Live data from Hacker News

Maybe treating housing as an investment was a mistake

goodreason.substack.com

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: Maybe treating housing as an investment was a mistake

#371
post #58
post #6

> Meanwhile, renters are desperate. They’re begging for housing prices not just to slow, but to fall. I have a friend who is a head chef at a decently popular bar and restaurant on Broadway in Capitol Hill, Seattle (very trendy part of town if you aren't familiar, steep commercial rent). He lives in a 400 sq ft studio and is barely, barely making it from one paycheck to the next. I am sitting on a 2.6% interest rate…

What sucks is a lot of young renters with steady jobs can afford to pay off a mortgage month to month, but they just can't afford that down payment (especially the 20% needed so as to not need to get mortgage insurance)! I was in that position for a while. Every time it seemed like I could afford to put that money down, the housing prices went up! It took a handful of years of renting cheap places (with roommates), l…

> especially the 20% needed so as to not need to get mortgage insurance

PMI affects the affordability but not by much - maybe $300-400/mo or so, and if you can get a conventional loan with a 3-4% down payment (which do exist) then it'll drop off once you've paid off 20% of the principal.

For conventional mortgages, the max DTI most lenders will be fine with is 45%, but let's be safe and go 40%. Let's take a household income of 150k, that's $12,500 a month, so you can have up to $5000 in monthly debts (DTI is based on GROSS income). If you have, say $1000 in monthly debts (eg. minimum student loan payments, minimum CC payments, and cars), you'd likely be approved for up to $4000 in housing expenses, which with 3.5% down and a worst case scenario interest rate of 7.3%, means a maximum home price of about $500,000. But when you factor in PMI, you'd only qualify for $450,000 since PMI is about $358 a month.

That's not all that much of an affordability drop - the difference is that you're basically forced to fall in line with urban sprawl by buying a smaller house further out, maybe even to the point where you're driving 40+ miles to work.

Re: Maybe treating housing as an investment was a mistake

#372
post #6

> Meanwhile, renters are desperate. They’re begging for housing prices not just to slow, but to fall. I have a friend who is a head chef at a decently popular bar and restaurant on Broadway in Capitol Hill, Seattle (very trendy part of town if you aren't familiar, steep commercial rent). He lives in a 400 sq ft studio and is barely, barely making it from one paycheck to the next. I am sitting on a 2.6% interest rate…

I feel similar cognitive dissonance every time I compare myself to people I know outside of tech. Pretty much without exception, they work harder jobs than me or my colleagues with worse hours and for a fraction of the income. I don't think my observation is tied to the housing market, other than it being a vehicle to expedite the wealth gap.

Do you believe your income is unearned? Or are you just virtue signaling about what the labor market values?

Re: Maybe treating housing as an investment was a mistake

#373
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I majored in economics and it still boggles my mind what we make as software engineers versus the guy who unclogged my sewer drain allowing me to use the toilet.

Will GPT-6 replace a plumber? I think not. Will GPT-6 replace some subset 10..80% of engineering, law, medical hours? absolutely

I'm not so sure. There is a Planet Money episode that talks about the effect the digital spreadsheet had on accounting employment:

> Thanks to spreadsheets, there are 400,000 fewer accounting clerks than in 1980, but 600,000 more regular accountants.

Might something like GPT-6 cause employment to shift to higher value job responsibilities?

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/02/25/389027988/epis...

Re: Maybe treating housing as an investment was a mistake

#374
In my metro, the median listing price for a home just peaked. Driven by low supply, high demand - stemming from a variety of factors. I've made competitive offers on many homes, only to be beaten by all cash offers or people putting more cash down for an appraisal gap. I get angry when I think about neighboring properties that sold for 50% less only 3 years ago, financed at 2.5% interest rates - while I must make a decision to pay 50% more and pay 7%. My wage increases during this time do not fill the gap. I feel I must accept a lower standard of living than my neighbor. This is a massive source of inequality that I feel does not get enough attention. I am quietly feeling the stress of despair and fomo in regards to my housing situation. How can a society function like this?

Re: Maybe treating housing as an investment was a mistake

#375
post #116

Easily fixed with a tax system: 1) first home tax-free - the address you submit your yearly taxes on. Incentivize people to own at least one home. 2) second property you pay taxes for both homes now - no more tax free benefit since you are able to afford more than one place. 3) more than 2 properties you pay taxes for all of them times some factor 0.05*N houses. Fudge around with the factor to allow more supply for a…

It already works something like that.

