Houses Are More Expensive In Democratic Cities Than In Republican Cities

[xchrom]

http://www.businessinsider.com/trulia-political-cities-vs-house-prices-2014-10

It turns out that houses in blue cities are more expensive than houses in red cities.

Trulia chief economist Jed Kolko compared vote margins from the 2012 presidential election to Trulia's estimates of the median asking price per square foot in each of the hundred largest US metropolitan areas. The following chart plots this comparison, with red dots indicating metro areas where Mitt Romney won, light blue dots indicating areas where Barack Obama won by fewer than 20 percentage points, and dark blue dots showing areas where Obama won by more than 20 points:



While each of the three groups include cities on the lower end of the house price spectrum, nearly all of the Romney-voting metro areas had median prices lower than $200/square foot, while some of the most Democratic-leaning areas were far more expensive.

Looking at these three groups in aggregate, the median asking price among the heavily Obama-favoring metro areas was nearly twice as high as in the Republican metros:



Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/trulia-political-cities-vs-house-prices-2014-10#ixzz3HR9MQAx6

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/trulia-political-cities-vs-house-prices-2014-10#ixzz3HR9Ae0ZL

[customerserviceguy]

1. All this says is

Democratic voters tend to live in more urbanized areas, while GOP voters tend to live in less expensive rural areas. I could have told you that.

[JaneyVee]

10. Exactly.

[ctaylors6]

11. actually the article is comparing metro areas

not urban vs rural.

[customerserviceguy]

20. Because there's really no difference

between Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Witchita and NYC, LA, and Chicago, right?

Expensive cities are surrounded by large swaths of progressive suburbs, while less expensive cities are surrounded by rural areas. There's your difference.

[bmac19gg]

2. inescapable truth

Income inequality has worsened under President Obama, and home prices could be a consequence. This is also troubling, from the link:

"But because blue markets are less affordable, have lower homeownership, and have greater income inequality, political leaders in Democratic-leaning and Republican-leaning metros may push for different policies."

Somebody could take a look at that and say "Democrats talk about equality but don't practice it at home".

[WinkyDink]

3. I'm sure Rush is already on it.

[Proud Public Servant]

5. Only if we let them be right

DC is a Dark Blue city, and affordable housing has been Topic #1 in the citywide races this year. There have been some intriguing, ambitious proposals discussed, but the question is whether anyone will act on them once the votes are counted. If instead we're back to business as usual, the GOP has every right to call us out.

[bmac19gg]

9. ya exactly

Typically after the votes are counted they realize they need to start fundraising again for next election and shrug their campaign promises in favor of lobbyist pandering. Its a shame.

[belzabubba333]

4. ok so dems have nicer homes

[snooper2]

16. and some really shitty homes, reading up above-

[geek tragedy]

6. Democrats live in cities and blue states

are generally more desireable locations especially for social liberals.

Very few liberals live in small town Kansas by choice.

[snooper2]

17. "each of the hundred largest US metropolitan areas"

[Sparhawk60]

7. Homes in Blue Cities

Or to change the headline......."homes in blue citlies are worth more".....I wonder why? mmmmm, maybe liberal values adds to the quality of life.

[merrily]

8. I give this chart ten Pinocchios (out of a possble five).

San Fransisco is indeed a city, and, to boot, a city with one of the highest housing costs in the mainland nation because it is a unique and very wonderful and desirable place to live. So, one immediately grasps why it appears in this bs chart as typical of housing costs in a Democratic city. It isn't typical at all.

Orange County, however, is NOT a city. It's well, a county. You can watch it on Bravo, in the form of Real Housewives of Orange County. A bunch of materialistic grifters, pretending to be wealthy and classy. Ugh.

North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota is not a city, either. It is an area of Florida that includes three towns and is not the most desirable area of Florida to live in.

Also, try comparing income in San Fransisco or Boston or NYC, each a unique and very wonderful place to live for so many reasons, with income in Bradenton or Sarasota.

The bars in that chart were very neatly drawn, though. So, kudos on that, businessinsider.com And shame on you for everything else, including calling blue cities "Obama-favoring," knowing full well that just about the entire Republican midterm strategy is trying to force Democrats to run away from Obama.

[Ikonoklast]

19. The comparison is for "metro areas", not specific cities.

[Youdontwantthetruth]

12. Of course housing is expensive, it ALWAYS costs more to live in the most desirable locations

America has 50 states some are more desirable to live in then others...face it more people want to live in NYC then Yazoo, MS so NYC commands a higher prices. It is that way all over the world.

Beachfront and waterfront property, even in Yazoo, MS costs more than the property next to the hog rendering plant, it is that way everywhere in the world.

Additionally many of the more desirable places to live also invest in infrastructure something all the less desirable places to live in do not do.

Want a decent place to live, invest in the city and state, don't invest then your place will remain undesirable.

It is just a big old coincidence that the least desirable places to live are also in regional clusters that all share a similar heritage and culture and are all run by Republicans and Conservatives for a very long times.

Be that as it may…..LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION is that that matters in real estate, no matter where one choses to live. The better the location the more it costs.

[librechik]

14. thanks for not making me say that! Dems are smarter, nicer so they have taste and things to do!

that can't be done down on the pig farm.

[Proud Public Servant]

13. The most important fact about housing in Dem strongholds is:

The 99% -- or the 90%, anyway -- can't afford it without struggling. What that means is that issues like income inequality are much, much more apparent in Democratic areas, precisely because we live it here every day. One reason we have trouble with the middle of the country is that we talk about things like income inequality and they look around and just don't see it -- not because they're stupid, necessarily, but because there really is is less of it in Montgomery County, Kansas, than in Montgomery County, Maryland.

In other words, this is another way in which our partisan rancor is exacerbated by the fact that Dems and Reps literally live in different worlds. The What's-the-Matter-with-Kansas GOPers can't get incensed about income inequality or the privilege of millionaires because they're so far removed from it; for Dem constituencies, it's in their faces every day.

[Youdontwantthetruth]

18. The ONLY way to get the attention of those in the Red States is to take away their Blue State

Welfare.

Make the Red States Practice what they preach for once and we will see how long the "fiscally Conservative" republicans stay in office.

[Marrah_G]

15. The northeast is wicked expensive

I know within an hour from Boston it is nearly impossible to find an apartment for less then a grand and that is for a really crappy apartment.