Live data from Hacker News

Adjusted for inflation, a Single Family Home costs 75% more than it did in 1987

marketplace.org

41–49 of 49 posts

Re: Adjusted for inflation, a Single Family Home costs 75% more than it did in 1987

#41

I’m thinking out loud here but: Lets game this out. Let’s say that interest rates go up significantly- say, to 12% or something. Ok, so then naively you would probably expect house prices to fall, because people won’t be able to make payments otherwise. But what if you’re someone who bought a house in the low rates/high price era. Are you going to sell? No, because your mortgage is underwater- you can’t afford to sel…

High interest rates turning into bankruptcy and people selling their land to the rich is as old as time itself.

It’s how the Roman republic became the empire as small farmers were bought out by huge landowners, financed by the spoils of war which went mostly to the 1% at the time. Then family farms became replaced by slave labor. History doesn’t repeat but it often rhymes.

Re: Adjusted for inflation, a Single Family Home costs 75% more than it did in 1987

#42
post #20

I compared prices of houses in Morocco vs America. And for same prices, American homes were WAY better, in all ranges of prices. But I would totally lose an argument if I tried to argue that the same salary goes a longer way in America, everything is cheaper there, except if you average out the quality of life. People are simply accustomed today on a better quality of living, it is not only the square footage, everyt…

Okay but technology improvements' one main thing is to make higher quality of living cheaper.

Re: Adjusted for inflation, a Single Family Home costs 75% more than it did in 1987

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You generally don’t actually have to pay your mortgage - you just lose the house if you don’t (well, and take a hit to your credit score). People can and do walk away from a place when they’re underwater.

This is country-dependent. In New Zealand, you cannot walk away from the mortgage. You might be able to if you declare bankruptcy, perhaps.

The whole point of the mortgage is that it's backed by the property.

Re: Adjusted for inflation, a Single Family Home costs 75% more than it did in 1987

#45
post #43
post #4

As it should be. Avg home size in 1987: 1780 SQ ft Avg home size in 2022: 2540 SQ ft

The same houses have increased by that price. So no. Size isn't what's causing this.

How do you figure? I've avg size of houses are going up, you're paying for extra house.

Re: Adjusted for inflation, a Single Family Home costs 75% more than it did in 1987

#46
post #16

These summary stats mask a huge amount of regional variation. My parents bought their house in a Midwestern suburb in the early 80s for about 100k, or 270K today. The house is worth 300k today, a 9% increase over 40 years. Meanwhile my West Coast home in has increased in value 33% in the 10 years I've owned it accounting for inflation, or 250% since it was built in the late 1990s. My parents house is a small fraction…

My Midwestern suburb home has gone up in value about 33% in the 4 years I've owned it (accounting for inflation, without taking it into consideration it's gone up ~50%), so yeah, very regional.

Even sub-regional. Hip second tier Midwestern cities have probably appreciated considerably more than my parents' aging first ring Midwestern suburb.

Re: Adjusted for inflation, a Single Family Home costs 75% more than it did in 1987

#47
post #28
post #15

I bought my home in the middle of nowhere in New England four years ago for $220k. I could sell it tomorrow for $400k. If I wanted to test my luck, I'd be able to sell it in 2-3 months for $450/500k. The median _family_ income for my area is $52k/year (2007-2011). Things are fucked for the average person. I keep coming back to the Player Piano[0]. It really is the "Reeks and Wrecks" vs. the Doctors. [0] ( https://en.…

You could sell your house for twice as much but you will have to pay twice as much to buy a new one.

I'm living this now, and it's more than twice as much to build a new house.

Re: Adjusted for inflation, a Single Family Home costs 75% more than it did in 1987

#48
I'd be curious to know what the current average q ratio is for the median size home, both in terms of BOM and labor.

I've talked to hundreds of contractors personally, so I have some skin in the game. I frequently get quotes that are orders of magnitude apart, so I have a great suspicion that there's just tremendous slack in the housing market.

Re: Adjusted for inflation, a Single Family Home costs 75% more than it did in 1987

#49
post #3

What has the square footage and amenities for single family homes done over the same time frame? You aren't comparing apples to apples... https://www.propertyshark.com/Real-Estate-Reports/2016/09/08... Not to mention the average household size (number of people) has been dropping...so the square foot per household member is up drastically...

Not an expert, but I did read the article. The point of the "Case-Shiller" metric is that it is computed on the basis of the same exact property changing hands in different time periods. That way it controls for trends in the product pool. Or as the article put it: Case-Shiller requires two transactions for the same house,” Lazzara said... It controls for the variability in the quality and size of the homes sold from…

Does it account for improvements in electrical, air con, comms?

Regardless, we don’t need a fancy index to observe how fucked the market is.

Post reply on HN