4 ms·

The 28% rule is a well-known metric in financial planning, they did not come up with this. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/mortgages/mortgage-to-income-ratio/ h

The 28% rule is a well-known metric in financial planning, they did not come up with this. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/mortgages/mortgage-to-income-ratio/ https://www.forbes.com/advisor/mortgages/mortgage-to-income-... https://www.cnbc.com/select/what-is-the-28-36-rule-for-buying-a-home/ https://www.cnbc.com/select/what-is-the-28-36-rule-for-buyin... https://money.com/what-is-the-28-36-rule/ https://money.com/what-is-the-28-36-rule/ https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/twenty-eight-thirty-six-rule.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/twenty-eight-thirty-six... A better study would certainly include multi-income households, but I think it's worth considering that multi-income households present serious opportunity cost. It is not "free" to have both partners work - assuming you have a partner at all. In previous generations, you had the "breadwinner" and "homemaker" - two clearly defined roles that fulfilled real needs. When both partners are working, who is taking care of the kids? Who is cleaning? Who is meal planning, shopping, cooking, and doing laundry? One or both partners need to then take on all of this in addition to their full-time jobs. This is exhausting, and I'm convinced is the mechanism behind the proliferation of managed services in the household. The monetary cost of these, and other necessary services like daycare, are not insignificant. Assuming that people should have dual income to afford a home is an insidious theft of quality of life. If both partners' time needs to be spent working to earn money, there is less time for traditional homemaking and hands-on parenting. What are the consequences of this, not just to the individual but to society?

alephnerd 3y ago
To add on to that, the 28% rule is based on the 30% limit from the Wagner-Stegal Act in 1937 during the Great Deal [0] [0] - https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/COMPS-10348 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/COMPS-10348
legitster 3y ago
> In previous generations, you had the "breadwinner" and "homemaker" - two clearly defined roles that fulfilled real needs. This is a false nostalgia. For most of human history men and women did equal amounts of labor. A non-working wife was a status symbol of urban society. > When both partners are working, who is taking care of the kids? Who is cleaning? Who is meal planning, shopping, cooking, and doing laundry? If we really want to go back to "previous generations" this was almost entirely done by grandparents or extended family. The idea of a nuclear family household is almost an entirely modern invention. Expectations that a single income was to support an entire household was solely belonged to the post-war baby-boom - before that even children were expected to work! I'm not saying there is not merit to a single-income household or some people shouldn't enjoy it. But I object to any framing of it as "traditional". If anything, part of our problem with our current housing market is that in the last 100 years we have mostly obliterated multi-family/multi-generational households from cultural acceptance.

alephnerd 3y ago

To add on to that, the 28% rule is based on the 30% limit from the Wagner-Stegal Act in 1937 during the Great Deal [0] [0] - https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/COMPS-10348 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/COMPS-10348

legitster 3y ago

> In previous generations, you had the "breadwinner" and "homemaker" - two clearly defined roles that fulfilled real needs. This is a false nostalgia. For most of human history men and women did equal amounts of labor. A non-working wife was a status symbol of urban society. > When both partners are working, who is taking care of the kids? Who is cleaning? Who is meal planning, shopping, cooking, and doing laundry? If we really want to go back to "previous generations" this was almost entirely done by grandparents or extended family. The idea of a nuclear family household is almost an entirely modern invention. Expectations that a single income was to support an entire household was solely belonged to the post-war baby-boom - before that even children were expected to work! I'm not saying there is not merit to a single-income household or some people shouldn't enjoy it. But I object to any framing of it as "traditional". If anything, part of our problem with our current housing market is that in the last 100 years we have mostly obliterated multi-family/multi-generational households from cultural acceptance.