4 ms·
if it is, then great. but the baseline built in assumption that all home buyers should be able to afford new homes when people complain that new homes are too
by steveBK123 4y ago
if it is, then great.
but the baseline built in assumption that all home buyers should be able to afford new homes when people complain that new homes are too expensive is what misses the point.
New homes are built on the expensive side because that's what allows developers to turn a profit in areas where development plots are scarce to come by. That is - where land is the constraint, why would a developer choose to have a lower ROI?
Areas that new & old homes don't price too differently & there is still building happening are likely not in land/development/zoning constrained with undersupply.
Also laughing/crying internally as you describe 2003 as old (from my 1970s home)..
Never lived in a building that wasn't older than me..
- bombcar 4y agoHeh my last few houses have pre-nuclear steel in them, since they were built before the bombs dropped. And yes, the "standard" (hard to call something a standard that only really existed for 50 or so years of the modern USA) of houses going out of style and passing down as starter homes, etc has been sadly disrupted. And many of those starter homes are now held out as rentals, which further distorts it. (We're actually in a "starter home" now and considering what the next step should be, and the vast improvements in energy, etc over the last 20 years alone is making me heavily lean toward building, especially as I can sit on the design and get something more reasonable for the cost.)