7 ms·

It's possible to live a very comfortable lifestyle and save a lot if you're not consumed by the idea that you need to live in SF or NY to enjoy your life. I alw

It's possible to live a very comfortable lifestyle and save a lot if you're not consumed by the idea that you need to live in SF or NY to enjoy your life. I always see these stories about how it's impossible for millenials to own a house etc. I bought my first house at 24 and sold it for 80k profit 5 years later, paid off my student loans. I'm on my second house now and it's appreciated considerably in the last few years. Both houses were below 250k with and over 1400 sqft. My wife and I have pretty modest incomes and only bring in about 100k a year together. While there are certainly things I would like to buy that I cannot afford I can buy most of the things I enjoy when I want to without having to worry and still save a lot for retirement.

vineyardmike 5y ago
> if you're not consumed by the idea that you need to live in SF or NY to enjoy your life And yet some people enjoy big cities more than they'd enjoy living in a small town and it is not a moral failing or a sign of stupidity or weakness. Many people enjoy the multiculturalism found in cities, and many immigrants or minorities feel out of place in small towns while major cities offer them the opportunity to connect with people like themselves. Obviously owning a big residence in a city will never be affordable but as a society we should ensure that people can affordably live where it makes sense for them.
- subsubzero 5y ago
  Why bring multiculturalism into it, or minorities feeling out of place? the parent comment never mentioned it, and I have been to small towns that were extremely welcoming to all groups. I agree with his statement, why live somewhere where housing is astronomically expensive, unless you enjoy it so much that living somewhere else would bring you sheer misery, be prepared to either rent forever or hustle your life away to afford that lifestyle.
  - mc32 5y ago
    Having a preference for multiculturalism is something mostly expressed in the west. People in Nigeria, Iran, Iraq, Peru, India, etc. Live just fine with it without it. They don’t feel inadequate living in a city or village that is monocultural. Neither is right or wrong. Cities develop over decades and they will have their unique histories. But seldom do people in other places say, oh my town is so monocultural, I wish it were a stew of cultures. No, mostly they are okay with their towns character. Interestingly besides Singapore, we have Beirut, Teheran, Khartoum, Baghdad which have lost multiculturalism over time, but those are mostly due to civil strife caused in part by the different cultures at violent odds with each other.
    - nemo 5y ago
      Really, I would suggest you read up about Peru. They're one of the more multicultural countries in the Americas, they've got multiculturalism enshrined in their constitution.
      - mc32 5y ago
        They have indigenous, mixed race, Japanese and others, that’s not in dispute. What I’m saying is I’m sure in the hinterlands the locals aren’t saying “oh, woe is us, we aren’t multicultural like those folks in Lima” Multiculturalism can be good, it can be neutral or like Beirut or Baghdad it can lead to violence. What I’m saying is most people overseas are totally okay with it, with few exceptions, but they don’t bemoan it’s absence.
    - verall 5y ago
      Cities have always collected people from further outside the local area than suburban or rural areas. If you have lived in cities with a monoculture and cities with significant minorities, the multicultural city has more dynamic options for food, drink, music, everything. New York is one of the only places in the world you could probably walk from fantastic bagels to great Italian food to a real HK-style diner. This is a great privilege that residents of these cities value highly.
  - vineyardmike 5y ago
    Because that is one thing i know that people mention a lot in moving to cities. Maybe part of it is american perspective. Is there something WRONG with talking about multiculturalism? eg. gay people leaving their small towns that don't have other gays, immigrants moving to a city full of people of their nationality (eg. "china towns, little italy"). No amount of "is renting forever not bad?" will rectify this advantage of a city for many people.
- TrackerFF 5y ago
  Living in a big city isn't much of a problem, only real difference is that almost all your equity will be in your house / real-estate assets. And that can be just fine - in certain areas the real-estate market has performed as well as the stock market, for the past 20-30 years. But it's difficult to retire on that - unless you decide to sell your house, and move somewhere cheap.
