4 ms·

U.S. Housing Crisis Only Gets Worse as Population Shrinks

29 points by jseliger 5y ago

vsskanth 5y ago
Find in page - "remote" - zero hits. Seems like it's important to talk about how the labor shortage and remote jobs would affect the housing market. What would happen if experienced people start demanding remote work to even consider a job change to avoid having to relocate and find a place to buy in a crazy housing market ? I've already seen this happen successfully with a couple of my colleagues in the industry (not tech). As a consequence I'm seeing jobs being advertised as "fully remote OK" for non-tech roles in my industry I never thought would even consider remote.
- spywaregorilla 5y ago
  I'm not buying that a sufficient number of people are interested in moving to cheap shrinking towns just to save a buck while working remotely while the effects of this article play out. Most notably, lower class people with no remote work skills can't participate in that at all. Not that I believe skilled workers would even find that appealing very often.
  - xyzzy21 5y ago
    I guess. I left Silicon Valley but mostly maintained a SV salary. The cost of living where I am is about 10%-20% what it is in SV so it's effectively been a major effective pay boost. I also live on 3 acres in the woods and will be "upgrading" to a 15 acres plot. Everything I do requires either remote or travel so where I am strictly makes no difference to achieving work product. So the increased effective pay is a plus. Note that I'm all out of Fxcks for FOMO - there's NOTHING you are missing out on in SV anymore.
    - spywaregorilla 5y ago
      Good for you, but SV is a drop in the ocean on this issue and not representative of anything.
      - kbelder 5y ago
        That's the thing. As far as the effect of remote work in the general population, it's near negligible. I'd be surprised if 1% of jobs have shifted to remote.
    - mech422 5y ago
      I'm in a similar situation regarding salary/COL, however I don't travel.. I found SV lost its appeal when I no wanted to take advantage of the meetups, computer clubs, etc. If I wasn't going to take advantage of the unique geek culture SV offered, what was the point of being there ?
    - more_corn 5y ago
      Where did you go?
- mech422 5y ago
  I've been working remote only for 20 years now, and don't consider any positions that require on-site/travel. Its become MUCH more prevalent in recent years, obviously. However I find a lot of my friends that HAVE jobs already are taking advantage of the new location freedom. When they next look for a position, I fully expect them to be looking for remote only, same as me.
raincom 5y ago
The super wealthy diversify their investments: buying more businesses, investing in new ventures, expensive real estate. The silicon valley Engineering class usually buy three more homes in Austin, 2 more in Denver, etc. Whenever a desirable city appears on the radar (due to 0 state taxes or also companies moving to such cities), expect all new homes get scooped by the investors like those from the bay area. Add NIMBY to this mix, with their pseudo-arguments about environment, parking issues, schools, zoning boards, zoning issues, local elections, etc. The end result: worsening housing crisis.
- olliej 5y ago
  Wtf do you get “the Silicon Valley engineering class” usually buying a bunch of houses? I know many many people of “the Silicon Valley engineering class” that have had to spend years saving to buy just a condo in the Bay Area. I don’t know anyone in that class who’s out their buying multiple homes. The only people I know who have managed multiple homes are people who have two homes are those who lived in SF before moving to somewhere much cheaper. They worked in non startup fintech. The idea that multiple home ownership is even remotely “usual” is laughable and seems more an attempt to blame tech workers rather than the large companies that are actually buying up property.
  - raincom 5y ago
    At least I know of four people, who bought 3 homes each in Austin. Of course, they guys bought their first homes in 2011, and they work at FAANG type companies.
fred_is_fred 5y ago
I think that a good chunk of the US already has places they'd like to live but cannot afford - for those people (including me) the choice is to move somewhere trendy and cool and live in a 1 bedroom apartment or stay where I am and live in a house. This will always be (and has always been) the trade-off. If you only have 200k for housing it doesn't matter that Austin or SF is cool - Toledo is affordable.

29 points by jseliger 5y ago

Find in page - "remote" - zero hits. Seems like it's important to talk about how the labor shortage and remote jobs would affect the housing market. What would happen if experienced people start demanding remote work to even consider a job change to avoid having to relocate and find a place to buy in a crazy housing market ? I've already seen this happen successfully with a couple of my colleagues in the industry (not tech). As a consequence I'm seeing jobs being advertised as "fully remote OK" for non-tech roles in my industry I never thought would even consider remote.

spywaregorilla 5y ago
I'm not buying that a sufficient number of people are interested in moving to cheap shrinking towns just to save a buck while working remotely while the effects of this article play out. Most notably, lower class people with no remote work skills can't participate in that at all. Not that I believe skilled workers would even find that appealing very often.
- xyzzy21 5y ago
  I guess. I left Silicon Valley but mostly maintained a SV salary. The cost of living where I am is about 10%-20% what it is in SV so it's effectively been a major effective pay boost. I also live on 3 acres in the woods and will be "upgrading" to a 15 acres plot. Everything I do requires either remote or travel so where I am strictly makes no difference to achieving work product. So the increased effective pay is a plus. Note that I'm all out of Fxcks for FOMO - there's NOTHING you are missing out on in SV anymore.
  - spywaregorilla 5y ago
    Good for you, but SV is a drop in the ocean on this issue and not representative of anything.
    - kbelder 5y ago
      That's the thing. As far as the effect of remote work in the general population, it's near negligible. I'd be surprised if 1% of jobs have shifted to remote.
  - mech422 5y ago
    I'm in a similar situation regarding salary/COL, however I don't travel.. I found SV lost its appeal when I no wanted to take advantage of the meetups, computer clubs, etc. If I wasn't going to take advantage of the unique geek culture SV offered, what was the point of being there ?
  - more_corn 5y ago
    Where did you go?
mech422 5y ago
I've been working remote only for 20 years now, and don't consider any positions that require on-site/travel. Its become MUCH more prevalent in recent years, obviously. However I find a lot of my friends that HAVE jobs already are taking advantage of the new location freedom. When they next look for a position, I fully expect them to be looking for remote only, same as me.

raincom 5y ago

The super wealthy diversify their investments: buying more businesses, investing in new ventures, expensive real estate. The silicon valley Engineering class usually buy three more homes in Austin, 2 more in Denver, etc. Whenever a desirable city appears on the radar (due to 0 state taxes or also companies moving to such cities), expect all new homes get scooped by the investors like those from the bay area. Add NIMBY to this mix, with their pseudo-arguments about environment, parking issues, schools, zoning boards, zoning issues, local elections, etc. The end result: worsening housing crisis.

olliej 5y ago
Wtf do you get “the Silicon Valley engineering class” usually buying a bunch of houses? I know many many people of “the Silicon Valley engineering class” that have had to spend years saving to buy just a condo in the Bay Area. I don’t know anyone in that class who’s out their buying multiple homes. The only people I know who have managed multiple homes are people who have two homes are those who lived in SF before moving to somewhere much cheaper. They worked in non startup fintech. The idea that multiple home ownership is even remotely “usual” is laughable and seems more an attempt to blame tech workers rather than the large companies that are actually buying up property.
- raincom 5y ago
  At least I know of four people, who bought 3 homes each in Austin. Of course, they guys bought their first homes in 2011, and they work at FAANG type companies.

fred_is_fred 5y ago

I think that a good chunk of the US already has places they'd like to live but cannot afford - for those people (including me) the choice is to move somewhere trendy and cool and live in a 1 bedroom apartment or stay where I am and live in a house. This will always be (and has always been) the trade-off. If you only have 200k for housing it doesn't matter that Austin or SF is cool - Toledo is affordable.