Coronavirus Updates

These States Will Be Hit Hardest by COVID-19 Recession

Expertise: Mortgages & Creative Financing, Business Management, Landlording & Rental Properties, Commercial Real Estate, Real Estate Deal Analysis & Advice, Real Estate Investing Basics, Personal Development, Real Estate News & Commentary
220 Articles Written
Phoenix, Arizona, USA downtown cityscape at dusk.

The real estate market is, like the rest of the economy, in turmoil due to the coronavirus and subsequent lockdowns. Some, such as Bryce Robertson here at BiggerPockets, believe the coming crash will be worse than the 2008 Great Recession. Others’ outlook is not so bleak (including myself), but virtually no one is predicting the “V-shaped recovery” many hoped for at the outset of the crisis.

So how will real estate be affected?

Well, the question of how may not be easy to answer, other than a vague notion that it won’t be good. But the question of where it will be affected the most might be elucidated by looking at what happened during the real estate crash of 2008. While it is universally agreed that housing was what caused that crash, the housing market did not collapse evenly.

In certain areas, it was hurt. And in other areas, it was outright devastated.

Where the 2008 Housing Crisis Hit Hardest

During the Great Recession, the number of foreclosure filings nationwide skyrocketed from 532,833 in 2005 to 2,871,891 in 2010! It was truly a catastrophic housing collapse.

As the following chart from Wikipedia shows, the housing crisis in 2007-2008 was extremely deep, with prices falling almost 34 percent from peak to trough:

Juan Toledo – Standard and Poors [1] Original jpeg graph from released under Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.

As noted above, however, this fall was not evenly distributed. As just a cursory look at the appreciation rates that preceded the crisis (1998-2006) shows, the Northeast, Southwest, and Florida saw, by far, the most appreciation before the collapse:

The counties that had massive amounts of appreciation also tended to be the ones hit hardest during the 2008 recession, as can be seen by this map from RealtyTrac for the foreclosure rate by county in 2008. You will immediately notice that the hot spots are remarkably similar (although the Northeast was hit substantially less hard than the Southwest and Florida).

‘The Foreclosure Five’

In 2009, the economist Alan Reynolds pointed out that “The Foreclosure Five”—California, Nevada, Arizona, Florida, and Michigan—had by far the most foreclosures. As he noted:

“One out of 76 homes in Nevada went into foreclosure in January, for example, compared with one out of 173 in California, with Arizona and Florida close behind. In New York, by contrast, only one out of 2,271 homes went into foreclosure.

“Nationwide, foreclosures fell 10% in January, to one out of every 466 homes. But that is a ‘mean’ average dominated by places like California and Florida. In the median state with the 25th highest foreclosure rate, by contrast, only one out of 949 homes was in foreclosure—just one-tenth of 1%. Foreclosure rates were even lower in 25 other states. In Vermont, foreclosures amounted to just one out of 51,906 homes. Foreclosure can be a personal crisis, but it is not a national crisis.”

By 2011, a similar trend could still be found. From RealtyTrac, we find that “Nevada, Arizona, and California post top state foreclosure rates for the year. More than 6% of Nevada housing units (one in 16) had at least one foreclosure filing in 2011, giving it the nation’s highest state foreclosure rate for the fifth consecutive year despite a 31% decrease in foreclosure activity from 2010.”

Those who lived through this economic disaster can remember the sweeping tracts of brand new and completely empty suburban housing developments that were reminiscent of Chinese ghost cities, a zombie apocalypse film, or a neutron bomb having just gone off.

Related: 5 Tips to Survive a Coronavirus-Induced Recession (& Thrive Afterward)

These developments tended to be in the Southwest and Florida, the epicenter of the economic disaster. Here, for example, is one new and completely vacant subdivision of mansions in Henderson, Nevada (a suburb of Las Vegas). Shockingly, not a lot of people are taking trips to The Strip to gamble ’til their heart’s content in the middle of a deep recession.