- wonderwonder 5y ago
  honestly if they enjoy it that's their call and they make the choice to live in a place that is not affordable. If they struggle due to that decision that is on them. If they could move somewhere else and live in a much more comfortable financial position the long term outcome is their choice. I am not denigrating their decision just saying that it is their decision. "we should ensure that people can affordably live where it makes sense for them" It makes sense for people to live in an area they can afford, not where they decide they should be able to afford. Its simple economics, supply and demand. "Many people enjoy the multiculturalism found in cities, and many immigrants or minorities feel out of place in small towns while major cities offer them the opportunity to connect with people like themselves". Not to be rude, but so what? I want to live in Napa Valley but I cant afford it, is it society's job to get me an affordable house there?
  - jjeaff 5y ago
    The calculus is a bit more complicated than you make it out to be. People have to live where they can afford to live -and- get a job. Many lcol areas do not have many jobs. Especially if you have an expensive education that you are trying to pay off. Some people might be able to take a pay cut and move somewhere cheap and come out ahead. But those options don't always exist. If you have $200k in student loans and a degree in biotechnology, good luck finding a job within 100 miles of cheap housing. More remote work opportunities might change this, but at least in the past, those were very rare. Housing is expensive in hcol areas for a reason. It's because there are lots of good paying jobs nearby. There is also a reason some areas have very cheap housing.
    - wonderwonder 5y ago
      You make good points but the comment I was responding to was very focused on people choosing to live somewhere based on what they like regarding the social atmosphere and feelings as opposed to economic concerns.
coryrc 5y ago
> and sold it for 80k profit You seem to miss the issue.
frankbreetz 5y ago
Had you not bought the first house, would you be able to afford you current house on your salary? People who bought houses in the last 10 years were lucky enough to get in when the market was historically low. People currently shopping for there first house are not so lucky.
- CountDrewku 5y ago
  The market is always "low" in the areas I've lived in. That's my point. My brother also just but a very nice house for 180k. There are plenty of affordable places in this country. >People who bought houses in the last 10 years were lucky enough to get in when the market was historically low. You realize those same people also had to deal with a shitty job market and college loans to pay off as soon as they graduated right?
  - nate_meurer 5y ago
    > You realize those same people also had to deal with a shitty job market and college loans to pay off as soon as they graduated right? I think this is a good point that's worth repeating in these conversations. It's easy to forget in better times, but economic crashes are really scary. The financial crisis scared the shit out of me; my job situation was tenuous and our finances were shaky, but my wife and I took a big gamble and bought a foreclosed house at what turned out to be the bottom of market. It seems like an obvious choice in hindsight, but it could easily have gone very badly.
- ipaddr 5y ago
  Exactly.. I couldn't afford to buy before but for a brief window my salary allowed me to buy a home in the area of my city most people were choosing to avoid. I wouldn't qualify the following year and I would be very far off now as my salary did not rise at the same level. What I see smart young people doing is moving away from bigger cities. They get a decent house / lot compared to a condo in a bigger area. Every generation has to move further away (or make more than others) if a city is growing. You don't have to live in a growing city.. you could move to a declining area or a neutral area. There are advantages to living in a declining city.
nonameiguess 5y ago
Not that this is entirely wrong in principle, but it sounds like you got into the market for a house right around 2009. "Happen to enter the market at the exact bottom of a historic crash" isn't exactly a strategy. It's just luck.
- UncleMeat 5y ago
  I think it will be fascinating to watch the FIRE movement and the broader trading communities through the next crash. It is easy to feel like a genius when the market is going up 30% in a year.
  - voidfunc 5y ago
    Im not sure what you expect to see with FIRE? Ill just keep investing through the down-cycle. Dollar cost averaging baby!
