Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The main decision maker, Jason Kamras, is a Princeton grad. The chancellor is a Georgetown grad and the former Chancellor, who with Henderson and Kamras devised the IMPACT evaluation system, has Cornell and Harvard degrees.
Not exactly "barely literate."
Are you really that dense? The issue isn't whether the people who devised these tools are illiterate. It's whether those who are tasked with using them in practice are stupid and incompetent.
The teacher put her superiors on notice that there was a problem and they not only ignored her warnings, but fired her. You might almost ask if her firing was akin to a retaliatory discharge. The sheer idiocy does indeed validate the decision that so many have made to leave DC for superior public school systems elsewhere. It may change for the better eventually, but the pace of improvement is very, very slow.
Many DC families have only stayed because they are underwater on their homes. Once it rises, absent a good school, the middle class will flee DC again.
Anonymous wrote:I know this thread has strayed off but I grew up with the teacher in this story and she and her family are just wonderful people. Our little town is very proud of her.
Anonymous wrote:Love how someone is using anecdotal info and "most people" (along with cherry picked data) to refute anedoctal info.
We bought in '01 in Mt P/Columbia Heights. Maybe "everyone" has kids just a few short years after marrying/buying houses, but "most" people around us with kids in early childhood elementary (K and younger) are sitting on hundreds of thousands of dollars of value. We're maybe 100K off from peak - but still sitting on 300K in potential profit, and houses here, while rarely offered, are snapped up quickly.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The main decision maker, Jason Kamras, is a Princeton grad. The chancellor is a Georgetown grad and the former Chancellor, who with Henderson and Kamras devised the IMPACT evaluation system, has Cornell and Harvard degrees.
Not exactly "barely literate."
Are you really that dense? The issue isn't whether the people who devised these tools are illiterate. It's whether those who are tasked with using them in practice are stupid and incompetent.
The teacher put her superiors on notice that there was a problem and they not only ignored her warnings, but fired her. You might almost ask if her firing was akin to a retaliatory discharge. The sheer idiocy does indeed validate the decision that so many have made to leave DC for superior public school systems elsewhere. It may change for the better eventually, but the pace of improvement is very, very slow.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Many DC families have only stayed because they are underwater on their homes. Once it rises, absent a good school, the middle class will flee DC again.
Don't be such a silly.
http://www.zillow.com/local-info/DC-Washington/Capitol-Hill-home-value/r_121685/
People may be underwater in the greater Dumfries-Manassass metropolitan area, but most middle-class DC folks have plenty of equity in their houses..even those who bought during the bubble.
Wrong. Instead of cherry picking your stats, why don't you cite the chart for Washington, DC as a whole:
http://www.zillow.com/local-info/DC-Washington/r_41568/
It's not just the "greater Dumfries-Manassass metropolitan area" that is underwater, but Washington, DC as well.
You'll probably want to dig a bit further into that chart. The areas that were hard-hit by the suburban housing bubble are a) the well-heeled areas of DC where households are likely to be both wealthy, and have access to the good public schools (JKLM), or b) the ungentrified areas of DC east of the river, and in the far NE. The middle-class parents who bought homes in places like Capitol Hill and elsewhere even in the "bubble years" are unlikely to be seriously underwater. That's because most of the (relatively small decrease) in home values in DC proper have taken place in ungentrified neighborhoods where new residents with children are unlikely to have settled. Even in your cherry-picked example of Petworth, someone is unlikely to be underwater unless they bought between late 2005 and mid 2009. The strong neighborhoods like Capitol Hill have only increased in value since the peak of the peak. Pretty much anyone who bought at any time other than a six month period in 2006 has made money. And the rents have gone up sufficiently that those people could rent their houses tomorrow and cover their mortgage and maintenance.
You're fantasies of nervous "underwater" parents wishing they could leave is just wishful thinking. Which, come to think of it, is a bit sad.
