bobzilla said:
In reply to GameboyRMH :
Poor choices by the people whining.... er "complaining" that they aren't being treated fair. How much is tha latest phone? How about the plan that goes with it? Or leasing a car they couldn't normally afford to purchase and spending $600/mo. Choosing to live in more expensive areas (down town, affluent neighborhoods etc) even though they don' have the income for it. Or just living in Canada alone. You pay more in taxes and duties than most US states (there are the exceptions on the coasts) and income rates are higher. Don't start with the "free healthcare" because anyone with more than 2 brain cells knows you're paying for it (see the higher taxes and duties).
Why do city dwellers always look down their noses on rural life? Is it a complete lack of understanding? Is it that feeling of superiority over "those dumb hicks"? Something else? Pride maybe? OR is it fear that they may have chosen a harder way to do things and maybe, just maybe, you really don't have it all figured out.
Most ( I should say all ) of the world spends a whole lot less on health care than Americans do. By 50% or more. Yet Americans die sooner and aren't as healthy. Not by a little but a lot. Men are dying here on Average , what? 68.8 years old?
Yet look at those who benefit from American health care . The CEO's of insurance companies, drug companies, HMO's. How many are in the upper 5%, 2%, 1%? Why reward guys who raise the price of critical drugs to the point where those who need insulin can't afford it.
I'm not talking about doctors and nurses that are keeping us alive . They should earn a nice living, more than they're making in fact. I'm talking about the guys who pay for the politicians to make rules like no discounting drugs, limiting liability. Shielding those who caused all those addiction deaths.
In reply to GameboyRMH :
Instead of brushing off new information after guessing at a set of potential rationalizations, you can do some research and test your theories.
Did Gen. Y not work as hard as Gen. X? If they did, it's not reflected in their paychecks or education levels or overall productivity:
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/when-i-was-your-age/
Did they buy their first houses later? All indications are they did. Because they didn't feel like it? No, 83% say mostly because of student debt:
https://www.homecity.com/blog/the-average-age-to-buy-a-house/
Is later marriage a factor? Yes, and also spending too much on rent:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/09/these-are-the-reasons-why-millions-of-millennials-cant-buy-houses.html
The problem is that you keep introducing new information without vetting it. The graphs that you referenced earlier could be interpreted in so many different ways that they were pretty much useless. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, as I think you are trying to provide useful info- but the links above are, again, highly biased and suspect. You put yourself into a feedback loop, regularly relying on questionable sources to back up your questionable claims. Your first link said this in it's introduction...
"This issue brief argues that a labor market where the deck is stacked in favor of employers at the expense of employees is a primary cause of this poor median compensation growth. Millennials have spent almost their entire working lives in a labor market that is loose—with too many job seekers and too few jobs—and where private-sector labor unions are almost entirely absent. Certainly, monetary policy that promotes employment while making it easier for workers to form unions would help Millennials make up lost ground."
The author makes no effort to hide their bias. But because you share the sentiment, you don't see the bias and accept it as fact. I could link opinions to back my opinions too and call it "new information," but that doesn't make it so.
Edit- did you even read your other two links? I don't think they say what you think they say. Once you get past the headlines and graphs, they back up what I've been saying. The age of first time homeowners has stayed remarkably steady over the last 40 years, with small peaks and dips following changes to the housing market and economy. They highlight the statistically slight increase in 2022- ignoring the fact that 2022 was probably not a good time to buy a house with a very hot market cooling. One link talks about the people getting married and having children later as one of the greatest impacts pushing the age of the first time buyer older, not house prices.
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
I look around the world and see what our money could buy. America is almost the only country where a new mother doesn't have time to spend with her child. Some countries provide up to 2 years!!!
Really is it that important to shove that baby in some underpaid daycare workers arm and get right back to earning money?
Look at the social costs.
Same with health care. Do any countries pay as much as America? Are we the healthiest country in the world for the premiums we pay? And education. Those great big education factories we call schools really produce better students? Or are they that big so the sports teams have more candidates?
But hey! our taxes are cheap. Cheaper than most industrial countries in the world.
Oh, and we are really good at military equipment.
In reply to frenchyd :
Okay, I'll bite. What does this have to do with this discussion?
Boost_Crazy said:
In reply to frenchyd :
Okay, I'll bite. What does this have to do with this discussion?
the same as every time he chimes in. Absolutely nothing.
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
They say trying to time the stock market is a fools errand.
Just like trying to time the housing market is just as foolish. What are you going to do if the housing market is bad? Sleep in your car? Or throw money away on rent? It's not a stock that is sold when profitable. It's your shelter and yes a long term savings investment of sorts.