In the last quarter of 2007, NAR found that housing prices had fallen 5.8% across the country year over year (and would keep falling for several years thereafter). Of course, this trend was not even close to evenly distributed. The “Foreclosure Five” had 10 of the 15 hardest-hit metro areas. The top three were:

  • Riverside/San Bernardino/Ontario, Calif.: -16.8%
  • Sacramento/Arden/Arcade/Roseville, Calif.: -18.5%
  • Lansing/E. Lansing, Mich.: -18.8%

States That Fared Better

On the other hand, those that tended to do the best were in “flyover country” and smaller cities and towns outside of the Southwest and Florida. New England also survived the crash quite well.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment data tended to mirror foreclosures, with “The Foreclosure Five” all having unemployment rates over 10% by 2010. The United States unemployment rate was 9.6%, but the “Foreclosure Five” had rates of:

  • Florida: 10.2%
  • Arizona: 10.7%
  • California: 12.4%
  • Michigan: 12.5%
  • Nevada: 14.9%

Overall, the West and Pacific had the highest unemployment rates while the South, Midwest, and Northeast hovered around 9%.

Some states survived remarkably well, though. Iowa and New Hampshire, for example, had an unemployment rate of only 6.1%. Vermont and Virginia came in at 6.2 and 6.9%, respectively. North Dakota had an almost unfathomably low rate of 3.9%!

New England, the Northwest, and many “flyover states”, as well as smaller towns, did substantially better than big cities. And the 45 states not in the “Foreclosure Five” survived the crash much better than those unfortunate five.

Foreclosure Sold For Sale Real Estate Sign in Front of House.

2008 Recoveries

While the crash centered on Florida, Michigan, and the Southwest, the recoveries did not. Indeed, according to an analysis by 24/7 Wall St, the states that recovered the least by 2011 were mainly up and down the eastern side of the country:

  • 41. Maine
  • 42. Montana
  • 43. New Hampshire
  • 44. West Virginia
  • 45. Arkansas
  • 46. South Dakota
  • 47. Pennsylvania
  • 48. Connecticut
  • 49. New York
  • 50. New Jersey

New Jersey, for example, only saw a 0.2% decline in unemployment from its peak and had -0.5% GDP growth. The states that recovered the best resembled a bit of a smorgasbord with no obvious trend:

  1. Michigan
  2. Ohio
  3. South Carolina
  4. Utah
  5. Oregon
  6. Florida
  7. Indiana
  8. Tennessee
  9. Missouri
  10. Arizona

The way back up doesn’t always follow the way down.

COVID-19-Induced Recession Outlook

As the old military saying goes, “Generals fight the last war.”

Indeed, World War I saw cavalry charges in its first year. And the French built a giant, super trench after the first World War (the Maginot Line) that proved completely ineffective at the beginning of the second.

Likewise, what happened in the previous recession does not necessarily show us what will happen in the next. That being said, a recent analysis from ATTOM Data Solutions indicates that the highest-risk areas are pretty reminiscent of 2008:

As you can see, the Southwest—most notably California—and Florida once again appear to be at the epicenter of whatever fallout is to come. The big difference is that it looks like New York, New Jersey, and much of the Northeast may join them this time.

Related: Recession Prep 101—Investing in Real Estate During a Financial Crisis

BiggerPockets’ own G. Brian Davis sums up the results as follows:

“Worryingly for New Jersey and Florida, they claim nearly half (24) of the 50 highest-risk counties.

Want more articles like this?

Create an account today to get BiggerPocket's best blog articles delivered to your inbox

Sign up for free

“With its high tax burden and overpriced housing markets, New Jersey faces particular risk. It has the dubious honor of 14 counties counted among the 50 highest-risk markets in the country. That’s two-thirds of its counties that met the minimum data threshold!

“Florida offers up another 10 of the top 50 highest-risk counties.

