Live data from Hacker News

Wages in America Are Too Low for the 30% Rule to Work for Renters Anymore

realtor.com

211–220 of 550 posts

Re: Wages in America Are Too Low for the 30% Rule to Work for Renters Anymore

#211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can find a single person still getting paid that, please give me their info and I will have them making twice that by tomorrow.

i can introduce you to ~50 people making about that amount. let me talk to my school and i can probably get a few hundred more. very kind of you to offer them all a job at twice that. how do i reach out to you?

Where are you located?

Re: Wages in America Are Too Low for the 30% Rule to Work for Renters Anymore

#212

Is it the wages or that shitty one bedroom apartments go for $2000+

Listening to NPR yesterday, they mentioned it’s a renters’ market in the Sunbelt [1]. Lots of new supply here in Texas and I just signed a lease recently with 2 months free in DFW. Bringing me down to ~$1550/month. Lots of places are offering 2-3 months for free. [1] https://www.zillow.com/rental-manager/market-trends/tx/

H1-B crackdown is cooling the housing market in cities like Dallas

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48399957

Re: Wages in America Are Too Low for the 30% Rule to Work for Renters Anymore

#213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A landlord is doing exactly the same thing as an investor. They are tying up their capital in exchange for an income, and the possibility of a capital gain.

The difference is that investment in a company can create “more company”, whereas investment in land can’t create more land.

You can improve the land, build more units, replace an small old house with a 4 story apartment building, etc.

Re: Wages in America Are Too Low for the 30% Rule to Work for Renters Anymore

#214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth being precise about this because it's a really important point. Most people who we call "landlords" are simultaneously a landlord and a property manager. Property management is an important and productive job. But the vast majority of such people's financial outcome is actually from being a landlord , that is doing literally nothing except holding a piece of paper granting them monopoly on a plot of land.…

> But the vast majority of such people's financial outcome is actually from being a landlord, that is doing literally nothing except holding a piece of paper granting them monopoly on a plot of land This is how I know that you've never tried to run houses. If you hire out a property manager and all of your maintenance you are not making money. I have to be an electrician, a plumber, a painter, a drywaller, an enginee…

Shelter, heat, and comfort? No: Location, location, location.

A crack shack with a busted roof and broken utilities in a good location sells for the same price as a pristine, functional mansion in the middle of nowhere.

Re: Wages in America Are Too Low for the 30% Rule to Work for Renters Anymore

#215
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a sort of interesting question. On one hand, landlords are easy to resent, they extract a lot of income primarily by owning something rather than doing anything productive. On the other hand, wages haven’t kept up with inflation and the super-wealthy are constantly capturing more of the value. At least in the case of small-scale landlords, maybe they are just the only lower-to-middle class people who’ve manage…

Are you saying that you blame apartment prices on landlords? If you build more apartments then market rent goes down and landlords can't charge more if people can just find cheaper apartments. It's not like landlords just choose whatever price they want - it's significantly bound by the demand.

don't forget about algorithmic collusion

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-requires-r...

Re: Wages in America Are Too Low for the 30% Rule to Work for Renters Anymore

#216

Landlords are the least productive class in society, and it's not even close in terms of ranking.

I don't understand this school of thought? Without renting everyone would have to buy a house / apartment on each move.

Because there's not actually enough money in America for everyone to be well off. You can either have a few silly rich people, and the rest of us constantly exchanging labour for cash until we die, or everyone is poor.

Re: Wages in America Are Too Low for the 30% Rule to Work for Renters Anymore

#217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One main driver is that there's not being built enough new housing. I recently entertained the idea of building a new house. Not terribly surprising, but worth mentioning that the time and materials to put up the structure was going cost even more than buying a used house. If nobody can afford to buy a less expensive used house then naturally nobody is going to build the much more expensive new house either. Therei…

New things do tend to cost more than old things, that's pretty much always the case! Where I live, people are blocking the construction of new apartments because the cost of the new ones is a bit higher, 10%-50%, than the average existing apartment. The idea behind blocking the new apartments is that "new expensive apartments don't help anybody" and people get very upset that the new housing is going to the type of p…

> the type of person that can afford to pay slightly more for the newer apartment.

Relying on that is the root problem. I could technically afford the new house, but in the end I couldn't find a good reason to tie up that much capital for something that does the same thing as what I've already got, only shinier. If the price were more reasonable then I'd make the move and then someone else could move into my much cheaper used house. But, as things sit, I occupy the cheap house instead, leaving the next guy out in the cold. Trouble is that just because I can afford it doesn't mean I am willing to be a buyer. The price still has to make sense.

I am not alone in this. It has been well reported that people are now staying in their "starter homes" instead of upgrading like past generations used to.

Re: Wages in America Are Too Low for the 30% Rule to Work for Renters Anymore

#218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is very simple. Housing is not built.

Every amount of new housing will be purchased by competitive investors. You are heavily underestimating the amount of money unsophisticated investors have, and the psychological effect of owning more and more of territory. Most people will never say no to owning more money and territory.

Tax homes that aren’t your primary residence to the point where it’s not a good investment.

Re: Wages in America Are Too Low for the 30% Rule to Work for Renters Anymore

#219

The problem is absolutley that housing is too expensive, which of course a bunch of realtors are not going to point out. Increasing wages will not fix the housing crisis, and will just drive prices higher. How convenient for a bunch of realtors...

Is it the case that housing was previously just very cheap and this is the normal price?

What's your definition of normal? 300 years ago you'd just set up on a chunk of land and build your own house. I'm not saying that's preferable to today but the actual financial cost was comparatively extremely little.

I bet there is a middle ground where we could relax or eliminate a lot of building restrictions and NIMBY policies to ease the upward pressure or even exert some downward pressure on home prices. We're also fighting against 6-7% interest rates after an extensive period of 2-3%.

Re: Wages in America Are Too Low for the 30% Rule to Work for Renters Anymore

#220

The problem is absolutley that housing is too expensive, which of course a bunch of realtors are not going to point out. Increasing wages will not fix the housing crisis, and will just drive prices higher. How convenient for a bunch of realtors...

Of all the jobs to get replaced by AI, I would be happy to see realtors to be first in line (but I also think this is wishful thinking). I feel like I get very little value out of what seems to be a mostly fixed/required price. I know flat fee realtors exist, and if/when we sell our home, I’ll be looking into this heavily. But I feel like they rank up there with car salespeople/dealers.

Realtors are experts in the market. A good realtor pays for themselves by getting you the best selling price or finding the best home for your price range. If you don't understand opportunity cost, then obviously it appears to be a ripoff. But once you understand, it's clear that realtors have value. And realtors are probably going to be the last to be replaced with AI. It's all about value judgement and AI is garbage at judgement.

Also, it's true this article isn't recognizing the root cause, overpriced housing, because realtors in general do better when prices are high. But "realtors in general" is a very different category than "your realtor".

Post reply on HN