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

Baby boomers are making it harder for millennials to buy homes

sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 145 posts

Re: Baby boomers are making it harder for millennials to buy homes

#31

Post by [deleted] »

manyxcxi wrote: post #26
mythrwy wrote: post #13

Speculation and free markets are great and all and there is a time and a place for those and it allocates capital more efficiently than central planning (from what we have seen so far) and freedom to attain wealth is a beautiful thing. That being said, there are basic human needs that should be met by any civilization of note. And if a civilization doesn't then it is failing. These needs include the the opportunity t…

I wholeheartedly disagree that land in the US is anyone's birthright, with the exception of people of native descent, and they (painting with a VERY wide brush stroke, I know) generally didn't believe in land ownership to begin with. I do agree that speculation has driven to some crazy things in the US housing market. Though I'm not against speculation in any market per se, when we see what banks, businesses, and oth…

[deleted]

Re: Baby boomers are making it harder for millennials to buy homes

#32

Post by mythrwy »

manyxcxi wrote: post #26
mythrwy wrote: post #13

Speculation and free markets are great and all and there is a time and a place for those and it allocates capital more efficiently than central planning (from what we have seen so far) and freedom to attain wealth is a beautiful thing. That being said, there are basic human needs that should be met by any civilization of note. And if a civilization doesn't then it is failing. These needs include the the opportunity t…

I wholeheartedly disagree that land in the US is anyone's birthright, with the exception of people of native descent, and they (painting with a VERY wide brush stroke, I know) generally didn't believe in land ownership to begin with. I do agree that speculation has driven to some crazy things in the US housing market. Though I'm not against speculation in any market per se, when we see what banks, businesses, and oth…

I hear you and apologies for the rant. Down votes are entirely understandable as I don't care for radical sounding rants either.

I'm not saying in in the US, nor concretely, but philosophically I think when a person is born they inherit the right to inhabit a piece of earth. You shouldn't arrive in the earth and not be able to sleep on piece of it without paying someone. I guess I feel that land in general belongs to the collective. And philosophically I'd extend that beyond national boundaries. Just because someone before us with a gun and a flag, or else a deed and a banknote did something doesn't mean they increased real estate. It was here before, it will be here after. So that's just theoretical but it seems axiomatic to me.

I own a home as well. I could sell it now and make money on it. Great. But then where would I poop?

I guess point is, it seems to me to be both unjust and destructive to have the essential needs of a place to sleep and raise a family be subject to wild market forces. Plus I think it discourages actual productive economic activity. People have a hard time relocating to where there is need partially because of speculation. So it inhibits the flow of human capital.

I don't disagree at all with your practical analysis of the situation. Admittedly I have no idea how to solve the problem, and it is a hard one, particularly now that so much "wealth" is represented. I just don't think it should have been allowed to get to this point, and I think we need to approach the problem with an entirely different framework. And I'd say part of that is realizing the ability to have a place to live and raise a family is an essential human right and it is sacred and it is many many times more important than the right of people to build or preserve wealth through paper ownership of real estate.

Leave wealth building for bitcoin and Apple stock and companies that make mascara. Or hard work and savings. Not wheat and water and living quarters.

Re: Baby boomers are making it harder for millennials to buy homes

#33

Post by Camillo »

kevinburke wrote: post #23

I'm going to sound like a broken record here but there are policy and other decisions being made in the Bay Area that are restricting the housing supply and driving up the price of existing housing. You don't have to be a bystander in this process, you can help lobby for more supply. A list of propositions and legislation to support (SF, Brisbane, Mountain View, the CA state legislature) can be found here: https://ne…

There should be a site where these actionable things are concisely listed. Not a HN comment, a real website. Maybe people could even sign up for emails whenever a new action item pops up.

OTOH, many people here are not US citizens, so they cannot really do much about any of this.

Re: Baby boomers are making it harder for millennials to buy homes

#34

Post by kevinburke »

Camillo wrote: post #33
kevinburke wrote: post #23

I'm going to sound like a broken record here but there are policy and other decisions being made in the Bay Area that are restricting the housing supply and driving up the price of existing housing. You don't have to be a bystander in this process, you can help lobby for more supply. A list of propositions and legislation to support (SF, Brisbane, Mountain View, the CA state legislature) can be found here: https://ne…

There should be a site where these actionable things are concisely listed. Not a HN comment, a real website. Maybe people could even sign up for emails whenever a new action item pops up. OTOH, many people here are not US citizens, so they cannot really do much about any of this.

There is! yimbyaction.org. They have a mailing list where they send out calls to action on upcoming legislation.

https://yimbyaction.org/mailinglist/

Re: Baby boomers are making it harder for millennials to buy homes

#35

Post by zanny »

ceejayoz wrote: post #19
BrentOzar wrote: post #2

The flip side of this is that as the baby boomers pass, there's going to be a glut of retirement home communities available - and with my generation probably never being able to retire, that's going to be an interesting market.

The glut of housing will come with a massive loss in healthcare jobs, though.