But what investment charges a 7% commission to convert it into cash?
Boost_Crazy said:
The problem is that you keep introducing new information without vetting it. The graphs that you referenced earlier could be interpreted in so many different ways that they were pretty much useless. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, as I think you are trying to provide useful info- but the links above are, again, highly biased and suspect. You put yourself into a feedback loop, regularly relying on questionable sources to back up your questionable claims.
Biased opinions don't equal biased data. You're also calling data from pretty reputable sources with good records of factual accuracy highly biased and suspect - on what grounds? What would you consider better data sources, and can you find data from them that conflicts with what I've found?
The data I have found points out that home prices and their need to coexist with student debt is the major factor. I'm curious about how you'd think home prices would not be the major factor when they've grown to roughly double of what they were relative to income for boomers at the same age.
SV reX
MegaDork
2/16/23 6:54 p.m.
In reply to GameboyRMH :
Biased opinions lead to biased interpretation of data, and biased presentation of the data, no matter how accurate the data is.
Multiply that a hundred fold when the biased entity is a media outlet.
You only present information that APPEARS to support your own bias, but you keep getting boxed in because you are misinterpreting the data (or failing to see the other ways it can be interpreted) because you filter it through your biases.
In reply to frenchyd :
You most certainly can time the housing market. In normal circumstances, you buy when you can afford to. But in abnormal circumstances- like right now when the crazy Covid fueled housing market is cooling off, and all signs point to dropping house prices. Which is currently happening. So yes, you most certainly can wait a bit. Prices are expected to drop in my area by 8% this year. On a starter home, $500k in my area- 8% is $40,000. That's a lot of rent money. Sure, interest rates may rise a bit- but long term a home can be refinanced when rates fall again. You don't get to renegotiate your home price though when prices drop. Plus interest rate hikes drive down the cost of homes. That is the whole point of the hikes on the first place- to curb inflation. Other parts of the country that grew quickly during the Covid spike are projected to see up to 20% drops- new housing starts are expected to be completed just as demand drops.
In reply to GameboyRMH :
Biased opinions don't equal biased data. You're also calling data from pretty reputable sources with good records of factual accuracy highly biased and suspect - on what grounds? What would you consider better data sources, and can you find data from them that conflicts with what I've found?
The data I have found points out that home prices and their need to coexist with student debt is the major factor. I'm curious about how you'd think home prices would not be the major factor when they've grown to roughly double of what they were relative to income for boomers at the same age.
The data may be fine. It's the way that it is presented and interpreted that is biased.
I could make a chart that shows 65% of men are wearing blue jeans when they have heart attacks. I could say that is evidence of blue jeans causing heart attacks. While omitting that men wear blue jeans 65% of the time. The data isn't wrong, but my presentation is misleading and the conclusion is wrong.
The whole premise of Millennials having it tougher than previous generations is flawed. That they buy homes later might be a problem or just a symptom. If one spends an extra 4 years in school without earning a marketable degree, lives with their parents longer, delays marriage and parenthood into their 30's- it's reasonable to expect that home ownership would also come later. If one takes longer to accept adult responsibilities, it's reasonable to expect that it would take longer to earn adult perks. Why do student loans need to coexist with housing prices? If I'm selling a house, I don't give a E36 M3 about a buyer's student loans or any other debts. I'm selling the house to whoever is willing and able to pay the most.
As for what Boomers paid for their homes- we don't want those homes any more. It's like everyone who wishes someone would sell a small, cheap, stripper mini truck again. If there were buyers, someone would build it. We want bigger, nicer houses. When Boomers bought their first houses in my town- like many towns across the country- it was a small town of 10,000 people with little amenities. And cheap houses. Now we have over 100,000, lots of jobs, shopping, restaurants, etc.. It costs more to live here now because it is a different place than it was in the '60's. There are still small towns in the middle of nowhere, like this one used to be. Houses are cheaper there.
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
You are right, to a degree. If you have the jobs the houses will be built.
Regarding student debt. Who's fault is it? The parents encouraging college? The colleges taking a broader cross section of students. Really selling degrees ? Not marketable knowledge.
The students who dodge growing up for 4 years on the student loan credit card.
Or the economy for not having good paying careers for those graduating students?
I'm not sure. I think look to who's not taking responsibility for decisions made
Where I live in FL the prices for rentals has skyrocketed to the point where my wife who's a county manager is losing employee's because when their lease is up, they can't afford to rent another place in the area. So they're being forced to move back in with family or to other areas.