“Other high-risk states center around the Mid-Atlantic region: Virginia, Delaware, Maryland, New York. Some Southern states also face high risk, including North Carolina, South Carolina, and Louisiana. And New England as a region can expect to get hit hard, with its high taxes, overpriced markets, and population outflow.

“In the other extreme, Texas claims 10 of the bottom 50 lowest-risk markets. Colorado and Wisconsin also represent particularly low-risk states.

“Only two counties in the West and five counties in the Midwest (all of them in Illinois) fall in the top 50 for highest risk.”

I would agree with Davis’ analysis entirely, except regarding New England, which survived 2008 well and looks relatively secure in ATTOM’s analysis.

It should also be noted that New York and New Jersey are the epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic in the United States, with over one-third of the country’s cases in those two states alone. These states will therefore likely have to stay locked down longer than others in order to contain the virus, causing even more economic hardship there.


The Effect on Real Estate

Overall, we are clearly already in a recession and the real estate market will likely be hit to one degree or another. Indeed, Redfin already shows listing prices have come down 6.4% ($21,000), and month-over-month listings have fallen 33% since the beginning of the year. That being said, the markets are spooked right now so it’s impossible to tell how deep this will go.

Predictions are, of course, always to be taken with a grain of salt. Regardless, given what happened in 2008 and the results of the ATTOM’s study, it would appear investors should be extra cautious in the Southwest, Florida, and the Northeast. On the other hand, the Midwest, Southeast (other than Florida), New England, and the Northwest will—in all likelihood—do better.

Of course, doing better in a recession is a relative term. All real estate investors should practice extra caution right now and insist on better deals than before until the fallout becomes clear.

Recession-Proof Real Estate book blog ad

How do you think the real estate market will fare during COVID-19 versus the Great Recession?

Share with a comment below!

