7 ms·

But that's the thing. Most people can't afford a home here; we're renters. The exception is upper class people riding stock market hype bubbles.

theryan 2y ago
I think that's a bit disingenuous. Home ownership under 35 is nearly 40%. 35 and up it increases to above 60% https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2023/07/younger-householders-drove-rebound-in-homeownership.html https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2023/07/younger-house... has some nice statistics.
- shrimp_emoji 2y ago
  Those numbers are made up, just like all the others.
  - WarOnPrivacy 2y ago
    Your instinct that those numbers don't match the reality you see is probably right. But it's less likely the #s are made up and more likely there are qualifiers.
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  It'd be interesting to see what would happen to 35 and up if you excluded everyone born before, idk, 1980, and then again if you excluded everyone born before 1965.
  - WarOnPrivacy 2y ago
    > It'd be interesting ... if you excluded everyone born before ... 1980, and then again .. .before 1965 On one income, I owned my first house in 1994 for $425/mo and next in 2001 for about 2x that. Hurricanes hit elsewhere in 05 & 07 (last here 1921) & I lost the 2nd when my (mandated) insurance doubled my monthly house payment. By 2021 we could minimally survive on 1.5 incomes (did 1). Today it's 3.5 incomes (have 4).
  - karatinversion 2y ago
    Luckily, the link provides just this information: 35-44: 62% 45-54: 70% 55-64: 75% 65+: 79%
- pseudo0 2y ago
  In case you weren't aware: > The name "homeownership rate" can be misleading. As defined by the US Census Bureau, it is the percentage of homes that are occupied by the owner. It is not the percentage of adults that own their own home. This latter percentage will be significantly lower than the homeownership rate. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeownership_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeownership_in_the_United_...
  - swores 2y ago
    To add to what you said, and make it a little easier to visualise why it's misleading: If you have one person living on their own in a house they own, and four people renting bedrooms in a shared house, the home ownership rate is 50% despite only 20% (1 of the 5) of the people being home owners. If the home owner then rents out one of their bedrooms to someone expanding the population between the two houses from 5 to 6, then home ownership rate is still 50% but now it's 16.6% (1 in 6) of people who own a home.
nradov 2y ago
False. The homeownership rate is about 66%. Most people can afford a home here. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RHORUSQ156N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RHORUSQ156N
- WarOnPrivacy 2y ago
  > The homeownership rate is about 66%. And declining. Homeowner vs. renter statistics reflect a decline in homeownership https://ipropertymanagement.com/research/renters-vs-homeowners-statistics https://ipropertymanagement.com/research/renters-vs-homeowne...
- quickthrowman 2y ago
  > Most people can afford a home here. Correction, most people have been able to afford a home in the past in the US. Homes used to be affordable, now they aren’t.
  - throwawaysleep 2y ago
    Gen Z is becoming homeowners at a record pace: https://www.forbes.com/sites/katherinehamilton/2023/04/21/gen-z-ahead-of-millennials-and-their-parents-in-owning-their-own-homes/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/katherinehamilton/2023/04/21/ge...
    - SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
      Record pace for only the last two generations: > Roughly 30% of 25-year-olds in 2022—the oldest of the Gen Z (born between 1997 to 2013)—owned their home in 2022, a slightly higher percentage than the 28% of Millennials (born between 1981 to 1996) who owned homes at that age and the 27% of Gen Xers (born between 1965 and 1980)—but lower than the rate for Baby Boomers (born between 1946 and 1964), 32% of whom owned homes at age 25.
      - formerly_proven 2y ago
        I'll be honest, how is it physically possible for a 25yo to own a home?
SirMaster 2y ago
I can easily afford a home, but I have no interest in buying one. I'd rather take all the extra money I save by renting and invest it in other assets. I also value my time and I don't want to have to do all the chores and upkeep a house needs. Sure I could pay someone to do all those things I suppose, but then it makes renting even that much cheaper. Owning a house used to be a goal of almost everyone? But I wonder if like me younger generations don't even have an interest in buying a house and maybe that also affects the homeowner rate.
- asynchronous 2y ago
  If anything that would make homes cheaper to afford, but I’d argue you’re in the tiny minority of people who think like that.
- carlosjobim 2y ago
  You could hire your landlord to do all the chores and upkeep for your house. I'm sure he would do it for cheaper than your rent. How many times has he been around this year to fix things for you?
  - SirMaster 2y ago
    My landlord is excellent IMO. They always fix any issues I have usually by the next day. I can't say I have had a ton of issues though. But I mean stuff like mowing the lawn, shoveling the snow, cleaning out the gutters, and various other repairs and such that happen over time. That is what I mean by I value my time, and those things can take a considerable amount of time. Also my rent is only ~$1000 per month for a 2-bedroom. It would cost me like 3x that for a basic house in mortgage plus property tax plus utilities plus maintenance etc. Sure a house is much larger space, but I don't really need all that space... And I don't find any smaller homes really. Property taxes alone would be like 1/3 to 1/2 my rent...
    - carlosjobim 2y ago
      Sure, but is it worth $1000 per month to have the lawn mowed and snow shoveled? Repairs and improvements are not a service he does for the renter, it is something that he does to keep or increase the value of his real estate investment. Your $1000 per month rent can only be compared with the interest part of a mortgage you'd get for the exact same housing you are paying rent for. If the rent is less than the interest would be, then yes, you are better off renting. You also have to be able to invest any money that would have gone to a mortgage to make more than the price of your rent in profit every month, because that is your loss each month on rent. It is achievable if you're shrewd and can stay cold headed. Compounding effects help you, but you're also vulnerable to rent hikes. If you stay for more than a few years with the same landlord, they will catch on to that you have a stable situation and are saving/investing, and they won't be able to sleep at night thinking about all that juicy income that you're saving and investing, that could belong to them. I've shoveled snow and cleaned gutters, even put on a new coat of paint a few times. It is not worth paying somebody $1000 per month for that. That's a salary for somebody working 50% of full time just taking care of maintenance on the unit you're renting. You're also comparing renting a smaller place vs buying a bigger house. That's also part of the problem. Landlords have hogged all of the apartments and smaller housing in order to extract the lifeblood of young workers, when such units would also be available for sale and not rent in a healthy environment.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