Heck we're looking at getting out of here, and moving to the mid west. Better pay. Yes it's a bit higher cost of living, but it's only getting more expensive here, and with the influx of people we're getting the pay rates are staying repressed. Even with the hike to $15.00 a hour minimum wage that's supposed to be in effect in the next year or so, her wages aren't being pushed up. She maxed out her raise potential last year, and the job she's in the running for out west still pays almost 2.5 times what she's making here. Looked at housing in the area, and what do you know, 400k seems to be the starting range for places with a decent yard/garage. 400k in Tampa buys you a stick built home, that was slapped together in 3 weeks with a yard you can reach out and touch both your neighbors place and yours while standing between them. Don't forget about the HOA's that go with those houses.
The house we're in will be paid for in less than 3 years if we pay nothing more than the min mort payments on it. If we move, I probably won't sell it. I love FL, though it's rapidly becoming a place I don't recognize, there's still nowhere I've found that has fishing like the gulf coast, and if/when I get old and want to spend my winters fishing I'll have a place to stay and do so. When I croak my niece can sell it and enjoy whatever she get's out of it.
The town we live in, when we moved here had a 8 month of the year population of about 18k residents. It's now at ~30k in 7 years. The infrastructure can't support the growth, and the other 4 months of the year with the snowbirds are even more of a nightmare with a 80k influx Yes most of those people bring their own RV/Travel trailer or have a place where they've been renting for 4 months of the year for years. When I was working part time for the post office they told us we were averaging 100 new residents a week in our service area.
Mr. Lee said:
Where I live in FL the prices for rentals has skyrocketed to the point where my wife who's a county manager is losing employee's because when their lease is up, they can't afford to rent another place in the area. So they're being forced to move back in with family or to other areas.
Heck we're looking at getting out of here, and moving to the mid west. Better pay. Yes it's a bit higher cost of living, but it's only getting more expensive here, and with the influx of people we're getting the pay rates are staying repressed. Even with the hike to $15.00 a hour minimum wage that's supposed to be in effect in the next year or so, her wages aren't being pushed up. She maxed out her raise potential last year, and the job she's in the running for out west still pays almost 2.5 times what she's making here. Looked at housing in the area, and what do you know, 400k seems to be the starting range for places with a decent yard/garage. 400k in Tampa buys you a stick built home, that was slapped together in 3 weeks with a yard you can reach out and touch both your neighbors place and yours while standing between them. Don't forget about the HOA's that go with those houses.
The house we're in will be paid for in less than 3 years if we pay nothing more than the min mort payments on it. If we move, I probably won't sell it. I love FL, though it's rapidly becoming a place I don't recognize, there's still nowhere I've found that has fishing like the gulf coast, and if/when I get old and want to spend my winters fishing I'll have a place to stay and do so. When I croak my niece can sell it and enjoy whatever she get's out of it.
The town we live in, when we moved here had a 8 month of the year population of about 18k residents. It's now at ~30k in 7 years. The infrastructure can't support the growth, and the other 4 months of the year with the snowbirds are even more of a nightmare with a 80k influx Yes most of those people bring their own RV/Travel trailer or have a place where they've been renting for 4 months of the year for years. When I was working part time for the post office they told us we were averaging 100 new residents a week in our service area.
Growth is good. It brings a lot of good things with it. Minneapolis/ St Paul metro area used to be growing by 30,000 per year. I suspect if I bothered to look it's at least that high. Maybe higher.
That growth raises the value of existing homes. With more people paying taxes, cities can upgrade services. Replace aged fire fighting equipment, repair and modernize sewers. Update and repair roads. Etc.
Plus jobs. Lots and lots of jobs. The more opportunities the better the your chances of a good life.
Some people like the low cost rural areas for for just those reasons. That's their choice. Perhaps daddy is a big fish in a small pond. Or they want to be a big fish in that small pond.
The home they live is may be modest. But affordable on a tiny budget. Etc.
Opti
SuperDork
2/20/23 11:05 a.m.
In reply to frenchyd :
One the macro scale: The government.
The colleges are following the incentive put in front of them. Everyone gets student loans of large amounts means colleges raise prices. They have no incentive to lower rates. Are they doing the "right" thing, many would say no, but you cant blame them for following the incentive put in front of them.
On the micro level: the people taking out the large loans and getting degrees with bad ROIs. If you want to do it, cool, but I dont want to hear you complain about it. The culture and parents may be conditioning people to do this, but at the end of the day, its up to you to make the best decisions for yourself.
Digging this up because I just realized that the 3 bedroom, 2 bath house they just built in my neighborhood is listed for *almost six hundred thousand dollars,* which is astounding to me. Apple moving in apparently has some investors thinking that this part of NC is the next Bay Area.