Andrew Syrios has been investing in real estate for over a decade and is a partner with Stewardship Investments, LLC along with his brother Phillip and father Bill. Stewardship Investments focuses on the BRRRR strategy—buying, rehabbing and renting out houses and apartments throughout the Kansas City area. Today, they have over 300 properties and just under 500 units. Stewardship Properties on the whole has just under 1,000 units in six states. Andrew received a Bachelor's degree in Business Administration from the University of Oregon with honors and his Masters in Entrepreneurial Real Estate from the University of Missouri in Kansas City. He has also obtained his CCIM designation (Certified Commercial Investment Member). Andrew has been a writer for BiggerPockets on real estate and business management since 2015. He has also contributed to Think Realty Magazine, REI Club, Elite Daily, Thought Catalog, The Data Driven Investor and Alley Watch.
    Pete Tam from Folsom, California
    Replied 8 months ago
    Economy outlook is not that grate compared what stock market. I am seeing house prices going up due to lack of supply and lots and lots of buyers are out there. I do not know if we call this recession or fasten our seatbelt for the market to crash in few months to a year time! It appears that market has not legs , keep flying high and high without any economic fundamental.
    Carmen Glancy Investor from Boise, Idaho
    Replied 8 months ago
    It seems like the states that are shut down the longest would have the most repercussions.
    Andrew Syrios Residential Real Estate Investor from Kansas City, MO
    Replied 8 months ago
    That will likely compound the matter. Unfortunately, the ATTOM's study came out before we could know how long each state would state closed for. Of course, we still don't know for sure in every case. And there might be a second wave too so there are a lot of questions and uncertainty still out there.
    Susan Maneck Investor from Jackson, Mississippi
    Replied 8 months ago
    One thing that needs to considered as a consequence of the virus is that more and more high tech companies are planning to encourage workers to work from home even after the pandemic ends. They found worker productivity remained stable, so why pay the overhead? This is going to have an effect on real estate because it means workers can now live wherever they want. To take the case of states like California, that is likely to drive down the price of real estate in places like Silicon Valley but real estate agents in places like Lake Tahoe tell me they have buyers waiting in the wings, because if they can live and work anywhere they want, why not live there?
    Lucia Rushton Realtor from Dallas, TX
    Replied 8 months ago
    Earlier in 2020 I heard the term 'Knowledge Worker' in reference to people that can work from home. I think it was on a @AdamAAdams podcast. I really liked the term. And this was before Covid hit. When I had my day job I fought to have one day from home; I had to keep my numbers up - no problem, I was successful (and beyond). My work life balance was strong. Fast forward to today and as said above, the amount of people working from home is huge today and their productivity has remained strong. This is a new wave and one for us to seize.
    Miranda Paton
    Replied 8 months ago
    Yes, indeedy! Distributing high-paying jobs to employee's homes will undo about a century of urban growth that revolved around people's commutes into a city center for work. It will be a fascinating change to watch. I wish I owned a vacation place that I could sell to someone with a well-paying job who could now flee the city.
    Andrew Syrios Residential Real Estate Investor from Kansas City, MO
    Replied 8 months ago
    This could, in the long term, definitely reduce housing prices in those coastal cities. Although, those cities could definitely use a little bit more "affordable housing" and by doing so, prices there will have to come down.
    Valerie Cudnik
    Replied 8 months ago
    I have to laugh when I see statistics that don't reflect reality. Virginia didn't have a bubble in the way many states did. We also didn't lose a bunch of jobs when the economy tanked because most of the state's income comes from federal jobs. 15 military bases in the second largest metro area in the state (Virginia Beach/Norfolk). Northern Virginia mostly houses people working in DC or for government contractors. Except for Richmond, the rest of the state is mostly rural. Our housing market was affected, and new home sales were hit, but overall, not much else. Because of those military bases we have a damn fine rental market here, too.
    Andrew Syrios Residential Real Estate Investor from Kansas City, MO
    Replied 8 months ago
    Virginia wasn't mentioned as one of the states that was hit particularly hard in 2008 so I'm not sure what you are referring to.
    Nancy Roth Investor from Washington, Washington D.C.
    Replied 8 months ago
