5 ms·

Insight into younger generations: I hate the idea of owning property. I don't want to be stuck to a city or a location. The world, and the universe have so muc

Insight into younger generations: I hate the idea of owning property. I don't want to be stuck to a city or a location. The world, and the universe have so much to offer. To me, buying a house is cementing your location and stunting the amount of knowledge you can acquire by handcuffing you to a location and limiting your exposure to the world. That is the philosophical side, then there's the debt and the overall asset appreciation game that everyone else plays. I have no interest in owning a home to settle down. If I do it, it would be to exploit financial interests with the right opportunity. I think we can use a radically different model for housing and what we consider livable spaces for our species. I'd love to see cities built around the Dunbar number and with transportation making travel times easier, we can see some interesting designs. Foster community and allow communication and personal reach across distances. This is probably going to be forced by warehouse space in relation to live space. We're going to need more and more land for manufacturing and storage of goods compared to retail and shopping experiences. We'll have living communities without much need to venture into markets. Markets will be VR, and many jobs will be remote. Foster community with "villages" within a city that is related to the Dunbar number.

lotsofpulp 7y ago
Most people have the same thoughts (at least in the income class that can afford to move around), until they have children and need a good school district.
- dfischer 7y ago
  School today is an archaic design. Education has no bounds with the internet and the spread of information where it is no longer asymmetric. School and universities are falling out of favor. What matters is what skills you have over what degree. The internet and the corpus of knowledge equalizes this. This assumes connectivity is a given – I believe connectivity will be tablestakes in a variety of situations and incentives by those that can provide it. Additionally again, education outside of pure learning like we're limited today on the internet will be more immersive with VR/AR and your need to go to a physical location will differ.
  - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
    I think/hope that in 20 years, this will be true. I'm not sure it's true enough yet to let you really ignore the school system and/or university. You can homeschool, though...
    - dfischer 7y ago
      I believe sooner than 20 years, it's not the norm yet but we're closer than most would admit I'd say. This is based on my personal experience and business endeavors.
- m463 7y ago
  Also theres the "That place was so expensive back then, but now I realize I should have bought 2 of them"
  - dfischer 7y ago
    This has an interesting inheritance of why properties go up in value in relation to supply and demand and an economy. If the needs of society are pushed to an average of not needing to venture out anymore due to automation and manufacturing + remote work then we start to focus internally on community. If that's the case, how much does the location matter outside maybe the view you're able to afford?
    - showerst 7y ago
      I'd argue that it matters _more_ in that case, because the returns to clustering will be higher, and the non-work features (access to outdoors, climate) will matter more. I think in a world where you don't worry about jobs, and worry less about living expenses, Boulder and San Diego and Manhattan get _more_ desirable.
      - dfischer 7y ago
        Why would they be more desirable?
        showerst 7y ago
        (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 situation where I have more leisure time and less income scarcity here. There are some people who take the "given no constraints I'd move to flyover country" but even then many of them are doing that because it's cheap, not because it's the absolute most desirable right? Strictly speaking you _could_ just plop a new city down from scratch in Nebraska, but why would i live there when i could live somewhere where I go to the beach or the mountains every weekend, and walk to a hopping established strip of restaurants and coffee shops in 10 minutes?
alkonaut 7y ago
Before I had kids I didn’t want to own a home or a car. Now I want to own it because I just don’t want the hassle of moving with schools and friends and whatnot. It’s a 10-15 year period of my life that I want this. Afterwards, who knows. But there will always be a market for people who want to just settle in one place for 15 years. I don’t think this is generational, I think it’s mostly just age.
BeetleB 7y ago
>To me, buying a house is cementing your location and stunting the amount of knowledge you can acquire by handcuffing you to a location and limiting your exposure to the world. Too many people have a narrow view of home ownership and end up believing in things like this. Whether it is true or not depends entirely on the location and the market. In the right places, you can buy a house that is near all the amenities (walking distance, even). The only real risk is the RE market, and how much loss you're willing to take to sell the house quickly (i.e. 6% RE fees when selling). In my case, the value rose enough in one year that I could have sold and still made a gain. If you can't sell because the loss will be too high, there are other alternatives (e.g. renting your house), but as I said, it all depends on the market. >If I do it, it would be to exploit financial interests with the right opportunity. Umm - isn't that why many do it? I mean yes, people do buy houses for other reasons, but if they don't perform due diligence in the math, it could end up hurting. At the moment my house is limiting my opportunities - I'm turning down any offer to move to SV, for example. But it has nothing to do with being shackled financially. I'm making the choice because of all the fringe benefits my house provides, which I would instantly lose were I to move to SV. Am I missing out on broadening my world view by not moving? Sure. Are others missing out on experiences by not owning? In some cases, yes.