    - UncleMeat 5y ago
      I expect a fair number of people who think they've got the guts for this to panic. But more I expect the proliferation of advice to shrink.
    - imtringued 5y ago
      There are always people on the margin. Those who barely get by with FIRE will be the ones to go.
  - EEREPRESENT 5y ago
    why? fire participants are disciplined so they will just invest as usual. what do u expect to see?
- CountDrewku 5y ago
  Oh you mean the same time I graduated into a shitty job market with thousands in college loans? No, I made smart decisions about purchasing a house in a good low col area and fixed it up. Honestly, this whole idea that anyone who's achieved some success is just down to luck is pretty disheartening. Do you think this is a good approach to improving your life? I don't see any advantage to thinking this way.
zehaeva 5y ago
I don't want to poopoo on your point about you and your wife having "pretty modest incomes" at about 100k together. However the median household income is only $68k a year[0]. That is 50% of households in the US earned less than 68k/year. You're actually in the top 30%[1] of US households if your income is about 100k together. I wouldn't call that modest by any stretch of the imagination. [0] https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-270.html https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-27... [1] https://www.ibisworld.com/us/bed/households-earning-more-than-100-000/35/ https://www.ibisworld.com/us/bed/households-earning-more-tha...
- dcolkitt 5y ago
  The median income is brought down by two factors: 1) people completely out of the workforce (the labor force non-participation rate is nearly 40%), and 2) single-earner households. Neither of these are relevant to what we'd expect to be "reasonable" or "modest" for a married, employed couple. $100k/year for two full-time workers is $25/hour. This is a pretty reasonable wage for someone with a modicum of stability and employment consistency. For example Bank of America tellers now start at $20/hour and move to $25 in a few years.[1] [1]https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2021/05/18/bank-america-raise-hourly-minimum-wage-2025/5152077001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2021/05/18/bank-america...
  - zehaeva 5y ago
    I hate to be the person to quibble about the semantics of words but when one says the word modest one doesn't usually imagine a situation that is more than 70% of all others. I agree, it's a reasonable expectation that two people working should have a lifestyle that something like 100k/year would support. That being reasonable doesn't change the fact that it's still more than what 70% of other situations get, regardless of how those situations came about. If you want to compare that on an individual level then it's still not modest. The median Individual income is only 36k/year. Even on an individual level they're still doing better than 70% of the population on that level. Yes, it's possible to be comfortable and live a nice life no in NYC or SF. But let's not delude ourselves into thinking that just because it's reasonable to expect that level of income for a household, that it's modest, or even the norm.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
mustacheemperor 5y ago
You bought your first house at the absolute bottom of the real estate market following a global crash, sold it at a profit, and bought another house during what continues to be a rapidly appreciating market. Would a 24 year old today in the same financial position you were in at 24 be able to afford that same first house? You applying this personal anecdote as some kind of geometric proof that living outside a major city is a pathway to simple financial independence is to me a bold-print example of how the very same people who had to fight their way up the ladder of success will promptly become oblivious to the fact that the rungs are becoming further and further apart every year, advising those behind them that "climbing it isn't that difficult, just try as hard as I did."
- CountDrewku 5y ago