These aren't "fantasies." We know many such parents personally. They are underwater and wishing that they could leave for a much better school district, but are forced instead to apologize for DCPS and "boost" it on forums such as this in the hope that the system will actually improve, or at least appear to have improved enough to attract another middle class home buyer to purchase their home for more than they paid for it during the boom years. Perhaps you are another example of this, which, come to think of it, is quite sad.
Moreover, your arguments don't refute the fact that the chart cited clearly shows that DC property values have declined. In fact, the chart doesn't even show the full extent of the decline, since it only goes back to early 2007, whereas the peak prices were around May 2006. The only "cherry picking" was by the PP who tried to cite Capitol Hill and certain other neighborhoods as examples of areas where prices hadn't declined as much, if at all. My point was that for DC as a whole, the prices have declined, and the chart proves that.
Name the neighborhood. My guess is that you know people in either Columbia Heights or Petworth who bought in, what? 2006? 2007? Either that or they're in the "suburban" neighborhoods west of the Park. I feel sorry for your personal acquaintances, but they're outliers.
What do you mean by "name the neighborhood"? We know parents from many different parts of the city that are underwater. Again, the facts that I have demonstrated show that they are not "outliers." Where are your facts demonstrating that property values in DC are now higher than at the peak of the boom?
Anonymous wrote:
The main decision maker, Jason Kamras, is a Princeton grad. The chancellor is a Georgetown grad and the former Chancellor, who with Henderson and Kamras devised the IMPACT evaluation system, has Cornell and Harvard degrees.
Not exactly "barely literate."
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
For example. We live in a house in DC that has doubled in value. Not exactly underwater.
Anecdotes don't refute overall truths. No one said that certain houses, or even certain neighborhoods in DC, haven't held their value or even gone up in some cases (which is also true for some of the closer in suburban areas). But for DC overall, property values have gone down since the boom, as proven in the chart cited previously. You can also look at the Case Schiller data and other data points if you still don't believe this for some reason.
Look at your chart again. It shows a period roughly from mid-2005 until early 2008 in which, if you'd bought you'd have lost a money. "DC overall" is just slightly less irrelevant to the question of "middle-class parents with school-age children" than the Case-Schiller index, which is essentially meaningless in this context.
The "gentrification zone", which is where almost all of the new middle-class residents who have elementary aged children are, has outperformed both the rich suburban areas of DC, and the old, ungentrified areas. Those bring down the overall DC figures.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Many DC families have only stayed because they are underwater on their homes. Once it rises, absent a good school, the middle class will flee DC again.
Don't be such a silly.
http://www.zillow.com/local-info/DC-Washington/Capitol-Hill-home-value/r_121685/
People may be underwater in the greater Dumfries-Manassass metropolitan area, but most middle-class DC folks have plenty of equity in their houses..even those who bought during the bubble.
Wrong. Instead of cherry picking your stats, why don't you cite the chart for Washington, DC as a whole:
http://www.zillow.com/local-info/DC-Washington/r_41568/
It's not just the "greater Dumfries-Manassass metropolitan area" that is underwater, but Washington, DC as well.
You'll probably want to dig a bit further into that chart. The areas that were hard-hit by the suburban housing bubble are a) the well-heeled areas of DC where households are likely to be both wealthy, and have access to the good public schools (JKLM), or b) the ungentrified areas of DC east of the river, and in the far NE. The middle-class parents who bought homes in places like Capitol Hill and elsewhere even in the "bubble years" are unlikely to be seriously underwater. That's because most of the (relatively small decrease) in home values in DC proper have taken place in ungentrified neighborhoods where new residents with children are unlikely to have settled. Even in your cherry-picked example of Petworth, someone is unlikely to be underwater unless they bought between late 2005 and mid 2009. The strong neighborhoods like Capitol Hill have only increased in value since the peak of the peak. Pretty much anyone who bought at any time other than a six month period in 2006 has made money. And the rents have gone up sufficiently that those people could rent their houses tomorrow and cover their mortgage and maintenance.
You're fantasies of nervous "underwater" parents wishing they could leave is just wishful thinking. Which, come to think of it, is a bit sad.