theryan 2y ago

I think that's a bit disingenuous. Home ownership under 35 is nearly 40%. 35 and up it increases to above 60% https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2023/07/younger-householders-drove-rebound-in-homeownership.html https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2023/07/younger-house... has some nice statistics.

shrimp_emoji 2y ago
Those numbers are made up, just like all the others.
- WarOnPrivacy 2y ago
  Your instinct that those numbers don't match the reality you see is probably right. But it's less likely the #s are made up and more likely there are qualifiers.
lenerdenator 2y ago
It'd be interesting to see what would happen to 35 and up if you excluded everyone born before, idk, 1980, and then again if you excluded everyone born before 1965.
- WarOnPrivacy 2y ago
  > It'd be interesting ... if you excluded everyone born before ... 1980, and then again .. .before 1965 On one income, I owned my first house in 1994 for $425/mo and next in 2001 for about 2x that. Hurricanes hit elsewhere in 05 & 07 (last here 1921) & I lost the 2nd when my (mandated) insurance doubled my monthly house payment. By 2021 we could minimally survive on 1.5 incomes (did 1). Today it's 3.5 incomes (have 4).
- karatinversion 2y ago
  Luckily, the link provides just this information: 35-44: 62% 45-54: 70% 55-64: 75% 65+: 79%
pseudo0 2y ago
In case you weren't aware: > The name "homeownership rate" can be misleading. As defined by the US Census Bureau, it is the percentage of homes that are occupied by the owner. It is not the percentage of adults that own their own home. This latter percentage will be significantly lower than the homeownership rate. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeownership_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeownership_in_the_United_...
- swores 2y ago
  To add to what you said, and make it a little easier to visualise why it's misleading: If you have one person living on their own in a house they own, and four people renting bedrooms in a shared house, the home ownership rate is 50% despite only 20% (1 of the 5) of the people being home owners. If the home owner then rents out one of their bedrooms to someone expanding the population between the two houses from 5 to 6, then home ownership rate is still 50% but now it's 16.6% (1 in 6) of people who own a home.