The last tax value on my house, which is 81 years old and slightly smaller, is maybe half of that, and I have more land. I'm not sad about it being listed so high, because maybe it will take a while for somebody to move in and I won't have to get used to a new neighbor for a bit.
Opti
SuperDork
7/18/23 9:09 a.m.
In reply to Brett_Murphy (Agent of Chaos) :
I have sub 1K sq ft homes, in a smallish town, around me selling for well north of 200K. No garage, decent size lot, nothing interesting about the home, minus the millennial gray "renovation." Less than a decade ago (like 5 years) they were well under 100K, like 60 to 80.
docwyte
PowerDork
7/18/23 9:27 a.m.
There are sub 1k sq ft homes in Denver selling for close to 7 figures. Then getting torn down and new homes costing multiple 7 figures getting built on the lot. Ten years ago that home was maybe $300k
In reply to docwyte :
My first house was bought for $48k. It was 1100 sqft house on a 7200 sqft lot. 25 years later we moved and I kept it as a rental at $1400 a month. Several years later I sold it for $257k, which I thought was an insane price. 4 years after that it sold for $430k. 4 years after that it sold for $530k. The current estimated price is between $760k and $900k.
For this:
That blows my mind. It's a E36 M3ty little house, on a E36 M3ty little lot, in an overpopulated town. It currently rents for $3700 a month. The next time it sells it will get bulldozed and a 3-story tall McMansion will be built. People have lost their damn minds.
Opti
SuperDork
7/18/23 10:04 a.m.
In reply to Toyman! :
One of my current rentals is following the same trajectory, except its accelerated. Paid 68K for 800 sqft and a 700sqft shop in 16, did a full reno myself. Getting a new roof in the next week or two, and Im redoing the siding. Realtor is telling me it could be 250-260K. Just had to fight my tax evaluation and found 2 or 3 in a similar size without any type of covered parking sold for 230-240K. Weird thing is im in a smallish town a decent ways away from the metroplex, so its not like its great for commuters and the town itself doesnt have much draw, Im just here because I like the old homes and hate being in big cities.
A friend is a builder that buys up old homes in the nice areas of the metroplex for the lots, bulldozing the old home and building new ones. I have a hard time believing people will pay for them with the massively inflated land costs (since you are paying for a house and lot, then spend money to demolish the home, then pay to build another house) but they do. I tell him im trying to offset him tearing them down, by saving as many old ones as I can.
In reply to AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) :
Mt Pleasant, SC.
A great little town to grow up in. In the 70s and 80s, the population was right at 15k people. The current population is in excess of 90k of the most snobbish people you will ever meet. It's a terrible place to live if you remember what it was. My kids called it Mt. Misery until we moved.
A new building by me has a cool hipster paint job on the facade and contains Japanese-style micro-apartments (most things fold and have dual functions etc.) that you can buy for somewhere north of $250kCAD. Yes the same town that was the butt of hillbilly jokes from Toronto residents 10-15yrs ago. I learned about this stark example of the heights of housing insanity when my mom pointed it out to me as a possible good investment, so clearly as a realtor she follows the school of thought that constant runaway home price increases are normal and unstoppable and should be a main source of personal wealth generation. Also that she thinks I can tolerate significantly more misery than I'm already in, as owning the place would require me to abandon any hobbies and just work nonstop at a job she knows I hate so I can fork over all my money for the privilege of continuing to do that. That's nothing resembling a decent life, that's episode 8-9 of Andor. I have a cousin who's almost in that situation with a small old house in a more rural area about 30mins from me, but at least it looks like he's going to get his project car back on track soon after just limping it to and from work on a messed-up clutch for almost 4 years now (offered to help him source a cheap replacement kit last year but he wasn't interested). He's a mechanic at a dealership.
Curiously my mom had also just assumed that cars had become like houses during the pandemic, I had to explain to her that prices only went nuts because of pandemic-related supply issues, had already started falling and in the next few years would return to pre-pandemic levels. I think only the absurd prices of new or slightly used cars combined with her fear of old car maintenance kept her from "investing" in ordinary cars in the same way.
Even in my city, my home from just, Google streetview and my owning it has increased in price from $125K to over $170K in two years- they don't know I've replaced all the windows, torn out the interior, repainted, stained, or replaced the doors (so that $170K is based on me still having shag carpet and single panes, lol). We're pretty sure now it's worth north of $210K even in it's "Every wall is Killz2 primer white" state and that's just ludicrous to me.
