4 ms·

No, I'm not. I'm citing the numbers in the table entitled "Quarterly Homeownership Rates for the U.S. and Regions: 1964 to Present"* (emphasis added). That tabl

No, I'm not. I'm citing the numbers in the table entitled "Quarterly Homeownership Rates for the U.S. and Regions: 1964 to Present"* (emphasis added). That table is talking about homeownership rates, not householdership rates, and the definition they give is this: > Homeownership Rates. The proportion of households that are owners is termed the homeownership rate. It is computed by dividing the number of households that are owners by the total number of occupied households (table 5 and 6) Here's the table: https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/histtab17.xlsx https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/histtab17.xlsx And for the benefit of others, here are the definitions: https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/definitions.pdf https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/definitions.pdf * EDIT: I was also citing "Homeownership Rates by Age of Householder: Fourth Quarter 2022 and 2023", which is likewise about homeownership

hmcq6 3y ago
That table doesn't break things down by age. Just own it dude. You pulled the "49% of people aged 30-34" thing from this chart https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/qtr423/tab7.xlsx https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/qtr423/tab7.xlsx or some variation of it and you misunderstood it.
- lolinder 3y ago
  Sorry, I just updated my links to include the citation for the age breakdown, which is in fact the link you linked to. Note the title of the chart you linked to (tab7.xlsx): "Homeownership Rates by Age of Householder" (emphasis added). This is percentage of householders who own the home that they are the householder of. EDIT: Also, while I'm at it, here's "Homeownership Rates by Age of Householder: 1994 to Present" (again, homeownership), which shows a 39% homeownership rate under 35 years old, which is about the same rate as it was throughout the 90s. It broke 40% in the 2000s for a while before coming back down, but was never higher than about 43%. https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/histtab19.xlsx https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/histtab19.xlsx
  - hmcq6 3y ago
    > This is percentage of householders who own the home that they are the householder of. It is not. It's a ratio of homeowners in an age group to the number of renter households in that age group, which is kinda a useless statistic. To explain why it's a bad metric take this real (but simplified) example. My roommate and I share a "household". Lets pretend that besides my roommate and I there is only one other person aged 30-34 in the US and they own a home. The Homeownership Rates by Age of Householder chart would say 50%. 1 owner household / 2 total occupied households. Now if you read that chart and take it to mean that there is only 1 homeowner and 1 renter, you would be misunderstanding what the statistics mean. There are more renters than homeowners in our example but the metric doesn't reflect that because it isn't meant to.
    - lolinder 3y ago
      This is a fair argument and as late as it is I don't have a reply—you're right that there are limitations that I hadn't considered, and I'll have to look at the numbers more closely to figure out what they mean *. However, I want to note that this represents a sudden change of pace from your original "49% of us are homeowners or renters" and "you've just linked to some statistics that show we can still afford rent". When you misunderstood the situation, you insisted that I "own it" that I was wrong (when I wasn't). It would behoove you to do so yourself instead of pretending you understood the numbers all along. * Edit: as an initial thought, I'd argue that the same argument often applies to the homeowner number—my wife and I jointly owning one house balances out you and your roommate.
      - hmcq6 3y ago
        [flagged]
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - refurb 3y ago
      But the measurement has been constant since the 90's - it hasn't changed. So regardless of the definition, it's remained constant, thus the idea that living arrangements have suddenly and dramatically shifted is not true.
- grfhtsdfvv 3y ago
  [flagged]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

hmcq6 3y ago

That table doesn't break things down by age. Just own it dude. You pulled the "49% of people aged 30-34" thing from this chart https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/qtr423/tab7.xlsx https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/qtr423/tab7.xlsx or some variation of it and you misunderstood it.

lolinder 3y ago
Sorry, I just updated my links to include the citation for the age breakdown, which is in fact the link you linked to. Note the title of the chart you linked to (tab7.xlsx): "Homeownership Rates by Age of Householder" (emphasis added). This is percentage of householders who own the home that they are the householder of. EDIT: Also, while I'm at it, here's "Homeownership Rates by Age of Householder: 1994 to Present" (again, homeownership), which shows a 39% homeownership rate under 35 years old, which is about the same rate as it was throughout the 90s. It broke 40% in the 2000s for a while before coming back down, but was never higher than about 43%. https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/histtab19.xlsx https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/histtab19.xlsx
- hmcq6 3y ago
  > This is percentage of householders who own the home that they are the householder of. It is not. It's a ratio of homeowners in an age group to the number of renter households in that age group, which is kinda a useless statistic. To explain why it's a bad metric take this real (but simplified) example. My roommate and I share a "household". Lets pretend that besides my roommate and I there is only one other person aged 30-34 in the US and they own a home. The Homeownership Rates by Age of Householder chart would say 50%. 1 owner household / 2 total occupied households. Now if you read that chart and take it to mean that there is only 1 homeowner and 1 renter, you would be misunderstanding what the statistics mean. There are more renters than homeowners in our example but the metric doesn't reflect that because it isn't meant to.
  - lolinder 3y ago
    This is a fair argument and as late as it is I don't have a reply—you're right that there are limitations that I hadn't considered, and I'll have to look at the numbers more closely to figure out what they mean *. However, I want to note that this represents a sudden change of pace from your original "49% of us are homeowners or renters" and "you've just linked to some statistics that show we can still afford rent". When you misunderstood the situation, you insisted that I "own it" that I was wrong (when I wasn't). It would behoove you to do so yourself instead of pretending you understood the numbers all along. * Edit: as an initial thought, I'd argue that the same argument often applies to the homeowner number—my wife and I jointly owning one house balances out you and your roommate.
    - hmcq6 3y ago
      [flagged]
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - refurb 3y ago
    But the measurement has been constant since the 90's - it hasn't changed. So regardless of the definition, it's remained constant, thus the idea that living arrangements have suddenly and dramatically shifted is not true.
grfhtsdfvv 3y ago
[flagged]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]