Never said I don’t like it in Seattle. I have spent the majority of my life in the PNW and likely will remain at least on the west coast if I can. The point is that there are many who don’t see Seattle as the best city in the world as many here like to think of it.

20,000 in 5 years is actually for King County from the Census bureau. And its actually more like 18,000.

Pop. 2000 – 1,737,034
Pop. 2005 – 1,755,818

Doesn’t seem like a significant increase to me. Not when you compare it to other cities faced with massive immigration such as Houston, Phoenix, San Diego, LA, etc.

The logic is that people would have you believe that Seattle is running out of land, that there are only so many houses available for all these people moving into the area. When in reality, there aren’t really that many people moving into Seattle.

But be careful with demographic figures. You might think an increase in population of “only” 20,000 in Seattle means it is undesirable to live here (I don’t get the logic there, by the way — that is a healthy increase in population!). But compare that with the net *drop* in population in San Francisco in the same time period of 50,000 people. I guess by your logic San Francisco must be a horrible place! Of course the reality is that people are leaving San Francisco because of the high cost of living — not because it’s undesirable. If the median home in Seattle cost $800K, I’m sure we’d be seeing a population drop here, too.
The income figures come from Claritas.

Now? Not even close. I certainly hope anyone with kids is counseling them against going into a low paid profession like that.

BTW, where did you get 2006 median income figures from?

If Seattle is such a “desirable” place to live, why has the population basically been stagnant since 2000-2005? A net migration of only 20,000 people.

I think it is “desirable” for people who are from the PNW, but most of my office consists of people that were hired after 9/11/2001 and hired from outside of this area. Most of them are trying to get out of Seattle. The only people in my office that want to stay here, are people from the PNW. The transplants from the Mid-West don’t find Seattle “affordable” by any means, nor do the people in my office from the South and Southwest.

Like I said before, both San Fran and NYC are inflated in housing values. Comparing NYC to Seattle is like apples to oranges considering the population density of Manhattan. I’ve lived in NYC and trust me, Seattle is no NYC.

San Fran is probably a little bit better comparison. I have a sister that lives there, and it is extremely overpriced. That just means their market has further to tumble than ours does, it does not mean that our market will not correct itself.

Who then is going to buy high end houses if people stop making such a huge profit on houses sold? If this market does plateau, and we stop seeing such a dramatic increase in equity, who is going to be buying 750,000 dollar houses?

If the market takes a small dip, wouldn’t that lead to a larger dip, considering people might actually lose some equity? Like I said before, 2007 will be an interesting year to see how all of this plays out. I’d rather be on the sidelines than to buy right now.

2006 median household income:

Manhattan: $53K
San Francisco (city): $67K
Seattle (city): $50K

I have to admit that buying this house with zero down was one of the whackiest things I’ve ever done. Should the lenders have let me do that? Absolutley not So far I’m holding my own after the divorce, but I can tell you it is not easy. At times it has been very difficult maintaining my ethical standards to never rush someone or push someone to purchase, no matter how much I need the money.

I remember telling my partner that I will lose the house before I twist someone’s arm to purchase. He looked at me like I was nuts. Maybe I am