If by "something like that", you mean "at a tax rate so low that it's irrelevant"...

Re: Maybe treating housing as an investment was a mistake

#376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s normal. I bought my first house in the early 1990s. Saving the down payment was tough. I lived in a real shithole apartment, anything nice and the rent ate up too much of my cash flow. And I I had to pay PMI, but the monthly payment was still cheaper than rent.

> I bought my first house in the early 1990s. Saving the down payment was tough. Compare housing prices since 1990 vs. wage growth over the same period. For the overwhelming majority of people entering the workforce today, there is no way to realistically save for a down payment unless you forego saving for anything else - no 401k, no IRA, no emergency fund, no car, no family.

I think a more apt comparison would be monthly mortgage + interest payment divided by price per square ft over time. I suspect it just barely tracks inflation.

Houses have gotten bigger and interest rates have fallen since then.

Re: Maybe treating housing as an investment was a mistake

#377
post #10

> While the rich are more likely to own homes, tons of middle class and poor people also bought homes and planned their lives under the assumption that housing prices would go up. Tanking housing prices would destroy their trust in the system that they bet everything on. This is pretty much the crux of it. High housing prices could be "fixed" almost overnight, but for almost every citizen of the first world, their ho…

How is it exactly a retirement plan if your house goes up 200% over N years, but so do all of your neighbor's homes? You aren't changing your relative position to them.

You sell your house and go back to renting or get a reverse mortgage.

Re: Maybe treating housing as an investment was a mistake

#378
post #58
post #6

> Meanwhile, renters are desperate. They’re begging for housing prices not just to slow, but to fall. I have a friend who is a head chef at a decently popular bar and restaurant on Broadway in Capitol Hill, Seattle (very trendy part of town if you aren't familiar, steep commercial rent). He lives in a 400 sq ft studio and is barely, barely making it from one paycheck to the next. I am sitting on a 2.6% interest rate…

What sucks is a lot of young renters with steady jobs can afford to pay off a mortgage month to month, but they just can't afford that down payment (especially the 20% needed so as to not need to get mortgage insurance)! I was in that position for a while. Every time it seemed like I could afford to put that money down, the housing prices went up! It took a handful of years of renting cheap places (with roommates), l…

The mortage payment isn't less than rent, at least for me. IF I got a "3.5% FHA loan" it'd be.. more. I don't know how to check how much mortage insurance would add at the moment.

I'm glad everyone was able to make it work 15 years ago though!

Re: Maybe treating housing as an investment was a mistake

#379
post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many (most?) retirement plans involve downsizing from the large home in a (sub)urban area where they raised children and worked for most of their life to a lower-cost area in a lower-cost house. If my SFH is worth $1,000,000 and my retirement plan involves selling and moving to a $500,000 condo, that's $500,000 of money in my retirement account. If politicians implemented a policy that slashed housing prices in half,…

On the other hand, we’ve made it so new condos are so hard to get built that a 2 bedroom condo in a walkable neighborhood (which you likely need when you retire) is the same or more expensive than a 4 bedroom suburban home. In order to be able to downsize, you need the smaller unit to be less expensive than your current home, and in many markets right now that’s barely, if at all, the case.

> a walkable neighborhood (which you likely need when you retire)

Really don't agree with this -- retiree doesn't mean "decrepit". You're still very capable of driving. My own parents recently retired to a rural area in the US, in a neighborhood with other retirees, where they're a 5 minute drive from the nearest grocery store and a 30 minute drive from the nearest "city" of ~20k people.

It's very walkable in the sense that there are sidewalks and parks, but not in the sense of living in a downtown core with public transit access to essential services.

Re: Maybe treating housing as an investment was a mistake

#380
post #116

Easily fixed with a tax system: 1) first home tax-free - the address you submit your yearly taxes on. Incentivize people to own at least one home. 2) second property you pay taxes for both homes now - no more tax free benefit since you are able to afford more than one place. 3) more than 2 properties you pay taxes for all of them times some factor 0.05*N houses. Fudge around with the factor to allow more supply for a…

What taxes are you talking about? If you're talking about property taxes then you just created a giant hole in every local government's budget. If you're talking about taxes on profits after you sell then that's basically how it works already.

And no, that would not fall under Georgism.

Post reply on HN