3 ms·

Housing in the suburbs was more expensive in the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s, but that is no longer true in many cities. Excluding the most affluent suburbs highe

by api 8y ago

Housing in the suburbs was more expensive in the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s, but that is no longer true in many cities. Excluding the most affluent suburbs higher quality urban real estate is often more expensive. Suburbs closer to city centers are also generally more expensive unless they are in poor condition. I've wondered if the suburbs might not have been a major driver of American middle class growth in the late 20th century for a really simple reason: expansion fueled by automotive transit allowed people to escape the law of rent and the tyranny of landlords and the property market. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_rent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_rent Eventually this expansion reached practical limits due to commute times and energy costs, so now we are back to the way it was before.

magduf 8y ago
>Excluding the most affluent suburbs higher quality urban real estate is often more expensive. This isn't really true in my experience. What is true is that housing is more expensive in terms of $/square foot in the middle of the city. However, this doesn't mean you'll find a cheaper place in the suburbs: if all the housing in a suburb is giant McMansions, they're still going to be more expensive than a small condo or efficiency in town. This is what I've found when I moved to my current city (DC); it just didn't save any money to live farther out because I don't want 2-5 bedrooms, as I'm a single guy. So it makes more sense for me to live closer to town in a small condo where I can enjoy the benefits of living closer, and my total rent is cheaper, and I don't have a giant house that I don't make use of, nor do I have to pay to heat/cool that giant house that I don't use.
RcouF1uZ4gsC 8y ago
> I've wondered if the suburbs might not have been a major driver of American middle class growth in the late 20th century for a really simple reason: expansion fueled by automotive transit allowed people to escape the law of rent and the tyranny of landlords and the property market. Nice insight. I know in Silicon Valley, people are not nearly as wealthy as the could be given their salaries because maybe 1/2 their monthly income goes to housing.
- api 8y ago
  The Bay Area is the most absurd large scale property market in America, but it's really just the most extreme case of a disease found almost everywhere.
criddell 8y ago
> Housing in the suburbs was more expensive in the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s, but that is no longer true in many cities. I think it's still true. If I go far enough out of the city center, I could afford a 3000+ sq ft house. Close to downtown, it's an order of magnitude more money for that much space.

by api 8y ago

magduf 8y ago

>Excluding the most affluent suburbs higher quality urban real estate is often more expensive. This isn't really true in my experience. What is true is that housing is more expensive in terms of $/square foot in the middle of the city. However, this doesn't mean you'll find a cheaper place in the suburbs: if all the housing in a suburb is giant McMansions, they're still going to be more expensive than a small condo or efficiency in town. This is what I've found when I moved to my current city (DC); it just didn't save any money to live farther out because I don't want 2-5 bedrooms, as I'm a single guy. So it makes more sense for me to live closer to town in a small condo where I can enjoy the benefits of living closer, and my total rent is cheaper, and I don't have a giant house that I don't make use of, nor do I have to pay to heat/cool that giant house that I don't use.

RcouF1uZ4gsC 8y ago

> I've wondered if the suburbs might not have been a major driver of American middle class growth in the late 20th century for a really simple reason: expansion fueled by automotive transit allowed people to escape the law of rent and the tyranny of landlords and the property market. Nice insight. I know in Silicon Valley, people are not nearly as wealthy as the could be given their salaries because maybe 1/2 their monthly income goes to housing.

api 8y ago
The Bay Area is the most absurd large scale property market in America, but it's really just the most extreme case of a disease found almost everywhere.

criddell 8y ago

> Housing in the suburbs was more expensive in the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s, but that is no longer true in many cities. I think it's still true. If I go far enough out of the city center, I could afford a 3000+ sq ft house. Close to downtown, it's an order of magnitude more money for that much space.