  No I bought a house in a low col area and worked. I have many more "anecdotes" from almost everyone I grew up with living in similar circumstances if you'd like to hear them. Pretty amazing that you somehow left out the fact that the while the market was low the job market was also bad and made it pretty difficult to pay off student loans. Somehow that doesn't factor in to your assessment though. >Would a 24 year old today in the same financial position you were in at 24 be able to afford that same first house? Yes and my brother just did that. Not bad for a musician that makes money of doing lessons and weekend gigs. According to you though I guess he should be wallowing helplessly in a gutter hoping someone else will come by and pull him out? I grew up in a midwestern farmhouse with no central AC or heat. We had one bathroom the size of a closet for 5 people. Sorry but I kinda don't care about you whining you can't make it due to some external force always making you a victim. I'm not sure what is with people like you but you always seem pissed off when you hear people are able to be self-sustaining. Must be an exhausting to live in constant victim-hood. What do you want? Someone else to pay for all of your stuff? Why should the rest of the country have to do that for you?
  - mustacheemperor 5y ago
    Okay, after reading that reply I will respectfully bow out after this reply, rather than try to force a rational conversation into an emotionally driven one. For your information I do work very hard and afford a comfortable life, but feel great empathy for the people for whom working hard is not enough to achieve basic comforts. I did not grow up in as challenging an environment so maybe I am overinclined to that empathy, because I feel lucky my own pathway up the ladder was aided by privileges others are not afforded. But that is not relevant to the original point, it is just the reply I feel obliged to make in response to your attack on my character. I didn't say I want anything for myself in my original reply. Broadly, I want equal opportunity for all. It was harder to get a job to repay loans in 2009 than today, but in the last 12 years college tuitions have continued to balloon while college graduate earning power continues to drop relative to the size of loans. I do not particularly understand or appreciate your decision to season your explanation with personal attacks but that certainly accomplished nothing as far as educating me (or anyone else) about your perspective. HackerNews can be a great place to learn from a diverse set of opinions. Nobody has the opportunity to see those opinions if they are getting downvoted to grey for bad community conduct. If you are new to this community, you may find you are more successful at communicating your perspectives if you do so respectfully.
Retric 5y ago
100k is a very high household income for areas with 1400 sqft sub 250k housing.
phrogdriver 5y ago
Growing up in the midwest prior to working FAANG in the Bay Area, this is my exact experience. With a graduate degree and making ridiculous money, I and my peers had no realistic path to homeownership on any reasonable time-scale in the Bay. Family members working HVAC, plumbing, electrician or other skilled blue-collar jobs in low-cost of living areas bought beautiful craftsman bungalows within walking distance to a decent school for $80K. Professionals with either no student debt or a few thousand from land-grant state university degree paid off in 5-7 years. This has knock-on effects to family formation and number of children. Many of my high school classmates had their first kid at 24-25 and have 3-5 kids now, versus Bay Area average of what seems like 1-2 starting in your late 30s. When you feel like you can finally afford it. I started making plans to leave as soon as I got there, it truly was "structurally hostile to families."
- troupe 5y ago
  You make a very good point. People dramatically underestimate how much more you need to make in the Bay Area to have the same quality of life as living in low cost of living areas.
imgabe 5y ago
Also a millennial. Also bought my first house at 24. Sold it 6 years later for a loss of $90k. Timing is important. Not everyone was fortunate to buy at the beginning of a huge bull market and right after a historic crash in real estate prices. (Bought my house in 2006)
sershe 5y ago
Heh, I don't understand why you are getting downvoted (well I do, but it's not a charitable interpretation). Yep, totally agree - people are not entitled to buy a house wherever they want. At least before the money printer went brrrrr, housing prices as compared to income in the US (median) were one of the lowest among the developed countries. Even now, median house is $375k [1]. Get out of your bubble. And I say it from the position of someone who actually made this mistake - I bought in Seattle and regret it. A much better decision would have been to buy a cheaper, better house somewhere else. Still, I'm not going to be mad at people telling me this truth :) [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MSPUS https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MSPUS
- sershe 5y ago
  Lol, now I'm getting silently downvoted. Come on, tell me which specific statement from my post (or the GP post) is false, or non-factual and doesn't contribute to the discussion :D

