2 ms·

If you are unattached you should absolutely not buy a home in a suburban area, or anywhere really. Planting a stake in the ground will make it harder to move t

If you are unattached you should absolutely not buy a home in a suburban area, or anywhere really. Planting a stake in the ground will make it harder to move to chase after better opportunities elsewhere, and that opportunity cost probably outweighs any asset appreciation you would see. Buying a primary residence should be treated as an opportunity cost for the invested money, as well as a necessity for the shelter. If you are coupled it's harder to coordinate big moves so that makes owning more attractive, and if you have children you also want a stable environment for them to grow up in. But all told there are far better investments than a primary residence. Seattle also has a high price-to-rent ratio: https://www.mashvisor.com/blog/best-real-estate-markets-price-to-rent-ratio/ https://www.mashvisor.com/blog/best-real-estate-markets-pric... You may actually lose money on a cash flow basis if you buy.

ghaff 7y ago
>If you are unattached you should absolutely not buy a home in a suburban area, or anywhere really. That's nonsense. You shouldn't feel you have to buy one for financial reasons. But even if you're unattached, as I was when I bought, many of us like having a place of our own with more room than an apartment that you can change as you see fit. Yes, it limits mobility to a degree. But I've changed jobs several times since I bought my house.
- jackcosgrove 7y ago
  I overstated it because I was assuming a certain motive (financial), which as you pointed out may not be present. But as a young, unattached person mobility is one of your top competitive advantages in the labor market. I'm not talking about switching jobs in the same metro. I mean moving to an entirely different metro.
  - ghaff 7y ago
    It does depend upon where you live to some degree. I wasn't that young (late 30s), was in a metro with a fair amount of tech (Boston) most of which was out west of the city where I already lived and worked, and had pretty much already decided I wasn't interested in moving to the Bay Area. Sure, circumstances could have changed but I pretty much bought when I did in part because I decided that mobility wasn't that big a deal for me any longer.
authoritarian 7y ago
>Seattle also has a high price-to-rent ratio: https://www.mashvisor.com/blog/best-real-estate-markets-pric.. https://www.mashvisor.com/blog/best-real-estate-markets-pric.... You may actually lose money on a cash flow basis if you buy. I don't know where they got their numbers, but they're saying that home price of a $1000 rental is $421,080 which is absolutely insane for Seattle. 3 Years ago when I was shopping around shitty apartments were $1500+, with decent apartments and houses renting for $2000+ easily. One of my family members rent out their $400,000ish house for something like $2200-2400 a month. You won't be able to find a $400,000 property to rent for anywhere close to $1000. My house was listed in the 200s, sold for 12% over asking, and has appreciated nearly 50%. If I ever move my house will rent for over $2000 a month easily and it's quite old and not even in Seattle proper
- mcchew 7y ago
  It looks like they got their numbers from 2017. The market really is that volatile there.

ghaff 7y ago

>If you are unattached you should absolutely not buy a home in a suburban area, or anywhere really. That's nonsense. You shouldn't feel you have to buy one for financial reasons. But even if you're unattached, as I was when I bought, many of us like having a place of our own with more room than an apartment that you can change as you see fit. Yes, it limits mobility to a degree. But I've changed jobs several times since I bought my house.

jackcosgrove 7y ago
I overstated it because I was assuming a certain motive (financial), which as you pointed out may not be present. But as a young, unattached person mobility is one of your top competitive advantages in the labor market. I'm not talking about switching jobs in the same metro. I mean moving to an entirely different metro.
- ghaff 7y ago
  It does depend upon where you live to some degree. I wasn't that young (late 30s), was in a metro with a fair amount of tech (Boston) most of which was out west of the city where I already lived and worked, and had pretty much already decided I wasn't interested in moving to the Bay Area. Sure, circumstances could have changed but I pretty much bought when I did in part because I decided that mobility wasn't that big a deal for me any longer.

authoritarian 7y ago

>Seattle also has a high price-to-rent ratio: https://www.mashvisor.com/blog/best-real-estate-markets-pric.. https://www.mashvisor.com/blog/best-real-estate-markets-pric.... You may actually lose money on a cash flow basis if you buy. I don't know where they got their numbers, but they're saying that home price of a $1000 rental is $421,080 which is absolutely insane for Seattle. 3 Years ago when I was shopping around shitty apartments were $1500+, with decent apartments and houses renting for $2000+ easily. One of my family members rent out their $400,000ish house for something like $2200-2400 a month. You won't be able to find a $400,000 property to rent for anywhere close to $1000. My house was listed in the 200s, sold for 12% over asking, and has appreciated nearly 50%. If I ever move my house will rent for over $2000 a month easily and it's quite old and not even in Seattle proper

mcchew 7y ago
It looks like they got their numbers from 2017. The market really is that volatile there.