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

The average age of U.S. homebuyers jumps to 56

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 127 posts

Re: The average age of U.S. homebuyers jumps to 56

#101

Post by valval »

whatever1 wrote: post #42
phyzix5761 wrote: post #35

I do financial coaching as a side business and I can tell you the main two reason why most people in their 30s can't afford a home is because they have no idea how to budget and they carry too much debt spent on things they don't need. On average people spend about 30% of their income paying off non mortgage debts like credit cards, car loans, and student loans. I teach my clients how to budget, cut back on unnecessa…

You don’t have clients who are barristers/teachers/cooks etc in SF or NY. It is literally impossible to own even if you save 200% of your income.

Who do you think should be renting if not them? Students? Unemployed people?

Re: The average age of U.S. homebuyers jumps to 56

#102

Post by ryandrake »

phyzix5761 wrote: post #59
twelve40 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow that's a cool side business. > spent on things they don't need Do you actually find people who pay you to teach them to stop buying crap? Like, when I get a Doordash I already know it's a waste of money that instead could compound as an investment, but I do it as a treat...

Almost every single client I meet has no idea how much is actually going towards eating out or entertainment every month until we sit together and look at the numbers. Everyone knows how much their rent and car payment is but most other stuff people have no idea. A lot of people don't even want to look at the numbers on their own so they need someone they can trust to help them face the reality. Having someone who ca…

That was one of my "wait, doesn't everyone do this?" realizations: Most people do not regularly look at their own finances, know how much they spend on what, and even roughly know how much money they have in their checking account! I could tell you how much I've spent on groceries, gas, restaurants, clothing, and so on, to the penny, and how it tracks vs. my budget, accurate at least as of a particular day. I can tell you to the penny any of my current account balances, cash, investment, or debt. But when I mention this to people, they look at me like I have a horn growing out of my head, like it's really weird and obsessive.

I've been in an HN thread where people claimed that it's easy to lose track of your subscriptions and accidentally pay for a service for years that you don't use. Like, really? You don't even look at your credit card bill and see what you're paying for, even monthly??? You really just turn on autopay and never even look at your bills?

Re: The average age of U.S. homebuyers jumps to 56

#103

Post by ler_ »

ryandrake wrote: post #102
phyzix5761 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost every single client I meet has no idea how much is actually going towards eating out or entertainment every month until we sit together and look at the numbers. Everyone knows how much their rent and car payment is but most other stuff people have no idea. A lot of people don't even want to look at the numbers on their own so they need someone they can trust to help them face the reality. Having someone who ca…

That was one of my "wait, doesn't everyone do this?" realizations: Most people do not regularly look at their own finances, know how much they spend on what, and even roughly know how much money they have in their checking account! I could tell you how much I've spent on groceries, gas, restaurants, clothing, and so on, to the penny, and how it tracks vs. my budget, accurate at least as of a particular day. I can tel…

I could have written this comment myself. I was surprised to find out that it wasn't common to track every single thing you spend, to have multiple Excel sheets for your money, and to constantly look at how you are faring against your budget. Seems like a lot of folks look at their checking account and go "guess I still have some money left over to spend." Maybe it's because I grew up poor or because my mother was very careful with finances herself (in spite of hardship). I would be curious to know what your case is.

Re: The average age of U.S. homebuyers jumps to 56

#104

Post by geor9e »

whatever1 wrote: post #42
phyzix5761 wrote: post #35

I do financial coaching as a side business and I can tell you the main two reason why most people in their 30s can't afford a home is because they have no idea how to budget and they carry too much debt spent on things they don't need. On average people spend about 30% of their income paying off non mortgage debts like credit cards, car loans, and student loans. I teach my clients how to budget, cut back on unnecessa…

You don’t have clients who are barristers/teachers/cooks etc in SF or NY. It is literally impossible to own even if you save 200% of your income.

Did you mean bartender? Barrister is a lawyer in the UK and makes a bit more.