vineyardmike 5y ago

> if you're not consumed by the idea that you need to live in SF or NY to enjoy your life And yet some people enjoy big cities more than they'd enjoy living in a small town and it is not a moral failing or a sign of stupidity or weakness. Many people enjoy the multiculturalism found in cities, and many immigrants or minorities feel out of place in small towns while major cities offer them the opportunity to connect with people like themselves. Obviously owning a big residence in a city will never be affordable but as a society we should ensure that people can affordably live where it makes sense for them.

subsubzero 5y ago
Why bring multiculturalism into it, or minorities feeling out of place? the parent comment never mentioned it, and I have been to small towns that were extremely welcoming to all groups. I agree with his statement, why live somewhere where housing is astronomically expensive, unless you enjoy it so much that living somewhere else would bring you sheer misery, be prepared to either rent forever or hustle your life away to afford that lifestyle.
- mc32 5y ago
  Having a preference for multiculturalism is something mostly expressed in the west. People in Nigeria, Iran, Iraq, Peru, India, etc. Live just fine with it without it. They don’t feel inadequate living in a city or village that is monocultural. Neither is right or wrong. Cities develop over decades and they will have their unique histories. But seldom do people in other places say, oh my town is so monocultural, I wish it were a stew of cultures. No, mostly they are okay with their towns character. Interestingly besides Singapore, we have Beirut, Teheran, Khartoum, Baghdad which have lost multiculturalism over time, but those are mostly due to civil strife caused in part by the different cultures at violent odds with each other.
  - nemo 5y ago
    Really, I would suggest you read up about Peru. They're one of the more multicultural countries in the Americas, they've got multiculturalism enshrined in their constitution.
    - mc32 5y ago
      They have indigenous, mixed race, Japanese and others, that’s not in dispute. What I’m saying is I’m sure in the hinterlands the locals aren’t saying “oh, woe is us, we aren’t multicultural like those folks in Lima” Multiculturalism can be good, it can be neutral or like Beirut or Baghdad it can lead to violence. What I’m saying is most people overseas are totally okay with it, with few exceptions, but they don’t bemoan it’s absence.
  - verall 5y ago
    Cities have always collected people from further outside the local area than suburban or rural areas. If you have lived in cities with a monoculture and cities with significant minorities, the multicultural city has more dynamic options for food, drink, music, everything. New York is one of the only places in the world you could probably walk from fantastic bagels to great Italian food to a real HK-style diner. This is a great privilege that residents of these cities value highly.
- vineyardmike 5y ago
  Because that is one thing i know that people mention a lot in moving to cities. Maybe part of it is american perspective. Is there something WRONG with talking about multiculturalism? eg. gay people leaving their small towns that don't have other gays, immigrants moving to a city full of people of their nationality (eg. "china towns, little italy"). No amount of "is renting forever not bad?" will rectify this advantage of a city for many people.
TrackerFF 5y ago
Living in a big city isn't much of a problem, only real difference is that almost all your equity will be in your house / real-estate assets. And that can be just fine - in certain areas the real-estate market has performed as well as the stock market, for the past 20-30 years. But it's difficult to retire on that - unless you decide to sell your house, and move somewhere cheap.
wonderwonder 5y ago
honestly if they enjoy it that's their call and they make the choice to live in a place that is not affordable. If they struggle due to that decision that is on them. If they could move somewhere else and live in a much more comfortable financial position the long term outcome is their choice. I am not denigrating their decision just saying that it is their decision. "we should ensure that people can affordably live where it makes sense for them" It makes sense for people to live in an area they can afford, not where they decide they should be able to afford. Its simple economics, supply and demand. "Many people enjoy the multiculturalism found in cities, and many immigrants or minorities feel out of place in small towns while major cities offer them the opportunity to connect with people like themselves". Not to be rude, but so what? I want to live in Napa Valley but I cant afford it, is it society's job to get me an affordable house there?
- jjeaff 5y ago
  The calculus is a bit more complicated than you make it out to be. People have to live where they can afford to live -and- get a job. Many lcol areas do not have many jobs. Especially if you have an expensive education that you are trying to pay off. Some people might be able to take a pay cut and move somewhere cheap and come out ahead. But those options don't always exist. If you have $200k in student loans and a degree in biotechnology, good luck finding a job within 100 miles of cheap housing. More remote work opportunities might change this, but at least in the past, those were very rare. Housing is expensive in hcol areas for a reason. It's because there are lots of good paying jobs nearby. There is also a reason some areas have very cheap housing.
  - wonderwonder 5y ago
    You make good points but the comment I was responding to was very focused on people choosing to live somewhere based on what they like regarding the social atmosphere and feelings as opposed to economic concerns.

coryrc 5y ago

> and sold it for 80k profit You seem to miss the issue.

frankbreetz 5y ago

Had you not bought the first house, would you be able to afford you current house on your salary? People who bought houses in the last 10 years were lucky enough to get in when the market was historically low. People currently shopping for there first house are not so lucky.

CountDrewku 5y ago
The market is always "low" in the areas I've lived in. That's my point. My brother also just but a very nice house for 180k. There are plenty of affordable places in this country. >People who bought houses in the last 10 years were lucky enough to get in when the market was historically low. You realize those same people also had to deal with a shitty job market and college loans to pay off as soon as they graduated right?
- nate_meurer 5y ago
  > You realize those same people also had to deal with a shitty job market and college loans to pay off as soon as they graduated right? I think this is a good point that's worth repeating in these conversations. It's easy to forget in better times, but economic crashes are really scary. The financial crisis scared the shit out of me; my job situation was tenuous and our finances were shaky, but my wife and I took a big gamble and bought a foreclosed house at what turned out to be the bottom of market. It seems like an obvious choice in hindsight, but it could easily have gone very badly.
ipaddr 5y ago
Exactly.. I couldn't afford to buy before but for a brief window my salary allowed me to buy a home in the area of my city most people were choosing to avoid. I wouldn't qualify the following year and I would be very far off now as my salary did not rise at the same level. What I see smart young people doing is moving away from bigger cities. They get a decent house / lot compared to a condo in a bigger area. Every generation has to move further away (or make more than others) if a city is growing. You don't have to live in a growing city.. you could move to a declining area or a neutral area. There are advantages to living in a declining city.

