4 ms·

> "What If Housing Never Bounces Back?" Then I might actually be able to afford a home in a pleasant place to live. Screw this entitlement attitude - people b

> "What If Housing Never Bounces Back?" Then I might actually be able to afford a home in a pleasant place to live. Screw this entitlement attitude - people bought into houses thinking they'd be this great investment vehicle, instead of what it really is: a stable way to maintain value and a roof over your head. The previous generation caused the bubble, screwing the younger generation out of affordable housing. Where I grew up, the average detached home is now $1M+, in a country where the average income is ~$40K. The market has finally returned to sensible levels, and one would hope in the future continues to be priced based on its utility as a home first, and as an investment second. tl;dr: Screw the boomers - maybe some of us can actually afford to buy a roof over our heads now.

nostromo 15y ago
I've always thought the coverage of housing in the media is very one-sided. As in any market, there are buyers and sellers. Way too much coverage is spent worrying about the sellers and not being happy for the buyers. Counter-example: if car prices suddenly dropped by 50%, the media would cover it like the second coming.
- ArchD 15y ago
  For good or for bad, the media has a propensity to focus on news that appeals to the reader's primal instincts, in this case fear. A 'homeowner' being under water or in danger of foreclosure seems to invoke a greater sense of crisis on the 'homeowner' than the situation on other side of the market for the potential buyer, namely a renter having to rent for many years because houses are just too expensive, or being able to buy cheap houses. For the (potential) new buyer, there is no crisis.
- jacques_chester 15y ago
  The stock of housing is much larger than the flow of housing to and from the property market each year. That is, current homeowners greatly outnumber people currently looking to buy by a large ratio. So the media's coverage isn't one-sided so much as majoritarian.
  - nostromo 15y ago
    That's fair, but I'd argue that most renters would like to buy a home or would pay a reduced rent if housing prices decline. Put in that context about 40% of the US population has something to gain by lower housing prices -- so I still think the media has done a bad job covering the other side of the story.
    - jacques_chester 15y ago
      True, but renters are not as emotionally involved as homeowners. A typical homeowner has the majority of their financial position tied up in their house. Where goes their house, there too goes their fortune. This is not true of renters.
  - rwmj 15y ago
    The media doesn't cover the news democratically in other areas. Else it'd be pretty boring, reading that millions of people woke up and had a cup of tea this morning ...
    - jacques_chester 15y ago
      That's because having tea isn't out of the ordinary and doesn't threaten people's sense of security. The formula for "news" is to multiply the number of people affected or interested by the emotional impact of the news.

nostromo 15y ago

I've always thought the coverage of housing in the media is very one-sided. As in any market, there are buyers and sellers. Way too much coverage is spent worrying about the sellers and not being happy for the buyers. Counter-example: if car prices suddenly dropped by 50%, the media would cover it like the second coming.

ArchD 15y ago
For good or for bad, the media has a propensity to focus on news that appeals to the reader's primal instincts, in this case fear. A 'homeowner' being under water or in danger of foreclosure seems to invoke a greater sense of crisis on the 'homeowner' than the situation on other side of the market for the potential buyer, namely a renter having to rent for many years because houses are just too expensive, or being able to buy cheap houses. For the (potential) new buyer, there is no crisis.
jacques_chester 15y ago
The stock of housing is much larger than the flow of housing to and from the property market each year. That is, current homeowners greatly outnumber people currently looking to buy by a large ratio. So the media's coverage isn't one-sided so much as majoritarian.
- nostromo 15y ago
  That's fair, but I'd argue that most renters would like to buy a home or would pay a reduced rent if housing prices decline. Put in that context about 40% of the US population has something to gain by lower housing prices -- so I still think the media has done a bad job covering the other side of the story.
  - jacques_chester 15y ago
    True, but renters are not as emotionally involved as homeowners. A typical homeowner has the majority of their financial position tied up in their house. Where goes their house, there too goes their fortune. This is not true of renters.
- rwmj 15y ago
  The media doesn't cover the news democratically in other areas. Else it'd be pretty boring, reading that millions of people woke up and had a cup of tea this morning ...
  - jacques_chester 15y ago
    That's because having tea isn't out of the ordinary and doesn't threaten people's sense of security. The formula for "news" is to multiply the number of people affected or interested by the emotional impact of the news.