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

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

realtor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 550 posts

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

#511

Post by chadgpt3 »

llbbdd wrote: post #479
chadgpt3 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only the rich get richer. You have to be rich to acquire the free money rights. The poor don't get richer, or the system wouldn't work.

So pool your money with other poors and enter the infinite money game

That's a sovereign wealth fund. It works. Norway had one. You underestimate how much money is needed. All the poors combined could barely do it. Even if you could, they'd just be extracting their own money which is better than giving it to the rich but still stupid.

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

#512

Post by chadgpt3 »

fooker wrote: post #464
chadgpt3 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Landlords assume artificial financial risk entirely created by landlords

Of course, that's how risk works. Any high risk high reward strategy gets you in charge of creating the risk to chase a higher reward. The math is fairly similar between spending 10$ to buy a call option and a 1 million down payment to buy a 10 million property with 15 apartments to rent out.

Then let's make a government run lottery where you either get infinite money or you die. Huge risk, huge reward, right?

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

#513

Post by bcjdjsndon »

llbbdd wrote: post #495
Henchman21 wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in the US and this seems pretty spot-on to me. Hard to hear perhaps, but best to hear it, eh?

Then touching grass remains a good recommendation for you and the person I replied to. Only hard to hear because I wish more of my countrymen were connected to reality.

Which part isn't true?

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

#514

Post by padjo »

consumer451 wrote: post #436
holistio wrote: post #142

Yet if I open X, I'm being told constantly that my European mind can't comprehend how poor we are and the richest European country is poorer than the poorest US state.

Well, of course. The owner of the site believes: > The EU should be abolished and sovereignty returned to individual countries, so that governments can better represent their people

Even though it was those same governments who set the EU up in the first place because it was mutually beneficial.

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

#515

Post by fooker »

chadgpt3 wrote: post #512
fooker wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, that's how risk works. Any high risk high reward strategy gets you in charge of creating the risk to chase a higher reward. The math is fairly similar between spending 10$ to buy a call option and a 1 million down payment to buy a 10 million property with 15 apartments to rent out.

Then let's make a government run lottery where you either get infinite money or you die. Huge risk, huge reward, right?

As you wrote this, several hundred young men from Russia accepted a bet very much like this.

The missing piece in your comment is the motivation for the government to run such a lottery.

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

#516

Post by sethammons »

stephen_g wrote: post #283
amazingamazing wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is very simple. Housing is not built.

Not that simple. In Australia over the last 10 years, the number of dwellings increased by 19% while the population increased by a smaller 16% [1]. Yet house prices still doubled. This is the same trend that has continued for decades, growth in number of dwellings has tended to outstrip population growth but house prices shot up since 2001 when the tax settings were changed to massively benefit speculation. We also h…

The law of supply and demand doesn't go away. If raw population numbers don't support increasing demand, something else does. My first guess would be less people per house, perhaps culturally driven like fewer roommates and families spreading out.

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

#518

Post by cpburns2009 »

chadgpt3 wrote: post #494
cpburns2009 wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A microwave is orders of magnitude cheaper and easier to purchase than housing. In fact, they appear to be too cheap to be available at Aaron's for rent. So you're going to have to cough up $50 for a microwave from Walmart if you only want one for two months.

Houses would be a reasonable price if you couldn't profit off them, too. Probably cheap enough that anyone could get a mortgage working at McDonalds and if you had a good job you could just buy one.

Even if houses were half the cost, buying and selling one would be a long, cumbersome process that I would not want to go through just to live in a city short term. You're running off the false assumption that no one wants to rent.

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

#519

Post by mancerayder »

rainsford wrote: post #499
mancerayder wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are two. Suburbs, good ones with low crime, access to jobs and good schools are desirable. Desirability leads to prices going up. Prices going up leads to property tax revenue going up. That budget going up leads to a higher $/pupil for schools, better infra, etc... Increasing desirability. So, not a supply problem. Here's another. Jobs are in cities. People don't like commutes, and value not owning a car if pos…

> So, not a supply problem. What do you mean it's not a supply problem? Suburbs and the housing within them aren't naturally occurring features with limited supply. They're not oil deposits. You can just build more of them. Same thing with places like NYC or Paris or London. The point isn't that they need more development, it's that other places need more development so people who want the NYC experience in the US do…

I'm in agreement in general. I argue against people who think Manhattan should be more dense, or parklands should turn into apartment blocs.

The problem with a lot of the US is that the city designs are atrocious - if you can call them designed at all. Americans don't really understand how to create public transportation systems and to urbanize suburban areas. Instead of looking at Europe and copying, we bicker and argue and support this broken idea of local government. Btw, that's not a right or left thing - community groups are touted as a great thing to fight against gentrification, or over development in blue states, and defenders of freedom in red ones. The issue is the multi faceted bickering making it impossible to progress - why don't NJ and LA suburbs not have the best public transportation in the country or world? They easily could. It's just bad government and a lack of centralized planning at the federal level.

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

#520

Post by consumer451 »

padjo wrote: post #514
consumer451 wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, of course. The owner of the site believes: > The EU should be abolished and sovereignty returned to individual countries, so that governments can better represent their people

Even though it was those same governments who set the EU up in the first place because it was mutually beneficial.

But it's not beneficial to the handful of dudes programming our SM news feeds, so the EU needs to be destroyed... and we will apparently do nothing to prevent this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

See the projections for many major countries in the EU for the next election cycle. Not looking great.

Post reply on HN