91–100 of 176 posts
Why get out of a 3-4% loan just to get into a 7-8% loan?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Real estate market will soften as the economy comes off the rails [1]. 6-12 months from now should have more motivated sellers depending on market (foreclosures in Clark County Las Vegas market are up 32% year over year June 2025, for example [2]). Short sales and foreclosure auctions are also options. If you still want to buy down the road, be in the strongest financial position possible to get financing and make an…
The housing market won't soften until we build a shit ton of houses which will never happen until there are a lot of very angry people willing it into existence.
What we have is a general shortfall of prosperity. Housing is affected by money supply in an outsized way. Prices are at least partly going up because our economy is stagnant, and wages are going down in real terms as credit continues expanding to keep the wheels from coming off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good luck. Reddit job hunting(?) sub has it pegged at ~400 applications, IIRC
I'd caution from reading too much into numbers like this. 400 applications is borderline spamming, putting quantity over quality, which employers would notice. It can be far fewer if you have a focus/specialty and specific industries that you target. No doubt though, it's a slog right now. My recent process was around 10 applications - which became 3 interviews - and the last 2 were offers, one that came via a recrui…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good luck. Reddit job hunting(?) sub has it pegged at ~400 applications, IIRC
I'd caution from reading too much into numbers like this. 400 applications is borderline spamming, putting quantity over quality, which employers would notice. It can be far fewer if you have a focus/specialty and specific industries that you target. No doubt though, it's a slog right now. My recent process was around 10 applications - which became 3 interviews - and the last 2 were offers, one that came via a recrui…
It's basically illegal to build dense homes in most cities. And despite what people say, the vacancy rate is at historic lows so its not just "people are keeping them empty" Its a disgrace that people deny the supply crunch we are in
It feels to me like a good faith counterargument to the YIMBY build more housing line of thought, so might be an interesting perspective
It is difficult to balance the competing priorities of "home ownership is widely affordable" and "home prices must always go up". When the balance is not broadly possible, our system seems to favor "home prices must always go up", at least in the short term.
Mostly the priorities are not competing. You can and should build more homes but the end goal is to improve utility of land which can further drive prices up thus helping both cases. You can first build more homes - prices go down and more people come into the city and prices start going back up because of increased economic activity.
Yes. The entry point to ownership lies within a state of affordability.
> but the end goal is to improve utility of land
For who? If it's anyone other than typical wage earners, this goal competes with home ownership by pressuring ownership costs upward and away from affordability.
For context, home purchases are mostly (if not fully) impossible for typical wage earners.
I've been casually job hunting for a couple months since rounds of layoffs started at my company. I've applied to umpteen places and haven't had a single callback. In my twenty+ years working as a dev, this is the worst I've seen it since about 2005.
Just a single data point against this. I got interviews with 4 companies out of 30 or so I applied to. Cleared all the onsites. Think FAANG, famous hedge fund, popular data analytics platform, and defense. 4 different industries. Job market's not the best, but it's also not that bad if you have 5 YOE+. Offers were good, ~$50-100K over my current pay. So many people are using AI during the interviews to cheat, as long…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mostly the priorities are not competing. You can and should build more homes but the end goal is to improve utility of land which can further drive prices up thus helping both cases. You can first build more homes - prices go down and more people come into the city and prices start going back up because of increased economic activity.
> You can and should build more homes Yes. The entry point to ownership lies within a state of affordability. > but the end goal is to improve utility of land For who? If it's anyone other than typical wage earners, this goal competes with home ownership by pressuring ownership costs upward and away from affordability. For context, home purchases are mostly (if not fully) impossible for typical wage earners.
We shouldn’t mind if home ownership becomes costly if more economic activity results out of it. More economic activity means more money in the hands of wage earners (just that proportionally more money is spent on housing which is okay).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Build a town, not a subdivision. I would really love to see a billionaire tackle this. There's loads of empty, or nearly empty, space in this country. Heck, take over a town if you really want! Sink a few million dollars into kickstarting small-scale urbanism. I'm not usually much of a billionaire-hater, but today's lot for the most part seems to be uninspired, when it comes to projects like this.
First institute a land value tax. If you have a regular property tax you are going to get speculators, and then eventually vacant lots This is part of the housing supply mystery. It's not very profitable to build housing when you are punished for building upwards and making good use of the land