    “Other high-risk states center around the Mid-Atlantic region: Virginia, Delaware, Maryland, New York. ..." Perhaps Ms. Cudnik was referring to the statement above, which your article quoted from G. Brian Davis's analysis of the ATTOM study. I was surprised that Brian included Virginia in that list also. Both Virginia and its neighbor, Washington, DC, have rather resilient economic environments. DC and Northern Virginia both saw housing costs dip (not crash) during the Great Recession but the dip was shallow and was followed by a quick rebound. More rural parts of Virginia, particularly the southwestern counties dominated by the coal industry, may have a different story, but those counties aren't even included in the ATTOM survey. I personally remain optimistic for the housing market this time around. Hard-hit states and states that did better will both have excellent deals and terrible deals like always. In DC and Virginia we are already seeing more home-buying activity in recent weeks.
    Andrew Syrios Residential Real Estate Investor from Kansas City, MO
    Replied 8 months ago
    OK, that would make sense. I thought she was referring to the discussion on the 2008 recession. From ATTOM's chart, it looks like only the most northeast part of Virginia is at risk from their analysis. And Valerie is probably right, the sheer number of government jobs there should keep that area afloat.
    Alex Forest Rental Property Investor from Henrico, Va
    Replied 8 months ago
    I also read the comment by Valerie as past tense and referring to the 08-10 period.
    Tim Rea
    Replied 8 months ago
    If you want to know how this is going to effect the market, find the statistic that tallies the number of new regulations per county/state correlated with the unemployment rate per county state. Leave 2008 alone.
    Robert Fair Investor from Tustin, CA
    Replied 8 months ago
    I'm not convinced that this market will look anything like the 2008 crash. That crash was caused directly by unsustainable loans - stated income, no reserves, 100% LTV with combined 1st&2nd mortgages. The Foreclosure 5 states had the highest percentage of new-build communities fueled by these liar-loans, which is why they were hit the hardest when the bubble full of empty equity borrowers popped. The recession is man-made, due to the lock-downs, and the states resisting the science the hardest, staying locked down and sacrificing their economies will have the deepest impacts. That said, all loans since 2008 have had a combination of full doc and/or more skin in the game. There is a 12 year foundation of solid loans made to qualifying borrowers that fueled the recovery in housing from 2008 until March of this year. With banks offering deferrals, and the quality of their loans solid, due to the built in equity from down payments, and several years of sustainable growth in values, the hit to housing will be more of a blip that will last a few months, than a crash that will snowball. There is no bubble to pop. When the bonus unemployment benefits run out in a couple of months, and the workers come back and the businesses open back up, the economic recovery will begin, and the impact to housing will be minimal.
    Miranda Paton
    Replied 8 months ago
    I appreciate your analysis-- one that attends to the causes of this recession rather than historical data. But the stability you speak of seems to revolve around the solidly-employed home-owner. Also, Susan Maneck's point above about white-collar workers now being able to buy anywhere rather than being tethered to a particular big city is fascinating. So my question for you: What will happen for the renter with a job? This is the person who didn't enjoy 12 years of growing equity and, at present, doesn't have the down-payment saved up, nor the job that looks to be stable? I always tend to think that people who rent- rather than own their homes will be faster to trim their housing costs than will those who would have to sell and rebuy in order to do that. What does this mean for the rental market? Feel free to answer that considering renters at all income levels. Thanks!
    Tony Kohnle from Mount Pleasant, South Carolina
    Replied 8 months ago
    I mostly agree with @Robert Fair, the better structural strength of the loan portfolios and percentage of the initial stimulus going to the citizens to allow the responsible ones to use it to “weather the storm” should help stem initial losses and keep the recession from snowballing too fast. Having said that, there will be local spots that will be hard hit. I expect them to more neighborhood sized than county or city sized, though I suspect the article just used those sources because that is the level they could get data for.
    Andrew Syrios Residential Real Estate Investor from Kansas City, MO
    Replied 8 months ago
    I would sort of agree. I think we'll probably start off with a fairly deep recession followed by stagflation unlike the last one. It's also a recession that won't be caused by real estate collapsing. Real estate will, instead, be pulled down with the rest of the economy.
    Dave Rav from Summerville, SC
    Replied 8 months ago
