Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Rise of Renting in the U.S

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 380 posts

Re: The Rise of Renting in the U.S

#271

Post by javanix »

kazinator wrote: post #193
javanix wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, in some areas, but it really depends on the market - the property taxes on my home in a University city of 200,000 are 1/3 of what I was paying in rent - with the interest on my mortgage the amount of "lost" money comes out to roughly the same amount for now. As long as property taxes do not outstrip my interest rate, that ratio should stay in my favor going forward.

My yearly property tax is barely a bit more than half of what people pay for one month's rent for a similar place. Tax being 1/3rd of rent indicates rather low rents or rather high tax.

Absurdly high taxes (my parents pay half my tax on a non-rural property twice as big about 120 miles north of me), but still, owning a home is hardly a fiscally ruinous proposition around here.

My property taxes this year were ~$4200 on an average sized lot and home, or roughly $350/month.

My last apartment cost $1050/month for a small two bedroom condo rental.

Re: The Rise of Renting in the U.S

#272

Post by lostcolony »

marincounty wrote: post #246
lowglow wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I park it wherever, but mostly try to stick to cities where it's legal to sleep in your van. While I have parked in San Francisco, Redwood City, and San Jose, right now I'm crashing in and around Palo Alto, CA. I shower every morning at my local 24 hour super sport gym. I'm a sucker for hygiene. I don't really worry about my van being broken into because I think I tend to stay in low crime neighborhoods. I'm also not…

I think you should write a book, but don't go through the vanity press ripoff. Publish it yourself. I have known people who live out of a van/truck camper until cops realize what's going on. They will harass you to no end. The tickets are expensive. The days of " Just move on." are over. That said, in most counties, there is nowhere to park a vechicle overnight. We need to desiginate areas, in commercial areas, where…

I'm surprised. I'd think with a van or camper or similar you can just park in any 24 hour walmart (or similar) parking lot.

Re: The Rise of Renting in the U.S

#273

Post by alistproducer2 »

themagician wrote: post #41
chishaku wrote: post #13

Why are mortgage debtors referred to as home owners? Edit: I was being a bit facetious. With liar loans, no down payment mortgages, deferred interest, "prices only go up," etc, it's been too easy to sell home "ownership" to people without their requisite understanding of the risks involved and the constantly changing market realities. I'm all for personal responsibility but the use of language is powerful.

Because in the US we like to sell people on the idea of "ownership", when the reality is that the bank retains all the real value. Only a fraction of so-called "homeowners" actually own more than 50% of their home. Most homeowners just rent from the bank. Many will rent from the bank for life. The way homeownership is sold in the US is nothing more than a way to get people to give up hundreds of thousands of dollars…

Here's a thread you may be interested in. I made a similar point and a pretty good discussion ensued.

Re: The Rise of Renting in the U.S

#274

Post by rsync »

kazinator wrote: post #192
awakeasleep wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Property taxes should basically kill the dream of "and don't pay a fucking thing to anyone" for anyone that lives in the US. Especially city dwellers. I was surprised to see tax for properties I could technically afford cost more per year than I had been paying in rent.

Running water, sewage and garbage collection/recycling are nice, though. The birds have to fly somewhere else just to get a drink of dirty water.

(speaking of the US here)

Property taxes have nothing to do with water/sewage/garbage/electricity.

You pay separate bills to separate providers for all of those things in a simple, fee for service arrangement.

Conversely, if you live on a property that does not, or cannot receive water/sewage/trash/etc. from a provider, you still pay full property taxes.

Re: The Rise of Renting in the U.S

#275

Post by gozur88 »

gnaritas wrote: post #263
gozur88 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how it works most places, but when I bought my first house my payment was almost double what I was paying to rent the apartment I vacated.

Houses tend to cost more than apartments, you upgraded, of course it cost more. It's generally cheaper to buy a place than to rent the same place; your rent is paying the landlords mortgage on that property + a little extra for him and buffer for time between tenants. People don't rent out places for less than it cost them unless they're desperate.