Re: The average age of U.S. homebuyers jumps to 56

#105

Post by consteval »

akreal wrote: post #71
Slartie wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even if the real estate/investment lobby is busy buying up all the "prime" land, its not like the US is a small country to work around them somewhere. Even the US being a big country doesn't help much. The value of land for the purpose of living on it is largely defined by the infrastructure around a particular piece of land: are there schools, shops, doctors, ... nearby, or do you have to drive through an empty de…

The infrastructure problem should also have a relatively cheap technical solution. I assume the major bottleneck is bureaucracy, which largely has no technical workarounds so far.

It's not a problem of bureaucracy, but rather efficiency. Urban centers emerge because they make sense - grouping together labor, production, and consumption. If we just equally distribute people across the country our economy would implode on itself. How do you get to work? Where do you work? Where does your work go once you've worked on it? Who buys your work? And what work do you buy?

I'm not going to build a doctors office, or a train, or a corner store next to 10 people. I'm gonna build it next to 100,000 people. And now here we are, where we have space but not really because most of the space is worthless.

Re: The average age of U.S. homebuyers jumps to 56

#106

Post by consteval »

toastal wrote: post #75
ilikerashers wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need very big changes to capitalism at its core. There are warning signs flashing across all economies without any coherent solutions.

Wouldn’t you just change your economic system if you need to change the core for its fundamental flaws playing out as expected?

Maybe, but so far we've been pretty successful in just adding patches/bandaids to capitalism to address the places where it falls on it's face. For example, healthcare doesn't fit into a "free market" model, and most countries have figured that out. Even the US, which imposes lots and lots of regulation and protections in healthcare.

Housing, too, could get similar treatment.

Re: The average age of U.S. homebuyers jumps to 56

#107

Post by runako »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #19
runako wrote: post #5

Without taking away from the reality of housing costs, the long-term chart [1, chart is a year old but looking for trends] suggests other explanations. In particular, the average of first-time buyers was 35, up from 30 as recently as 2010. That's a bad trend. The overall average appears to be driven by people who have bought homes before. Anecdotally, the Boomers I know bought houses well into retirement where their…

A lot of never-purchased-home-before people have money but still don't buy a home. Why? What happens that causes people who have money and can pay to finally buy a home?

A lot of reasons! Some I have heard:

- Homeownership comes with responsibilities that people may not want

- They prefer to invest the money elsewhere

- They expect to relocate on timeframes shorter than those that make homeownership a good investment

Re: The average age of U.S. homebuyers jumps to 56

#108

Post by thunky »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #83
thunky wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Separate rates already exist. Try buying an investment property and you'll see the rate is higher because there is more risk to the lender.

I said "risk adjusted", so I think you're agreeing with me.

I guess so? I interpreted the parent's use of "separate interest rates" to mean nominal rates.

Re: The average age of U.S. homebuyers jumps to 56

#109

Post by nightski »

consteval wrote: post #105
akreal wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The infrastructure problem should also have a relatively cheap technical solution. I assume the major bottleneck is bureaucracy, which largely has no technical workarounds so far.

It's not a problem of bureaucracy, but rather efficiency. Urban centers emerge because they make sense - grouping together labor, production, and consumption. If we just equally distribute people across the country our economy would implode on itself. How do you get to work? Where do you work? Where does your work go once you've worked on it? Who buys your work? And what work do you buy? I'm not going to build a doct…

There are plenty of thriving towns in America with 5k-10k people. I think you need to just get out more. I grew up in one and it was fine. I now live in a slightly larger city (in the low hundred thousands) and enjoy the low cost of living with a high salary. But I'd never live in a major metro area, that's nuts.

Re: The average age of U.S. homebuyers jumps to 56

#110

Post by xethos »

phyzix5761 wrote: post #48
whatever1 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t have clients who are barristers/teachers/cooks etc in SF or NY. It is literally impossible to own even if you save 200% of your income.

I don't work in those states but I've had plenty of clients who live in high cost of living areas and the solution is to move somewhere you can actually afford. It's not benefiting you in any way to work in a place you can't afford.

You're right in that it doesn't benefit them financially. Living in some of the few spots in the continental united states that allow for a more passively-active lifestyle (temerate enough to spend more time outdoors without making it an activity, reasonable transit/bike infrastructure, the ability to walk instead of driving everywhere) carries some pretty hefty health benefits, especially as it compounds over a lifetime.
Post reply on HN