(no title)
agentofoblivion | 2 years ago
> Even as Summit County adds waves of remote workers, it has experienced net negative migration since 2020
You click the link of that data and it talks about how the local government is desperate to attract workers and full time residents, rather than having mostly vacant second homes.
I presume they want to attract wealthy workers, given the choice, since that spending will be local and help the economy. So, assuming they get what they want, which is an influx of wealthy, employed people, it’s entirely clear what will happen to real estate prices. I’m sorry, but no one ever said you’re entitled to only having to play guitar in coffee shops to support themselves. That’s what college kids do, who don’t own houses.
zeroCalories|2 years ago
FireBeyond|2 years ago
Commissioned studies, and the worst case of those showed year-over-year appreciation decreasing, from 12% to 9.5% per year.
To be clear, people's property values were still going to be increasing nearly 10% a year, if fully implemented, and "worst case", but holy hell.
You'd think the city was talking about taking people's grandmothers into the street and executing them, the screeching was so fierce about "protecting my investment".
Never knew there was a constitutional right to double digit "returns" on property ownership, but to these people, apparently there is.
pif|2 years ago
Actually, no one ever said you’re entitled to only having to play guitar in coffee shops to support yourself in the town you chose.