Yes, of course. I moved from a single bedroom unit in a building with dozens of apartments to a house with three bedrooms and two bathrooms, a yard, an attic, better appliances, better carpet, and a much better kitchen.

That's sort of normal, I think. You get a better standard of living for that extra money.

My point was, originally, that if you're in an apartment you'll most likely be able to save for a downpayment on the sort of house on which you'll be able to afford the monthly payment. If you can't, either you're not the kind of person who saves money or there's something wrong with your math.

Re: The Rise of Renting in the U.S

#276

Post by paulddraper »

ap3 wrote: post #160
awakeasleep wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Property taxes should basically kill the dream of "and don't pay a fucking thing to anyone" for anyone that lives in the US. Especially city dwellers. I was surprised to see tax for properties I could technically afford cost more per year than I had been paying in rent.

Yes. Because renters don't pay property taxes /s

Though they do usually pay less since they usually live in less property.

Re: The Rise of Renting in the U.S

#277

Post by lkrubner »

The ratio of median wage to median rent peaked in 1958 at 22% (or rather, 4.54). That was also the peak of the Baby Boom. Which makes sense, really, because the ratio of wage to rent is one of the fundamental determinants of male sexuality, especially back then, when it was less common for women to work. It was much easier for an 18 year old to afford their own apartment and start their own family.

People often point out that the median male wage in the USA has been declining since 1973, but what is rarely pointed out is that for men under the age of 25, its been falling since 1958. The loss of high paying low skill jobs means the only high paying jobs are high skill jobs. That has forced two adjustments on us: one, people start their adult lives later than they used to, and two, some people never get there, as they never acquire the skills to get there.

Re: The Rise of Renting in the U.S

#278

Post by yardie »

kmonsen wrote: post #130
meddlepal wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait and see on Bernie. NH democrats might as well be from Vermont and I don't think there is any doubt Bernie will eat VT's primary when it comes up.

He will probably not win, but he is doing much better than anyone expected. Same with Trump (except he has an outside chance at winning this year).

They said the same of a certain junior senator from Illinois. Why do people think Sanders can't win when all evidence points to the contrary.

Sanders is sticking to the core liberals. That solid 25-35% that will actually vote. Hillary is trying to pursue centre, swing voters and losing the liberal core. Trump is doing the same on the right.

Hillary and Jeb assumed they had the left and right core voters, respectively, locked up and both have been proven completely wrong.

Re: The Rise of Renting in the U.S

#279

Post by prawn »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #95
seivan wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it work with having a companion. It might be easier to find someone with the same outlook. But if you're already in a relationship it's going to be an uphill battle.

I might be able to answer that. My wife and I are early 30s. I spent my 20s in the rat race, working 60-80 hour weeks for material possesions (nice vehicle, luxury townhouse, etc). At some point, I got tired of it and said, "Can we try something different?" I switched to a fully remote job. We disposed of the townhouse (no equity in it). We downsized our lives (1 car! I ride a bicycle everywhere! You would not imagin…

What does your wife do?

If one of the two of you is freelancing and has a variable income, getting the one with a reliable income to quit is risky.

Re: The Rise of Renting in the U.S

#280

Post by danans »

honksillet wrote: post #240
lowglow wrote: post #64

I've sorta turned my back on the standard american dream. Racing to new areas of growth, working to build someone else's dream, getting paid well immediately for performance, paying high rent, etc to afford the image of success, and making friends that participate in this same high ambition culture. Instead of making markets, markets start making you. All the rules, and "norms" we've collected around ourselves to par…

If that is what makes you happy, then more power to you. The real question is was the American dream really open to you? Was this life choice made easier because what was the american dream has been so diluted as to make it unpalatable? Is the current craze in tiny homes because people really like tiny home or because it is the only realistic option for a lot of the enthusiasts. For some people the former is true. Ot…

No doubt some of it is just making the best of an economic reality.

But short of living in a true "tiny home" (It probably helps that having a huge house is weakening (though clearly not gone) as a symbol of social status, especially in crowded coastal urban areas.

Post reply on HN