A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses • Hacker News Board

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#171

Post by pnutjam » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 5:28 PM UTC

fatnoah wrote: post #91

alistairSH wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right there with you. We sold our 1800sqft single-family for a 1500sqft townhome shortly after the kid flew the nest. And we still have two bedrooms that are seldom used (one is a guest room, used 3-4x/year, the other is an office used never, except by the dog).

My wife and I have a 2k square foot, 3 bedroom house, along with a kid (11 years) and a dog. (We recently moved there from the city) We're trying to figure out what we're going to do with all that space when kiddo is gone. Even though that's a way off, the likely plan is to downsize to a 2 bed in the city.

By all means, downsize. Every older person I see who doesn't, ends up living in a borderline hoarder situation.

It's easier for some people to blame others and hold on to nostalgic knick-knacks, then maintain good relationships.

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#172

Post by baron_harkonnen » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 5:28 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #93

One of the trends that I can only hope continues is getting rid of this idea that home ownership (especially single family home ownership) is the American dream. I live in and own a detached single family home (was a compromise with my spouse) and to be honest, I hate it. I hate having to take care of the yard, to deal with unreliable tradespeople when things break, to deal with the huge expense of minor home repairs…

I've gone the full cycle from renting -> own -> renting, and I can tell you that you're forgetting about a lot of the limitations that come with renting. There are a huge number of things that are out of your control and hobbies you simply can't have. Especially if you want to compare apartment to SFH. You can't paint the walls, keep a bicycle outside, grow plants you want, have any loud hobbies, BBQ, even keep your muddy boots outside your door!

Also the quality of repairs completely depends on your land lord. I've had some great ones, but on average I much prefer having the ability to repair what I want when I want.

You can do a ton of home improvements yourself and save a ton of money, or work to build relationships with reliable trades people (they exist) and pay someone else to take care of all of that. If you rent your entirely at the mercy of your land lord.

The trend should not be to "give up on the dream of home ownership" but make it easier and more reasonable for most people to achieve.

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#173

Post by nostrademons » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 5:29 PM UTC

LarryDarrell wrote: post #118

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #93

One of the trends that I can only hope continues is getting rid of this idea that home ownership (especially single family home ownership) is the American dream. I live in and own a detached single family home (was a compromise with my spouse) and to be honest, I hate it. I hate having to take care of the yard, to deal with unreliable tradespeople when things break, to deal with the huge expense of minor home repairs…

When I call the super they drag their feet, do a half-assed job, take a dump in my bathroom, and then I get a rent increase for "improvements" they've made to the property. I used to own a 1000 sq ft cape cod that was built in 1942. I fixed everything myself and since it was small, nothing could really get out of hand. I believe most of the pain involved in home owning lately has come from bigger houses with more com…

Ditto, but that's the experience when calling most tradespeople. In many cases what looks like the super dragging their feet is actually the super calling their a series of tradespeople and having them all flake out. One window repair at my apartment took over a year to complete and I had 4 different contractors all come to the apartment, forget a part, say that they'd be back in a week, and never show up again.

The way to do it is really to find a small set of good, reliable tradespeople, give them your business for all your repairs and improvements, and pay them well. There aren't many of them, though, and they'll cost you. Finding that small set of reliable contractors is part of what your rent goes to.

My dad used to do a lot of the home maintenance himself. Sometimes it worked fine, and sometimes (like the time he tried to replace the roof himself right before a thunderstorm, without having a giant tarp) it was pretty disastrous. In any case, it's not really realistic in today's world (where you usually need two incomes to survive) with today's homes (which are giant, complex, and built to a labyrinth of building codes that you are probably violating when you do improvements yourself).

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#174

Post by showerst » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 5:36 PM UTC

dfischer wrote: post #166

showerst wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue that it matters _more_ in that case, because the returns to clustering will be higher, and the non-work features (access to outdoors, climate) will matter more. I think in a world where you don't worry about jobs, and worry less about living expenses, Boulder and San Diego and Manhattan get _more_ desirable.

Why would they be more desirable?

(I hope i'm reading your hypothetical right) in a world where I don't have to venture out to go to work, and don't have to live in a set place to chase an industry, I'd put more value on being in a nice climate, close to fun things to do, and near other people that have 'interesting' established communities (walkable culture, food, know your neighbors, all the standard millennial trend stuff).

I'm assuming a situation where I have more leisure time and less income scarcity here.

There are some people who take the "given no constraints I'd move to flyover country" but even then many of them are doing that because it's cheap, not because it's the absolute most desirable right?

Strictly speaking you _could_ just plop a new city down from scratch in Nebraska, but why would i live there when i could live somewhere where I go to the beach or the mountains every weekend, and walk to a hopping established strip of restaurants and coffee shops in 10 minutes?

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#175

Post by scarface74 » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 5:38 PM UTC

theandrewbailey wrote: post #168

scarface74 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those two complaints are easy to fix. Get a yard service - I pay $150 a month for them to come twice a month. Get a home warranty - it’s about $600 a year and they fix everything - appliances, hot water heaters, plumbing, etc. I haven’t purchased one for current home because it’s a new build, but I did for furnished rental property I previously owned. In the grand scheme of things for an owner occupied home it’s prob…

That must be a huge yard, or is there some landscaping involved?