These aren't "fantasies." We know many such parents personally. They are underwater and wishing that they could leave for a much better school district, but are forced instead to apologize for DCPS and "boost" it on forums such as this in the hope that the system will actually improve, or at least appear to have improved enough to attract another middle class home buyer to purchase their home for more than they paid for it during the boom years. Perhaps you are another example of this, which, come to think of it, is quite sad.
Moreover, your arguments don't refute the fact that the chart cited clearly shows that DC property values have declined. In fact, the chart doesn't even show the full extent of the decline, since it only goes back to early 2007, whereas the peak prices were around May 2006. The only "cherry picking" was by the PP who tried to cite Capitol Hill and certain other neighborhoods as examples of areas where prices hadn't declined as much, if at all. My point was that for DC as a whole, the prices have declined, and the chart proves that.
Name the neighborhood. My guess is that you know people in either Columbia Heights or Petworth who bought in, what? 2006? 2007? Either that or they're in the "suburban" neighborhoods west of the Park. I feel sorry for your personal acquaintances, but they're outliers.
Anonymous wrote:
For example. We live in a house in DC that has doubled in value. Not exactly underwater.
Anecdotes don't refute overall truths. No one said that certain houses, or even certain neighborhoods in DC, haven't held their value or even gone up in some cases (which is also true for some of the closer in suburban areas). But for DC overall, property values have gone down since the boom, as proven in the chart cited previously. You can also look at the Case Schiller data and other data points if you still don't believe this for some reason.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Many DC families have only stayed because they are underwater on their homes. Once it rises, absent a good school, the middle class will flee DC again.
Don't be such a silly.
http://www.zillow.com/local-info/DC-Washington/Capitol-Hill-home-value/r_121685/
People may be underwater in the greater Dumfries-Manassass metropolitan area, but most middle-class DC folks have plenty of equity in their houses..even those who bought during the bubble.
Wrong. Instead of cherry picking your stats, why don't you cite the chart for Washington, DC as a whole:
http://www.zillow.com/local-info/DC-Washington/r_41568/
It's not just the "greater Dumfries-Manassass metropolitan area" that is underwater, but Washington, DC as well.
You'll probably want to dig a bit further into that chart. The areas that were hard-hit by the suburban housing bubble are a) the well-heeled areas of DC where households are likely to be both wealthy, and have access to the good public schools (JKLM), or b) the ungentrified areas of DC east of the river, and in the far NE. The middle-class parents who bought homes in places like Capitol Hill and elsewhere even in the "bubble years" are unlikely to be seriously underwater. That's because most of the (relatively small decrease) in home values in DC proper have taken place in ungentrified neighborhoods where new residents with children are unlikely to have settled. Even in your cherry-picked example of Petworth, someone is unlikely to be underwater unless they bought between late 2005 and mid 2009. The strong neighborhoods like Capitol Hill have only increased in value since the peak of the peak. Pretty much anyone who bought at any time other than a six month period in 2006 has made money. And the rents have gone up sufficiently that those people could rent their houses tomorrow and cover their mortgage and maintenance.
You're fantasies of nervous "underwater" parents wishing they could leave is just wishful thinking. Which, come to think of it, is a bit sad.
These aren't "fantasies." We know many such parents personally. They are underwater and wishing that they could leave for a much better school district, but are forced instead to apologize for DCPS and "boost" it on forums such as this in the hope that the system will actually improve, or at least appear to have improved enough to attract another middle class home buyer to purchase their home for more than they paid for it during the boom years. Perhaps you are another example of this, which, come to think of it, is quite sad.
Moreover, your arguments don't refute the fact that the chart cited clearly shows that DC property values have declined. In fact, the chart doesn't even show the full extent of the decline, since it only goes back to early 2007, whereas the peak prices were around May 2006. The only "cherry picking" was by the PP who tried to cite Capitol Hill and certain other neighborhoods as examples of areas where prices hadn't declined as much, if at all. My point was that for DC as a whole, the prices have declined, and the chart proves that.