations aligned with what we can reasonably resource.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
balor123



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 1204

PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:19 am GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Houses are only good investments if someone is willing to pay more for it than you did. That happens because income rises, rates fall, or density increases. None of these are happening in Boston. Your claim that it becomes easier after 5 years is only true if your income rises faster than the price of housing. That has been the case for the past few decades but unless incomes continue to rise it won't continue to be the case. Even if you enter the housing pipeline, you will almost certainly have had a nicer house in other states than here because you land, labor, and materials are more expensive here. I don't think that you can favorably compare MA to at least TX on that list because TX is doing quite well right now. Austin has the fastest growing economy in the country right now and since city planning is much more business friendly there it, in my opinion, has a much brighter future. For businesses to grow they need people and that's one area that Boston hasn't been strong - accommodating new people. Lexington and Waltham just celebrating buying over 50 acres of land that used to belong to a state hospital because they were able to save it from development. I'll agree with you that homes are better investments than the DOW at the moment and also your comments about health care. As long as we're willing to pump infinite amounts of money into health care, there will be high health care inflation. Additionally, this country has too many protections who work in those fields that keep costs high. If we want to reduce health care costs, then we need more doctors and more competitive insurance. I'm not an expert in this field but having considered entering the field I know how much harder it is here than it is in other countries, noting that harder doesn't necessarily mean more selective based on qualifications.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
john p



Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 1820

PostPosted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 1:38 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think your analysis is sound.

I'll tell you a story of about 9 years ago. I had a choice to either buy a condo or get an MBA. House prices had stayed flat for almost a decade and the difference between a 30 year note and a 25 year note for the same house wasn't that much of a difference.

So, what I decided to do was get an MBA, because new MBA grad's were getting about 1.5 to 2 times my salary at the time. My calculus was that I'd spend a couple three years getting the degree, get a huge increase in pay and get a 25 year note to cover the time lost.

What happened was that the decade of flat house prices had increased with upward pressure, then they lowered rates to deflate the stock market which ended up crashing the month I graduated which pretty much wiped out the job prospects I was hoping for. House prices shot up. Young families who put of having kids during the recession started having them; there was a mini babyboom in the mid to late 90's and there was a bigger demand for housing. The assumption that rents would stay cheap changed once Governor Bill Weld eliminated Rent Control in Massachusetts, so saving while renting was harder. Then, jobs in my industry started to slow down and because of the risks of solvency, I feared buying because that first Pilgrim's economic winter (first years of ownership) was going to be harsh.

What I'm saying is that often times things come around into balance. Wages do come back, house prices do come back down to normal, interest rates hedge and ballast among other things but don't think that something will stay out of balance for beyond a decade. I'm saying benchmark against your assumptions and have financial models that reflect different scenarios. More likely than not, you're in the same boat as many others so things behave in trends.

When I said 5 years, I wasn't meaning that you should over reach and hold your breath for 5 years, I meant get into something that is still in the comfort zone but on the part that you'd sacrifice a bit of luxury for a few years. This is assuming that you're going to get a cost of living adjustment for your salary and maybe a little more due to the fact that you're younger and might get an extra percentage more one year or the next.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Boston ITer
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 6:08 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://tinyurl.com/5rr7wj

This article, on the mobile rich living better in Paris, than let's say NY or London, has got me thinking.

What are the chances of let's say Northern Vermont, the region from the Waterbury/Stowe exit to Burlington, being the New England well off district, when the actual producing economies from metro Boston to RI/CT stop generating jobs? I don't imagine the well off to feel safe in Sudbury, Sherborn, and other wide open zones where punks and motorcycle gangs could ravage their homesteads w/o avail. Likewise, even more urban locales, like Brookline, won't be too safe to stroll around in.

In other words, all those who can suffice off their trading accounts a/o assets, living in an area with a lot of private security and even semi-privatized police depts. This can maintain the Stowe 'Bavarian/Swiss Village' ambiance or Burlington 'walks by the Lake & College town' type of bourgeois fantasies while the Boston area starts to resemble Bridgeport or New Haven.
Back to top
john p



Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 1820

PostPosted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 6:40 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Man you love that Burlington Vermont area. I do as well. Check out North and South Hero Island.

I don't see Sudbury and Sherborn turning into New Haven, but I think there will be more frequent robberies/muggings in the Back Bay and South End if more people get desperate due to the economy.

I think Vermont will prosper as you describe, but it's cold up there too and the older people don't like that cold air in/on their joints and many can't partake in lots of the outdoor winter activities. It is really beautiful, fun and totally cool up there. The cost of living is not as cheap as you would think though and you'll pay a ton to heat your home.

We do have this urban chic, but we don't like other countries like France have a lot of country chic. England has their country estate regions, Franceand Italy have their wine countries. I do think you'll see sophisticated outdoor living/ country types emerge and those folks will go to NYC for weekend trips to see exhibits in the MET.

When the wife and I were recently in Napa Valley, we were told that they saw more visitors in a year than Disney.

Further, my wife and I chose a quiet town near horse farms and cranberry bogs where people go sailing and boating in lakes and hiking in trails. We can take a train into the city and go to get our lobster right off the dock about 10 miles away. We have a couple of sushi places a short drive away as well as a Mall and we can do bike riding on the Cape Cod Canal on one day and the next day be in the North End for the Feast of St. Anthony or at a Red Sox game in Fenway. There are other little pockets like Scituate that are amazing if you like a little boating town that supports like 4 upscale wine shops. They just put in a commuter rail line and it ends right near a golf course.

I think because access to the City is easy, the dynamic you're talking about could also render out in other parts of our own State.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    bostonbubble.com Forum Index -> Greater Boston Real Estate & Beyond All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 4 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Forum posts are owned by the original posters.
Forum boards are Copyright 2005 - present, bostonbubble.com.
Privacy policy in effect.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group