Not a huge yard by any means.

Heck, now that I’m looking, it is overpriced.....

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#176

Post by Animats » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 5:38 PM UTC

LarryDarrell wrote: post #108

maxsilver wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also hate maintaining a detached single family home with a yard. I also hate being responsible for the fixes. But that situation is still far better than renting. When we rented, we were subjected to eviction at any time, for nearly any reason, for basically no notice (60 days, which in the US is effectively zero notice). Your subjected to every whim the crazy wildly-irrational housing market throws at you (we've h…

The thing I've noticed is that in my area all the modest neighborhoods (2 bed, 1 bath, sub $200k) are being bought up by landlords. This leads to a neighborhood of renters, which is a lot different than a neighborhood of owners. The Havers can buy a lot more houses than the Have-Nots and I'm left wondering what the price of single family homes would be if renting them was illegal and they were all placed on the marke…

Yes. That's a "private equity" thing.[1] Blackrock can borrow at lower rates than homeowners. So they can buy up houses and rent them out at a profit. Plus they can keep raising the rent. And they outsource maintenance.

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/02/singl...

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#177

Post by nostrademons » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 5:39 PM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #121

radar wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not an investment if you live in the property.

Yes and no. I don’t consider a home an investment in the traditional sense. I do consider a paid off house to be worth the amount of money that I would have to save to have a safe rate of return to live somewhere minus maintenance and property taxes. If a paid off house will save me $12000 a year. The value of that house to me is $12000/.04 Also, a house is a great inflation hedge. Rent goes up with the market. The m…

> Also, a house is a great inflation hedge. Rent goes up with the market. The mortgage stays the same. Property taxes and insurance can go up.

It's actually even better than that: if inflation goes up, you pay back the mortgage with cheaper dollars than you bought it with. If you're expecting higher inflation in the future (and it hasn't yet been priced into interest rates) a house is a great purchase.

The flip side is that if you get deflation (say, an economic recession hits and a lot of people in your area lose theirs jobs, possibly including you), a house is a leveraged asset, and you can quickly lose everything. As many homeowners found out in 2009.

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#178

Post by pnutjam » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 5:39 PM UTC

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #102

low_poly_shiba wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

hmmm you elsewhere, on a topic about the harrowing conditions of FB moderators, claim that "there's a lot of variance between individuals ... I'm not the kind of person that's particularly bothered by graphic violence. My opinion of humanity is dark enough to accommodate it" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20223267 maybe what you consider an ideal world or even positive outcomes or even onerous regulations are n…

>maybe what you consider an ideal world or even positive outcomes or even onerous regulations are not what others have in mind, what with your "dark views of humanity" and all? Many people (dare I say the overwhelming majority) on HN agrees that real estate needs a heck of a lot less regulation so supply can do better meeting demand and costs can drop. We may argue about the minutia but pretty much everyone on HN als…

Interestingly, I've come to the opposite conclusion. More regulation is the only answer to many of these problems.

It would help if there wasn't a party trying to self-destruct our country every time they get power.

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#179

Post by treis » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 5:39 PM UTC

LarryDarrell wrote: post #108

maxsilver wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also hate maintaining a detached single family home with a yard. I also hate being responsible for the fixes. But that situation is still far better than renting. When we rented, we were subjected to eviction at any time, for nearly any reason, for basically no notice (60 days, which in the US is effectively zero notice). Your subjected to every whim the crazy wildly-irrational housing market throws at you (we've h…

The thing I've noticed is that in my area all the modest neighborhoods (2 bed, 1 bath, sub $200k) are being bought up by landlords. This leads to a neighborhood of renters, which is a lot different than a neighborhood of owners. The Havers can buy a lot more houses than the Have-Nots and I'm left wondering what the price of single family homes would be if renting them was illegal and they were all placed on the marke…

It's another example of the high cost of being poor. The rent on my town home is several thousand more per year than what a mortgage (5% down), taxes, HOA fee, PMI, and home insurance would be.

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#180

Post by munificent » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 5:40 PM UTC

pbuzbee wrote: post #97

This article claims that these homes are going because buyer preferences have shifted towards smaller homes in walkable areas. I don't disagree with this, but I'm surprised the article didn't factor in the cost of these homes. These homes are priced in the millions and are generally not in areas known for high salaries. Coming up with that much money is out of reach for most members of younger generations. Some peopl…

I hate to sound so cynical and negative, but, God, this article is really just a case study in how stupid, materialistic, and short-sighted many Boomers are.

That generation was raised on the idea that happiness comes from owning as many things as possible. They've had decades to learn — like the generations after them did — that this is nonsense and that happiness comes from connection to family, friends, and community.

But, instead, some segment of them still build giant empty monoliths to consumerism out in the middle of nowhere and then get surprised when they discover that they are still old and approaching death and that they still don't feel good.