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

The carpetbagger’s guide to home ownership

granolashotgun.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 235 posts

Re: The carpetbagger’s guide to home ownership

#141

Post by 8organicbits »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #126
bosie wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Increasing housing increases demand on alot of other resources (medical, kindergarten, streets, public transport, schools,...). how do you orchestrate such a rise in demand in a densely populated city like san francisco quickly (dense in the sense of non-used land, not by population)?

I live in SF. The resources you mention are not currently a limiting factor. Medical: is provided by private companies like Kaiser, who have proven their ability to grow as their customer base grows. Kindergarten: the school district has excess capacity, as # students has shrunk from 70k+ to fewer than 50k. They will probably need to close some schools to increase utilization. Streets: the streets in San Francisco ar…

How much of those stats are pandemic related? (i.e. were true in 2019).

I'm ex-bay area since 2016, but I recall standing room only BART and shoulder-to-shoulder CALTRAIN can't add another body when heading to south bay. Although I didn't take SF bus, or send kids to Kindergarten.

Re: The carpetbagger’s guide to home ownership

#142

Post by astura »

josephcsible wrote: post #27
endisneigh wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see it any differently than having a roommate, which is something a lot of people who have good salaries have anyway.

What do you mean exactly by "a lot"? I don't think having roommates is very common for people who can afford not to.

Roommates are extremely common among young people, even when they aren't strictly financially necessary. Pretty much everyone I know has lived with a roommate at one time.

They are uncommon after around age 30 unless financially necessary.

If you're older than 30 or married you probably won't be interested in a roommate simply to save money unless you already know the person well or you have a mother in-law apartment set-up.

Re: The carpetbagger’s guide to home ownership

#143

Post by bosie »

walkhour wrote: post #131
bosie wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Increasing housing increases demand on alot of other resources (medical, kindergarten, streets, public transport, schools,...). how do you orchestrate such a rise in demand in a densely populated city like san francisco quickly (dense in the sense of non-used land, not by population)?

> kindergartens, schools and medical offices. Where exactly do you think schooling and medical practices happen or children are taken care of? >Public transport How hard is to coordinate to double the number of trains or buses? > Streets I don't know what you mean by the demand of streets increases. Most times solving the housing problem is a lack of will or coordination, and the solution is muddled/deleted/delayed i…

> Where exactly do you think schooling and medical practices happen or children are taken care of?

in close vicinity of the housing. not sure i understand the question.

> How hard is to coordinate to double the number of trains or buses?

running a bus during peak hours at twice your current rate (unless the rate is completely ridicilous) does not sound easy. why do you assume it is? at that rate, for SF at least, you are talking subway.

by streets i meant the higher volume during peak hours that need to be sustained (walking, cycling, driving, busses, trams, parking etc).

Re: The carpetbagger’s guide to home ownership

#144

Post by tomohawk »

> It was also sub rosa and illegal like most truly affordable housing in San Francisco

> There would be no drama with rent controlled tenants

> The landlord did the math and agreed to sell to us at below the full market value. He would be saving so much money by avoiding the associated legal challenges from disgruntled tenants that he would net the same profit even at a slightly lower price.

It's clear from these statements that the good intentions of the politicos in SF are artificially inflating the cost of housing. The only way forward for this person was to work around those issues.

Yes, it was lucky that all of those tenants were going to move out at the same time the landlord was thinking of selling, but this person was ready to take advantage of the opportunity when it presented itself. Taking advantage meant a lot of work and coordination.

This pattern repeats with buying in Sonoma. They had prepared themselves to be ready for an opportunity, and when the opportunity arose, they could take advantage.

Re: The carpetbagger’s guide to home ownership

#145

Post by bradlys »

nemo44x wrote: post #129
VRay wrote: post #84

People are fighting the wrong fight when they attack this guy (or attack the people attacking this guy, for that matter) It isn't SF Bay Bros'/foreigners'/companies' fault that houses are too expensive. It's because of strict zoning laws and a lack of building enough housing to match supply with demand[1]. Demand keeps going up way faster than supply, nationwide, and we're all feeling the squeeze [1]: A great example…

I think some people find it frustrating to see that the system does in fact work; that the narrative they’ve chosen to believe is just cynical and wrong. That a person on a house cleaners income can find a way to own property in SF as well as around the country. And be good about it by finding properties that need some love and investing in them. I thought it was a great story about a person that saw the vast opportu…

lol - did you not look at the prices they were dealing with? They bought an apartment building with friends and their share of the mortgage was only $900/month - half of which was shared with their partner. $900/month is a joke - even for back then. They bought land with cash that was even remotely near SF as well - unfathomable now.