    Its definitely going to be geographic during this crisis. The effects felt will not be equal across the board, in the varying locales around the country. This article sums it up well. And New, can someone please expose their local/county/state government for the exorbitant tax super-burden their poor citizens incur? (and why they dont overhaul their tax levy system)
    Andrew Syrios Residential Real Estate Investor from Kansas City, MO
    Replied 8 months ago
    I've heard it's a catastrophe in New Jersey regulations wise. New York and California aren't any better. I, for one, enjoy being in the sane regulatory world of flyover country.
    Alex Forest Rental Property Investor from Henrico, Va
    Replied 8 months ago
    I like how this article adds a piece of perspective to the overall context. And also breaks up the discussion to be more regionally focused rather than grouping the entire country going one way or the other. Other financial metrics that came to mind when reading through were local price to rent ratios and housing prices to median salary ratios. These speak to affordability and how reasonable housing prices are or how far out of reach tbey have become. Does the risk index by ATTOM incorporate these? It was hard to tell what that risk metric considered. Also, somehow overlaying covid impacts (perhaps moving forward) would seem to inform this map. Ny and NJ are mentioned in this context. But, if there is a new large uncontrolled epicenter that forms in a certain state, that may have an impact (eventually if they end up dealing with it over a long period of time). Some economists describe the pandemic as the driver of the future direction of the economy (how bad and how long) and so say they dont know what will happen until they see what path the pandemic takes. This may be true locally too. Also, the sources cited by the article are refreshing. Nice article, thanks for sharing.
    Steve Elling Rental Property Investor
    Replied 8 months ago
    I'm all for regional focus, but as somebody who lives in Central Florida, ZIllow says the property values here are still rising. In fact, the Zestimates on my six rentals located in Brevard and Citrus counties have probably climbed 3-4% since January. I think we're still six months away from knowing where the fallout will be the worst. On paper, tourism-reliant Florida seems like it should glow like Three Mile Island, but we'll see. Yes, Orlando's economy (Disney, Universal, hotels) is a one-note opera. However, I believe the crash of 2008 cleaned out many of the owners of second/vacation/spec homes here. So perhaps we're less susceptible to downturns now. The banks are in no hurry to foreclose this time around. They are not in the business of cleaning and selling homes and don't want a reprise of 2008. That said, I'm loading up on Dramamine. Yet so far, I've lost one tenant because of a (dubious) coronavirus-related job claim, but I immediately re-rented that home.
    Kenneth Hynes Rental Property Investor from Easton, PA
    Replied 8 months ago
    Some great analysis and facts in the article - One area that is vastly different from 2008 is the supply side- We saw in 2009/09 a wave of foreclosures due to the bad loans Robert Fair talked about. Now - " month-over-month listings have fallen 33% since the beginning of the year" - points to sellers being spooked and not listing during the lock down phase. What is going to happen as restrictions ease and this pent up supply hits the market, as well as inventory from sellers being forced to sell due to economic impacts of the health crises
    Jay Harris Developer from Wesley Chapel, FL
    Replied 8 months ago
    Florida’s economy is strong. We’re almost back to 100% capacity. I live here, am in construction and real estate, and have my boots on the ground. You will see a lot more people relocating to the Subshine State. We cannot keep up with the demand, and need more inventory. Florida will literally be the state that benefits most from this scamdemic.
    Matt Berklacy Rental Investor | Wholesaler | Realtor from Jacksonville FL | Raleigh NC
    Replied 8 months ago
    scamdemic, thats funny. agreed about Florida. im in jax N East Fl.
    Jacquelyn West from Fort Worth, Texas
    Replied 8 months ago
    Wow!! Almost 100,000 people dead and you refer to it as “Scamdemic” wonder what the families of these dead souls would think of your mockery!
    Vaughn K. from Coeur d'Alene, ID
    Replied 8 months ago
    Jacquelyn, it's not that nobody died... It's that they rapidly changed the goal posts from this being an actual REALLY bad thing, where they were estimating 3 million to 10 million + deaths (1.0-3.4% death rates), to 100,000 dying as being the end of the world. 3 million, or especially 10 million, would have been... 100,000 is not. Is it insensitive to dismiss the regular flu as not being worthy of destroying millions of peoples economic lives? Because this has ended up being barely worse at this point. The only reason it's worse at all is no natural immunity built up or vaccines. Case for case of people that actually get it this thing has ended up being no worse than many strains of flu.

