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

Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

denverite.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 391 posts

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#221

Post by petesergeant »

standardUser wrote: post #110
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because this doesn’t magically solve the housing crisis It does. Twenty thousand units represent about 5% of Denver's housing stock [1]. Commit to adding this many units to the housing stock every year for the next 10 years and you'll have solved the housing crisis. (You'll probably need to bail out recent homebuyers, who will be permanently underwater, but that's a separate issue.) [1] http://censusreporter.org/pr…

> You'll probably need to bail out recent homebuyers, who will be permanently underwater If you buy a house for $400k, and suddenly it is worth $300k, you don't need to be "bailed out" for your purchase decision. You should have been certain that the house was worth $400k to you at the time of purchase. Otherwise you're a speculator, and we shouldn't be bailing out speculators. It's called buyer's remorse. We accept…

> If you buy a house for $400k, and suddenly it is worth $300k, you don't need to be "bailed out" for your purchase decision. You should have been certain that the house was worth $400k to you at the time of purchase.

I think it's pretty normal for rational purchasers to consider the resale value of something that they purchase, and hand-waving that away doesn't make for a very serious argument.

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#222

Post by brailsafe »

lbourdages wrote: post #217
brailsafe wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't say 70 year mortgages, they said 70 years to pay off a mortgage, which is still a bit exaggerated (maybe), but would come from the contingent of people who got themselves into variable rate fixed payment mortgages for comically expensive properties, and that had a significant amount of interest remaining before the feds started cranking up interest rates. If rates go up from 2% to 6+% while you're holding…

> If rates go up from 2% to 6+% while you're holding onto a $2m detached house, it's a bad situation to be in. I find it mind boggling that banks will lend money to people that cannot sustain a 4% increase to their mortgage rate. Rates have been over 10% in the 80's!

Well, as far as I understand, in Canada we do have relatively conservative lending practices, such that you do need to be able to pass an income stress test of some amount, you're only able to lock in terms of 5-10 years instead of a fixed 30yr, and if you qualify for and choose a 5% down payment you'll have to fork out for CMHC mortgage insurance, so from a lending perspective it's more stable. That said, it's crazier to me that people will take on that liability rather than the fact that lenders will lend it.

As soon as someone hits what they think is a high salary, they'll borrow as much as possible, not thinking they'll ever lose that job or interest rates will increase. This changed a bit in the last 5 years, hopefully for the long-term, so places like Toronto are seeing 90%+ decreases YoY in certain realty segments.

Canadians' household debt numbers are absolutely wild and millenials without wealthy parents are and will continue to experience an increasingly tenuous financial future.

As an example, there's an older guy down the street from me who's long since paid his house off. For property tax assessment purposes, his house is worth $40k CAD, while the land is worth $1.6m CAD. It's just a standard plot in what used to recently be one of the poorest neighborhoods in the country

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#224

Post by mattmaroon »

caseyohara wrote: post #145
mattmaroon wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 5% increase in supply annually indefinitely would crash the housing market there, induced demand be damned. To put it in perspective, a metro area growing at 2% is killing it, the highest growth rate is Austin at 3%. Denver only grows at less than 1%. Cheaper homes may induce demand, they won't induce a 5% growth rate.

> A 5% increase in supply annually indefinitely would crash the housing market there Only if population is held constant. Housing supply is inelastic, but housing demand is somewhat elastic. As seen in Denver, an increase in housing supply would decrease prices. But those lower prices will increase demand from people that want to live in Denver but previously couldn’t afford it.

I think you missed my point. It won’t increase it to 5% because that’s basically an unheard of population level increase for a big city/metro. It’s like 5x your average fast growing big city. You may induce some demand, it will be nowhere near that much.