nonameiguess 5y ago

Not that this is entirely wrong in principle, but it sounds like you got into the market for a house right around 2009. "Happen to enter the market at the exact bottom of a historic crash" isn't exactly a strategy. It's just luck.

UncleMeat 5y ago
I think it will be fascinating to watch the FIRE movement and the broader trading communities through the next crash. It is easy to feel like a genius when the market is going up 30% in a year.
- voidfunc 5y ago
  Im not sure what you expect to see with FIRE? Ill just keep investing through the down-cycle. Dollar cost averaging baby!
  - UncleMeat 5y ago
    I expect a fair number of people who think they've got the guts for this to panic. But more I expect the proliferation of advice to shrink.
  - imtringued 5y ago
    There are always people on the margin. Those who barely get by with FIRE will be the ones to go.
- EEREPRESENT 5y ago
  why? fire participants are disciplined so they will just invest as usual. what do u expect to see?
CountDrewku 5y ago
Oh you mean the same time I graduated into a shitty job market with thousands in college loans? No, I made smart decisions about purchasing a house in a good low col area and fixed it up. Honestly, this whole idea that anyone who's achieved some success is just down to luck is pretty disheartening. Do you think this is a good approach to improving your life? I don't see any advantage to thinking this way.

zehaeva 5y ago

I don't want to poopoo on your point about you and your wife having "pretty modest incomes" at about 100k together. However the median household income is only $68k a year[0]. That is 50% of households in the US earned less than 68k/year. You're actually in the top 30%[1] of US households if your income is about 100k together. I wouldn't call that modest by any stretch of the imagination. [0] https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-270.html https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-27... [1] https://www.ibisworld.com/us/bed/households-earning-more-than-100-000/35/ https://www.ibisworld.com/us/bed/households-earning-more-tha...

dcolkitt 5y ago
The median income is brought down by two factors: 1) people completely out of the workforce (the labor force non-participation rate is nearly 40%), and 2) single-earner households. Neither of these are relevant to what we'd expect to be "reasonable" or "modest" for a married, employed couple. $100k/year for two full-time workers is $25/hour. This is a pretty reasonable wage for someone with a modicum of stability and employment consistency. For example Bank of America tellers now start at $20/hour and move to $25 in a few years.[1] [1]https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2021/05/18/bank-america-raise-hourly-minimum-wage-2025/5152077001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2021/05/18/bank-america...
- zehaeva 5y ago
  I hate to be the person to quibble about the semantics of words but when one says the word modest one doesn't usually imagine a situation that is more than 70% of all others. I agree, it's a reasonable expectation that two people working should have a lifestyle that something like 100k/year would support. That being reasonable doesn't change the fact that it's still more than what 70% of other situations get, regardless of how those situations came about. If you want to compare that on an individual level then it's still not modest. The median Individual income is only 36k/year. Even on an individual level they're still doing better than 70% of the population on that level. Yes, it's possible to be comfortable and live a nice life no in NYC or SF. But let's not delude ourselves into thinking that just because it's reasonable to expect that level of income for a household, that it's modest, or even the norm.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

mustacheemperor 5y ago

You bought your first house at the absolute bottom of the real estate market following a global crash, sold it at a profit, and bought another house during what continues to be a rapidly appreciating market. Would a 24 year old today in the same financial position you were in at 24 be able to afford that same first house? You applying this personal anecdote as some kind of geometric proof that living outside a major city is a pathway to simple financial independence is to me a bold-print example of how the very same people who had to fight their way up the ladder of success will promptly become oblivious to the fact that the rungs are becoming further and further apart every year, advising those behind them that "climbing it isn't that difficult, just try as hard as I did."

