A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses • Hacker News Board

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#291

Post by stale2002 » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 7:38 PM UTC

newsoul2019 wrote: post #189

stale2002 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No? It give me freedom to rent. At any point that I feel like it, I can pick up and move. Whether it is to a place across the street or on the other side of the country. I wouldn't have nearly that much freedom if I had the misfortune of owning my own place.

Do you see this as a temporary or permanent situation in your life? What is your "end game" so to speak?

Permanent.

Buying a home is a bad investment, because I could have all that money getting 7% returns in the stock market.

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#292

Post by realityenigma » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 7:41 PM UTC

whenchamenia wrote: post #258

rifung wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When we rented, we were subjected to eviction at any time, for nearly any reason, for basically no notice (60 days, which in the US is effectively zero notice). Your subjected to every whim the crazy wildly-irrational housing market throws at you (we've had 12% yearly rental increases for a decade straight now, despite living in bumblefudge-nowhere Midwest). Not saying you're wrong but at least where I've lived, I…

For a family, 60 days to pack everythig you own, and move, while supporting everyone is not easy at best, and untenable at worst. When I was single this was not the case.

This doesn't pass the BS test, especially if you are local. I have moved across town; with a family and a day job, in around 15 days, with most of the move taking place the first 7. Out of town, I can see 30 - 45. It would require planning and a UHaul (if within 250 miles) and a semi-truck moving company if further out than that. It literally just takes a bit of planning and follow through.

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#293

Post by mcguire » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 7:43 PM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #278

x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You must not live in Georgia or the South.

Rental contracts are not valid in the South and one party can unilaterally end the agreement for no reason? That really sucks, if so.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/the-eviction-process...

Georgia:

"If a landlord does not have cause to terminate a tenancy early and evict a tenant, then the landlord must wait until the lease term has ended before expecting the tenant to move. In some cases, the landlord may still need to give the tenant written notice to move.

"Month-to-Month Tenancy

"If a tenant is in a month-to-month tenancy and the landlord wishes to end the tenancy, the landlord needs to give the tenant a written 60-day notice. This notice will inform the tenant that the landlord is terminating the tenancy and the tenant must move out of the rental unit by the end of 60 days. If the tenant does not move out of the rental unit by that time, then the landlord can file an eviction lawsuit with the court (see Ga. Code Ann. § 44-7-7). For more information on this topic, check out Georgia Notice Requirements to Terminate a Month-to-Month Tenancy.

"Fixed-Term Tenancy

"If a landlord does not have cause to evict a tenant who is in a fixed-term tenancy (such as for six months or one year), then the landlord must wait until the end of the term before expecting the tenant to move. The landlord does not need to give the tenant written notice to move unless the terms of the lease or rental agreement specifically require the landlord to do so. The landlord can expect the tenant to move by the end of the term."

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#294

Post by wwweston » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 7:48 PM UTC

module0000 wrote: post #277

rdiddly wrote: post #268

On one of my harder-hearted days I would've felt schadenfreude (rich assholes waste obscene amounts of money on tacky shit, get burned, film at 11), but today I feel sorry for them. The whole thing is just sad. On the macro level, such a tragic mis-deployment of resources. And on the micro level, misplacing one's priorities on material things and finding out the hard way that it doesn't bring any meaning to your life…

> Everybody follows each other in a grand parade to oblivion. You sir, are a genius. I love that wording. That should have been on the welcome brochure we all get as babies, assuming we could read it.

”Hello babies. Welcome to Earth. It's hot in the summer and cold in the winter. It's round and wet and crowded. On the outside, babies, you've got a hundred years here. There's only one rule that I know of, babies-"God damn it, you've got to be kind."” ― Kurt Vonnegut

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#295

Post by mcguire » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 7:48 PM UTC

saltminer wrote: post #239

radcon wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you have a mortgage and are hit by a catastrophic life event that leaves you without a job and depleted of your emergency fund, your home is gone. That risk exists regardless of whether you rent or own. The risks he mentioned are unique to rentals. It's very common for leases to essentially say "We can kick you out if we feel like it," no justification necessary. Even if the lease stipulates some justification,…

The mortgage might be more secure, but an HOA can turn your life upside down if it's run by power-hungry busybodies and they can destroy the property values of the whole neighborhood while they're at it.

I've lived in several HOAs in the past, and yeah, they can be a pain. But in my experience, they are mostly concerned with not destroying the property values. In practice, they're only interested in stuff that's egregiously stupid. (Say that crazy old lady with the weird, creepy Halloween decorations including the beheaded baby that stay out from Labor Day to New Years.)

Plus, it's easy enough to avoid HOAs.

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#296

Post by mensetmanusman » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 7:48 PM UTC

module0000 wrote: post #277

rdiddly wrote: post #268

On one of my harder-hearted days I would've felt schadenfreude (rich assholes waste obscene amounts of money on tacky shit, get burned, film at 11), but today I feel sorry for them. The whole thing is just sad. On the macro level, such a tragic mis-deployment of resources. And on the micro level, misplacing one's priorities on material things and finding out the hard way that it doesn't bring any meaning to your life…

> Everybody follows each other in a grand parade to oblivion. You sir, are a genius. I love that wording. That should have been on the welcome brochure we all get as babies, assuming we could read it.