nradov 2y ago

False. The homeownership rate is about 66%. Most people can afford a home here. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RHORUSQ156N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RHORUSQ156N

WarOnPrivacy 2y ago
> The homeownership rate is about 66%. And declining. Homeowner vs. renter statistics reflect a decline in homeownership https://ipropertymanagement.com/research/renters-vs-homeowners-statistics https://ipropertymanagement.com/research/renters-vs-homeowne...
quickthrowman 2y ago
> Most people can afford a home here. Correction, most people have been able to afford a home in the past in the US. Homes used to be affordable, now they aren’t.
- throwawaysleep 2y ago
  Gen Z is becoming homeowners at a record pace: https://www.forbes.com/sites/katherinehamilton/2023/04/21/gen-z-ahead-of-millennials-and-their-parents-in-owning-their-own-homes/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/katherinehamilton/2023/04/21/ge...
  - SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
    Record pace for only the last two generations: > Roughly 30% of 25-year-olds in 2022—the oldest of the Gen Z (born between 1997 to 2013)—owned their home in 2022, a slightly higher percentage than the 28% of Millennials (born between 1981 to 1996) who owned homes at that age and the 27% of Gen Xers (born between 1965 and 1980)—but lower than the rate for Baby Boomers (born between 1946 and 1964), 32% of whom owned homes at age 25.
    - formerly_proven 2y ago
      I'll be honest, how is it physically possible for a 25yo to own a home?

SirMaster 2y ago

I can easily afford a home, but I have no interest in buying one. I'd rather take all the extra money I save by renting and invest it in other assets. I also value my time and I don't want to have to do all the chores and upkeep a house needs. Sure I could pay someone to do all those things I suppose, but then it makes renting even that much cheaper. Owning a house used to be a goal of almost everyone? But I wonder if like me younger generations don't even have an interest in buying a house and maybe that also affects the homeowner rate.

asynchronous 2y ago
If anything that would make homes cheaper to afford, but I’d argue you’re in the tiny minority of people who think like that.
carlosjobim 2y ago
You could hire your landlord to do all the chores and upkeep for your house. I'm sure he would do it for cheaper than your rent. How many times has he been around this year to fix things for you?
- SirMaster 2y ago
  My landlord is excellent IMO. They always fix any issues I have usually by the next day. I can't say I have had a ton of issues though. But I mean stuff like mowing the lawn, shoveling the snow, cleaning out the gutters, and various other repairs and such that happen over time. That is what I mean by I value my time, and those things can take a considerable amount of time. Also my rent is only ~$1000 per month for a 2-bedroom. It would cost me like 3x that for a basic house in mortgage plus property tax plus utilities plus maintenance etc. Sure a house is much larger space, but I don't really need all that space... And I don't find any smaller homes really. Property taxes alone would be like 1/3 to 1/2 my rent...
  - carlosjobim 2y ago
    Sure, but is it worth $1000 per month to have the lawn mowed and snow shoveled? Repairs and improvements are not a service he does for the renter, it is something that he does to keep or increase the value of his real estate investment. Your $1000 per month rent can only be compared with the interest part of a mortgage you'd get for the exact same housing you are paying rent for. If the rent is less than the interest would be, then yes, you are better off renting. You also have to be able to invest any money that would have gone to a mortgage to make more than the price of your rent in profit every month, because that is your loss each month on rent. It is achievable if you're shrewd and can stay cold headed. Compounding effects help you, but you're also vulnerable to rent hikes. If you stay for more than a few years with the same landlord, they will catch on to that you have a stable situation and are saving/investing, and they won't be able to sleep at night thinking about all that juicy income that you're saving and investing, that could belong to them. I've shoveled snow and cleaned gutters, even put on a new coat of paint a few times. It is not worth paying somebody $1000 per month for that. That's a salary for somebody working 50% of full time just taking care of maintenance on the unit you're renting. You're also comparing renting a smaller place vs buying a bigger house. That's also part of the problem. Landlords have hogged all of the apartments and smaller housing in order to extract the lifeblood of young workers, when such units would also be available for sale and not rent in a healthy environment.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]