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#225

Post by _carbyau_ »

Alive-in-2025 wrote: post #186
standardUser wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You'll probably need to bail out recent homebuyers, who will be permanently underwater If you buy a house for $400k, and suddenly it is worth $300k, you don't need to be "bailed out" for your purchase decision. You should have been certain that the house was worth $400k to you at the time of purchase. Otherwise you're a speculator, and we shouldn't be bailing out speculators. It's called buyer's remorse. We accept…

You never know what your house or apartment or condo is worth, even to you. Maybe you can afford $400k barely, but you'll be hugely squeezed. Or maybe you'd get a bigger place if prices had dropped for your family size. You hope conditions won't change. You can look at the current market trends to try to value it. But things will change in the next few years probably. You can guess, but you'll never "know with pretty…

This is the rat race. You are competing with all the other humans around you in the same playspace of reality.

A mortgage is a loan that gives you money you don't have (yet). If you are spending money you don't have, do it wisely or suffer the consequences.

I think no special treatment. Everyone else in the same space has the same rules/uncertainty as every argument you offered.

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#226

Post by thehappypm »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #106
1270018080 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "fuck you got mine" attitude so many homeowners have and deliberate supply restriction to increase property values makes it a smart investment on paper, at the cost of screwing everyone else coming after you.

I'm not sure why it has to be that way. Build more houses.

The problem is “where”.

Building them in random lots in Florida or upstate New York is exactly what builders were doing in the runup to the financial crisis.

Building them in already-dense places is always tricky because of NIMBYism

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#227

Post by cokeandpepsi »

lbourdages wrote: post #217
brailsafe wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't say 70 year mortgages, they said 70 years to pay off a mortgage, which is still a bit exaggerated (maybe), but would come from the contingent of people who got themselves into variable rate fixed payment mortgages for comically expensive properties, and that had a significant amount of interest remaining before the feds started cranking up interest rates. If rates go up from 2% to 6+% while you're holding…

> If rates go up from 2% to 6+% while you're holding onto a $2m detached house, it's a bad situation to be in. I find it mind boggling that banks will lend money to people that cannot sustain a 4% increase to their mortgage rate. Rates have been over 10% in the 80's!

[dead]

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#228

Post by dmix »

msgodel wrote: post #138
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pretty sure a government won’t bail me out if I invested in a stock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenspan_put More pointedly, you're not in a position to block equity capital markets reforms in the way homeowners are in respect of housing reform.

Yeah everyone involved in that should have been shot. That's part of what led to the situation we have today.

Short term thinking dominates economics these days. Managing the current downturn is most important, when people ask about longterm implications do a bunch of hand wavy stuff about it being temporary and then kick the can to the next guys who do the same thing.

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#229

Post by FireBeyond »

tptacek wrote: post #117
akavi wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any evidence that _8_ years of post-secondary education (plus 3-7 years of residency at poverty wages) actually improves medical outcomes? 5 years could be plenty?

NPs are supervised, as are doctors on rotation, so it's 7 years before clinical practice for a doctor.

PAs might love to hear about that, since they’ve been lobbying about supervision.

Dozens (I gave up counting) of states have absolutely no supervision for NPs: https://www.aafp.org/family-physician/practice-and-career/ma... - they have full autonomy as providers.

Re: Denver rent is back to 2022 prices after 20k new units hit the market

#230

Post by _carbyau_ »

petesergeant wrote: post #221
standardUser wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You'll probably need to bail out recent homebuyers, who will be permanently underwater If you buy a house for $400k, and suddenly it is worth $300k, you don't need to be "bailed out" for your purchase decision. You should have been certain that the house was worth $400k to you at the time of purchase. Otherwise you're a speculator, and we shouldn't be bailing out speculators. It's called buyer's remorse. We accept…

> If you buy a house for $400k, and suddenly it is worth $300k, you don't need to be "bailed out" for your purchase decision. You should have been certain that the house was worth $400k to you at the time of purchase. I think it's pretty normal for rational purchasers to consider the resale value of something that they purchase, and hand-waving that away doesn't make for a very serious argument.

I think it's pretty normal for resale to be less than purchase price. Considering it is important!

Making any guarantees as to the future worth of these items is craziness.

Post reply on HN