The economist just had a really fascinating interview with parents of extremely gifted children. Apparently many of these types of children start obsessing over this grand parade and it can become quite debilitating for them.

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#297

Post by jandrese » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 7:49 PM UTC

rifung wrote: post #250

brightball wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree and disagree. On the one hand, yes, you're right that the repair expenses can be a big deal. If you don't want anything but the basics for the technology in your home, sometimes a home warranty can be a good option too but experiences vary significantly. On the flip side though, after my 15 year mortgage is up I'm not going to pay another dime outside of maintenance on this thing. On a 30 year, you'll still p…

> On the flip side though, after my 15 year mortgage is up I'm not going to pay another dime outside of maintenance on this thing. On a 30 year, you'll still pay a fortune over the life of the loan which makes the renting argument a lot closer. If you can assume historical returns, renting is a financially superior choice. Well, assuming my math was correct. Both are big assumptions admittedly. The reason is that whe…

> over the long term on average home prices don't increase.

I assume you mean adjusted for inflation here? Even then that hasn't been true.

The problem with renting is that you're still paying the mortgage, only in the renting case you're also paying the middleman who then pays the mortgage. This is why rent per month is higher than mortgage per month for the same house. So the returns from that downpayment you instead invested need to make up for the monthly loss in rent, plus the lack of an asset at the end of the process.

It's not a small difference either. My current mortgage is $1250/month for a single family home. 13 years ago when I was renting the rates started at $1600/month for a tiny studio apartment unless you were willing to commute an hour each way. Rents have gone up in the meantime. You need to be making some baller returns on your downpayment if you're going to beat that.

This comparison isn't entirely fair because the rental unit also included maintenance and groundskeeping. In my house I have to do all that work myself or hire someone. However, in the rental unit I had to pay for the utilities. This is a problem because the landlord will never replace something like an AC unit or a refrigerator with anything but the absolute cheapest and most expensive to run model. In my house when I replace it I have the option of buying the high efficiency model and enjoying the cost savings over the life of the unit. Plus when something breaks in my home I just fix it or go out immediately and hire someone to fix it. In the apartment you have to contact the landlord who then sits on it for two weeks before contacting his maintenance guy who only comes by once every couple of weeks to look at it and then order the part so maybe he can fix it on his next visit. In the meantime I'm freezing my ass off with no heat for all of January. I don't miss renting at all.

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#298

Post by rdiddly » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 7:49 PM UTC

module0000 wrote: post #277

rdiddly wrote: post #268

On one of my harder-hearted days I would've felt schadenfreude (rich assholes waste obscene amounts of money on tacky shit, get burned, film at 11), but today I feel sorry for them. The whole thing is just sad. On the macro level, such a tragic mis-deployment of resources. And on the micro level, misplacing one's priorities on material things and finding out the hard way that it doesn't bring any meaning to your life…

> Everybody follows each other in a grand parade to oblivion. You sir, are a genius. I love that wording. That should have been on the welcome brochure we all get as babies, assuming we could read it.

Hah! Well thanks. I think the idea partly came from Cormac McCarthy - was it No Country for Old Men? The protagonist has a dream where he and his dad are on horses at night, and the dad rides ahead, into the "darkness," and is waiting for him to follow.

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#299

Post by mcguire » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 7:50 PM UTC

esoterica wrote: post #149

maxsilver wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also hate maintaining a detached single family home with a yard. I also hate being responsible for the fixes. But that situation is still far better than renting. When we rented, we were subjected to eviction at any time, for nearly any reason, for basically no notice (60 days, which in the US is effectively zero notice). Your subjected to every whim the crazy wildly-irrational housing market throws at you (we've h…

Price controls do not work. High home prices are a symptom of a lack of available housing and the only way to fix the lack of housing is by building more housing.

High home prices are often a symptom of easy money and inflation localized to that sector. (Specifically, the houses described in the article seem to be poster children of this type.) That was the whole 2008 thing, right?

Re: A Growing Problem in Real Estate: Too Many Too Big Houses

#300

Post by madengr » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 7:50 PM UTC

souprock wrote: post #249

showerst wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(I hope i'm reading your hypothetical right) in a world where I don't have to venture out to go to work, and don't have to live in a set place to chase an industry, I'd put more value on being in a nice climate, close to fun things to do, and near other people that have 'interesting' established communities (walkable culture, food, know your neighbors, all the standard millennial trend stuff). I'm assuming a situatio…

Moving to flyover country is more than affordability. It's also a matter of culture. Some people want stand-your-ground, constitutional carry, and lethal defense of property. Some people want to be surrounded by a particular religious group. Affordability is also more than just being able to buy a place to live. People want land. This can mean being able to hunt in the yard, own a private pond, or walk around without…

Bingo. I live in a “constitution carry” state in flyover country. Currently on travel in a heavy gun-control state that looks like a documentary on the opioid epidemic. Can’t wait to get back.