I don't get this sentiment. Boomers weren't all born in the same year, right now the "bubble" of US population is 50-60. because they do start dying off after that. But the trick is medical advances are likely to push the 40-50 year olds now (respectively, 50-60s make up 7% of the population while 40-50s make up 6%) to live longer and die slower, meaning they will probably still fit in the currently emerging retirement markets meant for older boomers who are going to die sooner.

The difference is 1%, though. Millions of people isn't a small amount, but considering how the country had to adapt before to growing and shrinking classes of population before it isn't going to be catastrophic, and like I said, it is likely the current 40-50 year olds will live longer and fill out the healthcare market for current boomers.

Re: Baby boomers are making it harder for millennials to buy homes

#36

Post by jrapdx3 »

kevinburke wrote: post #23

I'm going to sound like a broken record here but there are policy and other decisions being made in the Bay Area that are restricting the housing supply and driving up the price of existing housing. You don't have to be a bystander in this process, you can help lobby for more supply. A list of propositions and legislation to support (SF, Brisbane, Mountain View, the CA state legislature) can be found here: https://ne…

The question I have has several parts, but fundamentally I wonder if the housing supply could even be increased enough to materially affect housing prices.

Not saying that the housing supply isn't excessively restricted, but how much can restrictions be decreased and how much difference would it make?

An analogy is building freeways to relieve traffic congestion. What regularly happens is that additional roads or adding lanes to existing roads provides temporary respite from traffic jams. But before too long the roads are jam-packed again, the problem isn't solved, just have more cars clogging traffic.

I suspect adding more housing won't lower housing prices, just bring some more people into the area. BTW this is what's happening here in Portland OR, where a building boom has been going on for years. The area population has increased, housing prices are still out of range for many people.

Re: Baby boomers are making it harder for millennials to buy homes

#37

Post by randomdata »

jmclnx wrote: post #27

Not really the Baby Boomers fault, but bad decisions made over the past 30/40 years are coming to fruit. Right now only a hand full of cities have 'real' jobs and those cities have strict zoning laws (and NIMBY). So young people in the US, if they want to make any real $ need to move to those cities, otherwise all they will have are 'mcjobs'. I would not be surprised to see slums like the type seen in many poor count…

> if they want to make any real $ need to move to those cities

This is the crux of the matter. The market always seeks equilibrium. If there is an income advantage in one location, people will move there, driving up costs in the process, until the point that there is no longer an advantage. Certain cities have held an advantage in earning ability for quite some time and the market is attempting to correct that disparity by increasing costs.

People complain about how expensive these homes are, but in reality they are the cheap ones! The low dollar value homes out in the middle of nowhere are truly the expensive ones. Like you mention, the profitability in a high cost city outpaces the profitability elsewhere, even after you consider that your costs are lower. If the lower paying job, but also the lower expenditures, provided a higher income there would be absolutely no hesitation to take a 'mcjob'.

The question is: At what point does the 'mcjob', where housing is low cost, actually provide – after accounting for costs – a higher income and become the more desirable type of work? That is when housing in the high-priced cities will stabilize, as there is no longer the financial advantage to live there. Until then, expect price to continue upward.

Re: Baby boomers are making it harder for millennials to buy homes

#38

Post by smrtinsert »

kevinburke wrote: post #23

I'm going to sound like a broken record here but there are policy and other decisions being made in the Bay Area that are restricting the housing supply and driving up the price of existing housing. You don't have to be a bystander in this process, you can help lobby for more supply. A list of propositions and legislation to support (SF, Brisbane, Mountain View, the CA state legislature) can be found here: https://ne…

the headline is still very applicable to other metro areas.

Re: Baby boomers are making it harder for millennials to buy homes

#39

Post by mythrwy »

pxeboot wrote: post #21
mythrwy wrote: post #13

Speculation and free markets are great and all and there is a time and a place for those and it allocates capital more efficiently than central planning (from what we have seen so far) and freedom to attain wealth is a beautiful thing. That being said, there are basic human needs that should be met by any civilization of note. And if a civilization doesn't then it is failing. These needs include the the opportunity t…

Housing is still ridiculously cheap in much of the US. Should everybody have the right to live in the trendiest city?

Housing is only cheap if you can make enough in the area the house is located to afforded it.

Not in relative terms.

Re: Baby boomers are making it harder for millennials to buy homes

#40

Post by nitrogen »

jrapdx3 wrote: post #36
kevinburke wrote: post #23

I'm going to sound like a broken record here but there are policy and other decisions being made in the Bay Area that are restricting the housing supply and driving up the price of existing housing. You don't have to be a bystander in this process, you can help lobby for more supply. A list of propositions and legislation to support (SF, Brisbane, Mountain View, the CA state legislature) can be found here: https://ne…

The question I have has several parts, but fundamentally I wonder if the housing supply could even be increased enough to materially affect housing prices. Not saying that the housing supply isn't excessively restricted, but how much can restrictions be decreased and how much difference would it make? An analogy is building freeways to relieve traffic congestion. What regularly happens is that additional roads or add…

But before too long the roads are jam-packed again, the problem isn't solved, just have more cars clogging traffic.

Isn't that a good thing, indicating greater economic activity?

Post reply on HN