This person bought before prices in SF were so above and beyond what anyone near that level of income could ever afford.

This is just survivorship bias mixed with a bit of “I did it during a time when prices were nowhere near what they are now”.

Story sucks because it’s not a story of grit and smarts. It’s a story of unrepeatability.

Re: The carpetbagger’s guide to home ownership

#146

Post by bradlys »

xyzzyz wrote: post #35
alphabettsy wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of the needs seem like wants and then it just depends on how much you these things are worth to you.

> Many of the needs seem like wants This is true of initial 800 sq ft as well.

True of anything beyond simplistic shelter that barely keeps you alive.

Everything is a want when you want it to be. Is even living really a need? After all - you can just die and then you don’t definitely don’t need/want anything then for sure!

Re: The carpetbagger’s guide to home ownership

#147

Post by kareemm »

phnofive wrote: post #71

> A property that has four or fewer apartments is treated the same as a single family home for lending purposes. But five or more units requires a commercial loan. So we created a pro forma and told the bank we were investors looking to be slumlords and this building would cash flow. This is not a difference of perspective - home loans involve significantly more consumer protections than commercial ones; had things g…

What issues would they have had other than not paying $900/m that would have caused the bank to foreclose? Even a decade ago $900/m wasn’t a lot of money for rent in a major urban metro.

Re: The carpetbagger’s guide to home ownership

#148

Post by bradlys »

nine_k wrote: post #67
endisneigh wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In NYC, Bay Area, Boston, LA and Hong Kong I know people making top 15% income and have roommates. They don't necessarily need to, though.

Having a roommate has two purposes, I suppose. One is freeing up $1-2k of disposable income that you can afford to spend on living in the most desirable place, but maybe would rather not. Another is to feel less alone. Also, having somebody in the apartment when you're away, who could take care of a delivery or a pet may be important.

The people I know who have roommates do it because they’re cheap and they don’t like being alone. This includes people making $400k+/yr. Even people in 7-figure territory.

They’re pennywise pound foolish types usually tho.

Re: The carpetbagger’s guide to home ownership

#149

Post by bradlys »

kareemm wrote: post #147
phnofive wrote: post #71

> A property that has four or fewer apartments is treated the same as a single family home for lending purposes. But five or more units requires a commercial loan. So we created a pro forma and told the bank we were investors looking to be slumlords and this building would cash flow. This is not a difference of perspective - home loans involve significantly more consumer protections than commercial ones; had things g…

What issues would they have had other than not paying $900/m that would have caused the bank to foreclose? Even a decade ago $900/m wasn’t a lot of money for rent in a major urban metro.

Split between two people as well. Only $450/month. It was really not very much money at all.

Their partner apparently isn’t a house cleaner and supposedly makes a decent living.

Re: The carpetbagger’s guide to home ownership

#150

Post by bosie »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #126
bosie wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Increasing housing increases demand on alot of other resources (medical, kindergarten, streets, public transport, schools,...). how do you orchestrate such a rise in demand in a densely populated city like san francisco quickly (dense in the sense of non-used land, not by population)?

I live in SF. The resources you mention are not currently a limiting factor. Medical: is provided by private companies like Kaiser, who have proven their ability to grow as their customer base grows. Kindergarten: the school district has excess capacity, as # students has shrunk from 70k+ to fewer than 50k. They will probably need to close some schools to increase utilization. Streets: the streets in San Francisco ar…

I can't comment on Kaiser or SF, not familiar with either. But great if Kaiser can just create GPs and consultants localised in newly built areas like that. well done them. To be honest, I forgot the private aspect of health care in the US. I wonder how city planners are planning around that.

> Public transport: the last few times I've taken the bus, it's been easy to find a seat. The last time I took the BART it was nearly empty.

if that is the case, SF has either the most amazing public transportation already or the most under-used public transportation. or you are simply cheery-picking.

school, kindergarten and medical need to be in close vicinity though. the overall capacity is meaningless for the first two if you build housing for an additional 15k within a few blocks and then have no GPs (and to a lesser extend consultants) within a few minutes of walking or no hospital within a quick driving distance. and if that 70k to 50k (i assume it is not covid related) is uniformly across all kindergartens, it is pretty meaningless for housing

Post reply on HN