    For people who have no sense of statistics 100,000 may sound like a lot... But it's not. IIRC 90% of deaths have been people over 60, with around half being over 80. In living memory we've had regular flu years that killed north of 100,000 people. 30-60K every year is the recent norm. So it's not that 100,000 people dying is awesome. It sucks. But it's literally a rounding error in a country of 330 million people. We're talking 2 perfectly regular but on the bad side flu years. That is NOT a big deal. The people dying are the same type of people who die from the flu too, it's actually been extra kind to young people compared to the flu.

    People who are numerate realize it is on the whole a nothing burger. People who don't understand statistics hear 100,000 dead and freak out. But it is literally nothing of any significance. If we'd figured out the death rate was as low as it is up front, and the media and politicians didn't hype this up, we could have literally done nothing and nobody would have even noticed that this pandemic even happened. It's been all hype. Bear in mind I say this as somebody who was slightly freaked out when the numbers WERE looking like it might be 1%+ death rate. But they're not. So dismissing it as a rounding error is simply factually correct. The only reason politicians and the media are keeping the hype up is because they don't want to admit all this was a completely unneeded disaster we created for ourselves. They don't want to admit they ruined millions of lives for no reason.
    Cindy Casper from Tucson, AZ
    Replied 8 months ago
    The issue is not the death rate. The issue is how fast the virus spreads and to keep it from overwhelming healthcare. I am an RN and we would not be able to handle all the Covid cases with a system that runs so lean that my hospital is usually in “ code purple” which means divert patients we have no rooms or too little staff. The other thing people seem to forget is that Of the people who survive the hospital stay many are there for several weeks and are leaving with new onset kidney failure and heart failure or embolisms of all kinds. It’s not a scam at all. Now that everyone thinks it’s all over and are going back to life basically they are dumping the problem on the healthcare system. BTW I still have the same one N95 mask I have had for 6 weeks and out of 20 RNs in my unit ( short staffed purposely by the hospital administration is the norm in our country...not from a nursing shortage) 20 % of us got sick and some were out for weeks. When the second wave of this virus hits people will see the truth and it will overwhelm the health care system. While the patients, doctors and nurses suffer the burden of this the hospital and insurance CEOs will get their millions in salaries and bonuses..Just some Insider things to consider.. This is why I am investing my way out of nursing.
    Vaughn K. from Coeur d'Alene, ID
    Replied 8 months ago
    Hi Cindy. First off thank you for doing what you do as an RN! I have an aunt who is a retired RN and it is a tough job. As far as things go, I have also talked to numerous doctors and nurses in real life during this pandemic. Frankly, every single one but one of them shares my general opinion on this whole thing. One nurse had more your thinking.