lotsofpulp 7y ago

Most people have the same thoughts (at least in the income class that can afford to move around), until they have children and need a good school district.

dfischer 7y ago
School today is an archaic design. Education has no bounds with the internet and the spread of information where it is no longer asymmetric. School and universities are falling out of favor. What matters is what skills you have over what degree. The internet and the corpus of knowledge equalizes this. This assumes connectivity is a given – I believe connectivity will be tablestakes in a variety of situations and incentives by those that can provide it. Additionally again, education outside of pure learning like we're limited today on the internet will be more immersive with VR/AR and your need to go to a physical location will differ.
- AnimalMuppet 7y ago
  I think/hope that in 20 years, this will be true. I'm not sure it's true enough yet to let you really ignore the school system and/or university. You can homeschool, though...
  - dfischer 7y ago
    I believe sooner than 20 years, it's not the norm yet but we're closer than most would admit I'd say. This is based on my personal experience and business endeavors.
m463 7y ago
Also theres the "That place was so expensive back then, but now I realize I should have bought 2 of them"
- dfischer 7y ago
  This has an interesting inheritance of why properties go up in value in relation to supply and demand and an economy. If the needs of society are pushed to an average of not needing to venture out anymore due to automation and manufacturing + remote work then we start to focus internally on community. If that's the case, how much does the location matter outside maybe the view you're able to afford?
  - showerst 7y ago
    I'd argue that it matters _more_ in that case, because the returns to clustering will be higher, and the non-work features (access to outdoors, climate) will matter more. I think in a world where you don't worry about jobs, and worry less about living expenses, Boulder and San Diego and Manhattan get _more_ desirable.
    - dfischer 7y ago
      Why would they be more desirable?
      - showerst 7y ago
        (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 situation where I have more leisure time and less income scarcity here. There are some people who take the "given no constraints I'd move to flyover country" but even then many of them are doing that because it's cheap, not because it's the absolute most desirable right? Strictly speaking you _could_ just plop a new city down from scratch in Nebraska, but why would i live there when i could live somewhere where I go to the beach or the mountains every weekend, and walk to a hopping established strip of restaurants and coffee shops in 10 minutes?

alkonaut 7y ago

Before I had kids I didn’t want to own a home or a car. Now I want to own it because I just don’t want the hassle of moving with schools and friends and whatnot. It’s a 10-15 year period of my life that I want this. Afterwards, who knows. But there will always be a market for people who want to just settle in one place for 15 years. I don’t think this is generational, I think it’s mostly just age.

BeetleB 7y ago

>To me, buying a house is cementing your location and stunting the amount of knowledge you can acquire by handcuffing you to a location and limiting your exposure to the world. Too many people have a narrow view of home ownership and end up believing in things like this. Whether it is true or not depends entirely on the location and the market. In the right places, you can buy a house that is near all the amenities (walking distance, even). The only real risk is the RE market, and how much loss you're willing to take to sell the house quickly (i.e. 6% RE fees when selling). In my case, the value rose enough in one year that I could have sold and still made a gain. If you can't sell because the loss will be too high, there are other alternatives (e.g. renting your house), but as I said, it all depends on the market. >If I do it, it would be to exploit financial interests with the right opportunity. Umm - isn't that why many do it? I mean yes, people do buy houses for other reasons, but if they don't perform due diligence in the math, it could end up hurting. At the moment my house is limiting my opportunities - I'm turning down any offer to move to SV, for example. But it has nothing to do with being shackled financially. I'm making the choice because of all the fringe benefits my house provides, which I would instantly lose were I to move to SV. Am I missing out on broadening my world view by not moving? Sure. Are others missing out on experiences by not owning? In some cases, yes.