In other news (apolitical thread)...

[Cincydawg]

We did NOT play the tips/PGA tee boxes.  Probably around 6500-6800 yards, not 7500. I played somewhat conservatively, trying to stay below the hole around the greens to avoid chipping and putting downhill on those slippery SOBs.  I had a "good" day by my standards and shot 90.  I was probably about a 10 handicap at the time.  Playing from the tips at 7500 yards would have killed our group.

So, if you had a 90 on a decent day, what would it have been from the tips with a crowd watching?  

[847badgerfan]

To be fair, nobody would be watching FF on a Friday before he misses the cut.

[FearlessF]

108 - add a stroke a hole
the length would bother me more than the crowd
I would have injured a couple spectators fer sure
the gallery does a great job of finding errant golf balls and tramping down the deep rough - so they can be very helpful

[Cincydawg]

I really enjoyed these books, good airplane reads.

[FearlessF]

To be fair, nobody would be watching FF on a Friday before he misses the cut.

unless I was paired with John Daly

[SFBadger96]

Those prices are just nuts.

Historical data shows a strong ROI--probably stronger than anywhere else in the country, except--maybe--NYC.
My parents were "nuts" in 1975 when they bought their house for mid-5-figures. It has appreciated more than 60x what they paid for it.
That's one example, but it's not that extraordinary compared to the trajectory of home prices in the area for the last 80 years.

[847badgerfan]

What did a house in Walnut Creek cost in the 1960's?

[FearlessF]

about 70X less

[SFBadger96]

I don't know for sure, but probably $25-30K (depending on location/view, etc.). It was likely a little higher than the national average. Some quick googling suggests that's the range.

[847badgerfan]

They had 5 kids so it would have been a good size house.

[FearlessF]

kids shared bedrooms in the 60s

[847badgerfan]

I don't think they did. They were pretty well off.

[bayareabadger]

And those are in the East Bay, i.e., the "lower cost" part of the Bay Area. The Silicon Valley (Santa Clara) and Peninsula (San Mateo) are even more:

I wouldn’t necessarily describe it as the “lower cost“ part of the Bay Area. Though it does get j to some interesting convos about composition of places.

[SFBadger96]

The East Bay includes Piedmont ("Rich Oakland"), Orinda/Lafayette/Moraga, Danville, Alamo, and others--so plenty of expensive zip codes, but relatively speaking, the cities in the east bay have a lower price point than the cities on the Peninsula or in the Silicon Valley--as shown in that chart above. If you include all 9 counties considered in the Bay Area, no, Alameda County isn't the "low cost" area, but of the counties that are right on the Bay (as opposed to the Delta), Marin, San Mateo, and Santa Clara are more expensive than San Francisco, then Alameda, then Contra Costa.