    I fully understand that there is more than the death rate here. Some people are having problems that may last for forever from this. Then there is the issue of overloading the hospitals. The thing with that is that it has happened precisely ZERO places in the entire country outside of NY/NJ. That's not to say we shouldn't worry about it happening, but what it DOES mean is that the level of shutdown we've had has been MORE than was needed to flatted the curve and prevent overloading. In other words we should have been more open than we have been. Although it sucks for doctors and nurses, the quickest and best way through this thing is to keep ICU capacity juuuuust below maximum capacity, but not over it, to let this thing burn out as quickly was possible.

    What we've actually done has destroyed our economy, and extended the duration this nonsense will go on for. We've been sooooooooo far under the number of cases our health care system can handle we've had to LAY OFF probably hundreds of thousands of doctors and nurses nationally. Just one hospital system in my city has announced layoffs of 5,000 friggin' people!!!

    So I fully agree that we need to stay under the overload numbers... But the freakout level of shutting everything down was FAR more than was needed to achieve that. Given that we won't have a vaccine for a long time, we basically have to accept that we need to develop natural herd immunity. What's the best way to do that? As quickly as possible, but without overloading the system. IMO I think no major events and possibly no clubs etc is all that is needed. Everything else is the equivalent of us shutting everything down every year to save lives from the flu, which is patently ridiculous. People just need to realize that we live in an imperfect world, and that is the only sensible way out of this. Not because it is a great alternative, but because every other alternative is even worse overall.
    Andrew Syrios Residential Real Estate Investor from Kansas City, MO
    Replied 8 months ago
    In April, Florida's unemployment hit 12.9% (the nation was 14.7%). It will be higher in May. Not sure how exactly that's "100% capacity."
    John Stilwell
    Replied 8 months ago
    Good information. What happens when thousands of jobs aren’t available because businesses close? I believe this is one of the great unknowns. If people don’t have jobs it doesn’t matter how many forbearance agreements are put forth. Thoughts?
    Joe Splitrock Rental Property Investor from Sioux Falls, SD
    Replied 8 months ago
    The 24/7 Wallstreet ranking of recovery was based on how much the areas recovered from peak unemployment. Of course the states that fell worse had more room to recover. The ranking doesn't take into account that if unemployment fell less to peak, there is less to recover. For example in South Dakota the peak unemployment was 5.3% and it fell to 4.5% by 2011. Most people would not consider that bad even at peak. The other factor is population. South Dakota had consistent population gain during the same period. Michigan had yearly population decrease from 2005 to 2011. People move to find work, which has two effects. It means less people to be unemployed in the state they leave and more people to be employed in the state they move to. Population always shifts towards jobs, so over time unemployment is self-healing, even if no jobs are added. I agree with others, the states that will be hardest hit are those who are not opening back up. The longer these businesses are shut down, the lower likelihood they will reopen. Interest discussion though, thanks.
    Shiela Roberts Investor from Boulder, Colorado
    Replied 8 months ago
    Interesting. Some of these comments are priceless! Jay Harriss "scamdemic". Cracked me up :) With the same sentiment, I'm only seeing a straight up panic to BUY right now here in Boulder and north Denver Metro Colorado markets. It doesn't really reflect job loss and small business closures...yet. Sellers who occupy the listed homes are quickly fatigued by COVID19 showing guidelines and often are accepting offers just to stop showings. I tend to disregard anything other than local data because, as my mentor said, "Real estate is valued block to block." I say: there is no accurate national weather forecast, just like there is no national one-size-fits all real estate forecast. During 2008-2009, foreclosure and unemployment rates in CO were well below national averages. I've seen a noticeable amount of people relocating due to Colorado's legal weed law, passed in 2012 and implemented in 2014. I believe this fueled a steady buying market in already strong markets like Boulder, CO. In some neighborhoods and price points, there were still bidding wars from 2008-2013. Also agree that there are some real differences from then to now. COVID19 closures fueled pent up buying energy at a time when people are already looking to buy (spring). White collar jobs - specifically tech employees able to work from anywhere might mean people take their equity and relocate to a less urban setting but people with small businesses or who are employed in the service industries (restaurants, hair stylists, etc) will likely be hit the hardest and stuck. The income, wealth and equity gaps will widen. There will be loss for many which creates opportunity for those positioned well. This is why I've said that now (since 2017) is not the time to buy, it's a time to sell and wait and then came COVID19...Inevitably, there will be some good buys but timing will depend on state to state re-openings and foreclosure proceeding timelines.
    Erin Spradlin Real Estate Agent from Colorado Springs, CO
    Replied 8 months ago
    @shielaroberts - "White collar jobs - specifically tech employees able to work from anywhere might mean people take their equity and relocate to a less urban setting but people with small businesses or who are employed in the service industries (restaurants, hair stylists, etc) will likely be hit the hardest and stuck. The income, wealth and equity gaps will widen." Couldn't agree more. Colorado has dominated for remote work for a few years now, and this will certainly further attract people that can work from anywhere.
    Christine Yeigh
    Replied 8 months ago
    Unfortunately COV19 is far from over. California has high percentage of forclosures in my old neighborhood. Almost 50%.
    Christine Yeigh
    Replied 8 months ago
    You cannot have a situation like this and believe it's gonna be OK Ave residence at 650/1,000,000. Most homes just sit there. Some have been on the market for over a year. Starting to decrease in price but we are just at the beginning of this financial problem also we have less than 5% of population but 30% of cases we are # 1 in the world our President has made grave errors of statements and actions. l don't see the economic expert's listening to the scientists about how dangerous it will become if aggressive action is not implimented to fight this pandemic.
    Vaughn K. from Coeur d'Alene, ID
    Replied 8 months ago
    See my post above about how this is all a nothing burger... But also, you do realize we're the 3rd most populous nation on earth right? Half the reason we probably show that rate is because we've done more testing than the 2 countries on earth that have more people than us! Looking at antibody tests worldwide, we probably don't have more cases per capita than MANY other places. But even if we have more cases per capita, it really doesn't matter. Because this whole thing ended up not being a big deal. It's a whopping 2 bad flu seasons in one year. You need to put this thing in perspective and not buy into the hype.