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

If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 1001 posts

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#561

Post by michaelmrose »

Telemakhos wrote: post #544
maxsilver wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everybody opposed the rezoning and fought to defeat it. Why? That's kind of an important point. For example, unless this is NYC or similar, 49 townhomes is going to need a minimum of at least 110 parking spots (just to hold the occupants alone, assuming no one ever has guests ever). A realistic parking minimum should be 2.5 spots per townhouse. A lot of builders outsource their pollution to the local neighborhood,…

The developer wants to build the densest housing in four counties with little parking, and nobody has asked the real question: is this planned as Section 8/affordable housing? It sounds like it. Section 8 is guaranteed income for the landlord and probably a headache for the neighbors, especially if they had no poverty in the area before. A very similar situation happened in my rural village, where a developer decided…

Where do you expect poor people to live exactly?

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#562

Post by [deleted] »

oh_sigh wrote: post #346
_greim_ wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently went down the Geoist/LVT rabbit-hole myself. It strikes me as uniquely appealing across the political spectrum, since it reduces tax on wealth-creation AND redistributes wealth from the rich to the poor. Sadly, this very fact provokes enough superficial resistance to keep it out of the Overton window. Whenever it comes up, shouters on either side have plenty of ammo to blast it, saying things to the effect…

It's never appealing to make a long time member of a community leave because they can no longer afford the land they've owned for years, because other people say "I want that" I move to a cheap, small town. I embed myself in the community and help build it up over decades. And then, at the peak popularity, in part due to my presence, I am forced out, because someone who has never been here says that they would like t…

[deleted]

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#563

Post by AQuantized »

symlinkk wrote: post #550
spoonjim wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After I spent my entire net worth plus a good chunk of my future net worth on this house you can be damn right I’m going to vote to protect its value.

“Screw you, I got mine!” The capitalistic attitude in a nutshell.

More like "I got screwed and I'd rather other people get screwed than get screwed further." Obviously not selfless, but I don't think the housing market is their fault.

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#565

Post by dragonwriter »

michaelmrose wrote: post #561
Telemakhos wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The developer wants to build the densest housing in four counties with little parking, and nobody has asked the real question: is this planned as Section 8/affordable housing? It sounds like it. Section 8 is guaranteed income for the landlord and probably a headache for the neighbors, especially if they had no poverty in the area before. A very similar situation happened in my rural village, where a developer decided…

Where do you expect poor people to live exactly?

The standard answer has a convenient acronym: NIMBY.

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#566

Post by potta_coffee »

jonfw wrote: post #484
plank_time wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of my neighbors are seniors who are on social security. Their houses were bought for about $160k in the 1970s. Which is expensive back then. Now they are worth $2M but they have no intention to move. Where would they live? And how can they afford the $30k/yr property tax? What stops people from selling their homes isn’t prop 13, it’s the ridiculous rise in house prices in the last 15 years. It creates no mobilit…

Where would they live? With a budget of 2 million dollars- they could own an extravagant home practically anywhere in the US while pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars. I have no idea why people who are living off of social security should be in the most desirable housing in the entire country

Why should they be forced to sell a house that they earned and paid for?

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#567

Post by michaelmrose »

maxsilver wrote: post #553
crooked-v wrote: post #524

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ok, that means it would likely carry the highest prices per square foot in 4 counties, which means it would immediately make that neighborhood the most expensive neighborhood in 4 counties. Could that be a reason it was opposed? Artificially constraining expensive housing isn't a good thing. If the demand is there in the first place, doing so just means that the people who are interested will insteaad buy or rent e…

> Artificially constraining expensive housing isn't a good thing Again, this isn't California. This is the Midwest. We have gentrification problems even in cities that are still losing population . And we've never constrained housing, for our cities that are slowly growing, many have built more new units than residents for years now. Most cities have no meaningful housing shortage here, but every city currently has a…

I'll do you one better maybe people that don't intend to live in them at least half the time shouldn't be able to buy a second home.

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#568

Post by jiux »

CapmCrackaWaka wrote: post #551
spoonjim wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After I spent my entire net worth plus a good chunk of my future net worth on this house you can be damn right I’m going to vote to protect its value.

Hmmm this just seems like a bad decision on your part. I bought my house in 2018 and it was expensive, yes, but definitely manageable on my salary. I definitely would not buy a house right now, especially if it required spending 'my entire net worth plus a good chunk of my future net worth'.

What key metrics do you observe when it boils down to determining whether or not you feel it is a good or bad time to buy?

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#569

Post by spoonjim »

CapmCrackaWaka wrote: post #551
spoonjim wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After I spent my entire net worth plus a good chunk of my future net worth on this house you can be damn right I’m going to vote to protect its value.

Hmmm this just seems like a bad decision on your part. I bought my house in 2018 and it was expensive, yes, but definitely manageable on my salary. I definitely would not buy a house right now, especially if it required spending 'my entire net worth plus a good chunk of my future net worth'.

Almost everyone spends more than their present net worth on their house. It’s great for you that you didn’t have to but I’m not in the minority.

Re: If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund

#570

Post by dragonwriter »

KingMachiavelli wrote: post #225
etempleton wrote: post #200

In my neighborhood the bank owns a house and has owned it since it was foreclosed upon about three years ago. The house is completely falling apart. It is unlivable. The house is tarpped. Apparently also filled with mold. The yard has rotting wood and weeds that are taller than my head. And no one will do anything about it. The city will fine the bank $100 for each infraction and that is it. The bank could care less.…

Very strange. Typically banks try to sell foreclosures ASAP to the extent that most go the 'short sale' route where they just force a sale. Given it has been only 3 years and it's already inhabitable; something probably went very wrong preventing it from being sold. It's possible the previous tenants just destroyed it... it's really surprising how bad some people treat their home.

> Typically banks try to sell foreclosures ASAP to the extent that most go the 'short sale' route where they just force a sale.

Short sale (which is generally not forced, but is usually win-win for the borrower and bank, so often ultimately approved after the bank convinces themselves that denying it won't let them extract more from the borrower) is typically favored for many reasons including the fact that (while there may technically be liability) borrowers who are foreclosed upon have very little incentive not to damage thr property to the extent that it enables them to extract even miniscule additional value, so things like stripping resellable (even at small fractions of the value they provide in the house) materials like pipes, wiring, and notionally-permanently-installed fixtures is extremely common.

Post reply on HN