CountDrewku 5y ago
No I bought a house in a low col area and worked. I have many more "anecdotes" from almost everyone I grew up with living in similar circumstances if you'd like to hear them. Pretty amazing that you somehow left out the fact that the while the market was low the job market was also bad and made it pretty difficult to pay off student loans. Somehow that doesn't factor in to your assessment though. >Would a 24 year old today in the same financial position you were in at 24 be able to afford that same first house? Yes and my brother just did that. Not bad for a musician that makes money of doing lessons and weekend gigs. According to you though I guess he should be wallowing helplessly in a gutter hoping someone else will come by and pull him out? I grew up in a midwestern farmhouse with no central AC or heat. We had one bathroom the size of a closet for 5 people. Sorry but I kinda don't care about you whining you can't make it due to some external force always making you a victim. I'm not sure what is with people like you but you always seem pissed off when you hear people are able to be self-sustaining. Must be an exhausting to live in constant victim-hood. What do you want? Someone else to pay for all of your stuff? Why should the rest of the country have to do that for you?
- mustacheemperor 5y ago
  Okay, after reading that reply I will respectfully bow out after this reply, rather than try to force a rational conversation into an emotionally driven one. For your information I do work very hard and afford a comfortable life, but feel great empathy for the people for whom working hard is not enough to achieve basic comforts. I did not grow up in as challenging an environment so maybe I am overinclined to that empathy, because I feel lucky my own pathway up the ladder was aided by privileges others are not afforded. But that is not relevant to the original point, it is just the reply I feel obliged to make in response to your attack on my character. I didn't say I want anything for myself in my original reply. Broadly, I want equal opportunity for all. It was harder to get a job to repay loans in 2009 than today, but in the last 12 years college tuitions have continued to balloon while college graduate earning power continues to drop relative to the size of loans. I do not particularly understand or appreciate your decision to season your explanation with personal attacks but that certainly accomplished nothing as far as educating me (or anyone else) about your perspective. HackerNews can be a great place to learn from a diverse set of opinions. Nobody has the opportunity to see those opinions if they are getting downvoted to grey for bad community conduct. If you are new to this community, you may find you are more successful at communicating your perspectives if you do so respectfully.

Retric 5y ago

100k is a very high household income for areas with 1400 sqft sub 250k housing.

phrogdriver 5y ago

Growing up in the midwest prior to working FAANG in the Bay Area, this is my exact experience. With a graduate degree and making ridiculous money, I and my peers had no realistic path to homeownership on any reasonable time-scale in the Bay. Family members working HVAC, plumbing, electrician or other skilled blue-collar jobs in low-cost of living areas bought beautiful craftsman bungalows within walking distance to a decent school for $80K. Professionals with either no student debt or a few thousand from land-grant state university degree paid off in 5-7 years. This has knock-on effects to family formation and number of children. Many of my high school classmates had their first kid at 24-25 and have 3-5 kids now, versus Bay Area average of what seems like 1-2 starting in your late 30s. When you feel like you can finally afford it. I started making plans to leave as soon as I got there, it truly was "structurally hostile to families."

troupe 5y ago
You make a very good point. People dramatically underestimate how much more you need to make in the Bay Area to have the same quality of life as living in low cost of living areas.

imgabe 5y ago

Also a millennial. Also bought my first house at 24. Sold it 6 years later for a loss of $90k. Timing is important. Not everyone was fortunate to buy at the beginning of a huge bull market and right after a historic crash in real estate prices. (Bought my house in 2006)

sershe 5y ago

Heh, I don't understand why you are getting downvoted (well I do, but it's not a charitable interpretation). Yep, totally agree - people are not entitled to buy a house wherever they want. At least before the money printer went brrrrr, housing prices as compared to income in the US (median) were one of the lowest among the developed countries. Even now, median house is $375k [1]. Get out of your bubble. And I say it from the position of someone who actually made this mistake - I bought in Seattle and regret it. A much better decision would have been to buy a cheaper, better house somewhere else. Still, I'm not going to be mad at people telling me this truth :) [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MSPUS https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MSPUS

sershe 5y ago
Lol, now I'm getting silently downvoted. Come on, tell me which specific statement from my post (or the GP post) is false, or non-factual and doesn't contribute to the discussion :D