Nearly 25% of Gen Z House Hunters Willing to Sacrifice Safety to Afford a Home: Redfin Survey

Status
Not open for further replies.
alarmguy said:
If they couldn't, then housing would fall
Click to expand...

If people cannot afford to buy houses, investment companies buy the house for the same price, then rent it back to the same people that can't afford it so they can collect money every month, while not giving up the property

Its very strange you are defending the current situation so much, its not good for anyone. Its like you yourself own 10 investment properties or something

Tried to view your profile, but its all blocked off :ROFLMAO: I wonder why
 
  • Like
Reactions: pbm
SupremePossum said:
To live somewhere somewhat decent with just a small yard you need to spend at least half a mil, and then its a home that has just been flipped and still needs actual work, new electrical, etc.

You can spend a little less if you live far outside the city, not even in Houston

To live in a nice area you need at least 800K
Click to expand...
It eye opening Sir. It's getting to the point that the price of admission near/in any major city is going to be 1 million dollars.
 
CKN said:
It eye opening Sir. It's getting to the point that the price of admission near/in any major city is going to be 1 million dollars.
Click to expand...

We thought about moving, and it pretty much is a million dollars. To upgrade from our current house while adding all the stuff we've done to it, we are essentially at a million

All of the homes in that price range still need pretty much everything done to them. New electrical, new pipes, new HVAC, etc. Closest I found was houses in the $800's but with a $450 monthly HOA

We paid $200K with no HOA for a 1/4 acre lot and a 2400sqft house. Good luck finding that for even double the cost

I don't know if I'd choose Houston as the city to spend a million bucks
 
  • Like
Reactions: CKN
=============
https://www.carriermanagement.com/news/2024/01/17/257878.htm

According to Redfin, homeownership rates for 19-to-25-year-old Gen Zers are higher than the homeownership rates were for millennials and Gen Xers when they were the same age. “For example, the rate for 24-year-old Gen Zers is 27.8 percent, compared with 24.5 percent for millennials when they were 24 and 23.5 percent of Gen Xers when they were 24.”

At the time, millennials were in their early twenties, still struggling to find work due to the Great Recession, making it more difficult to afford a home, Redfin added.

When Gen Xers were in their early twenties, they were hit with some of the highest mortgage rates in history; rates were around 11 percent in 1989, when the oldest Gen Xers were 24.
==============

I don't think it makes much sense to compare generational home ownership at age 25 vs say 30 or 35. It's more interesting to know how many boomers or Gen X or Y owned a home at age 35 or even 40 (the oldest Gen-y's are 40 currently).

Everything I've read on this topic says that the home-ownership age profile has been getting increasingly delayed when looking at the "silent" generation (before the boomers) to the boomers to gen x to gen y. And with that also goes family formation. Many more kids are living with their parents today vs 20 - 40 years ago, and the age of these kids are also increasing, which delays family formation.
 
SC Maintenance said:

​

"Nepo-Homebuyers: 40% Of Under 30s Received Family Money For Down Payment"


If I give my kids the money they need for a house (and I probably will), who is actually buying what?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/darylf...r-30s-received-family-money-for-down-payment/
Click to expand...

Don't worry about it, it doesn't matter you have to foot the bill for your kids home, or that people are struggling to put food on the table

As long as the "home ownership rate" stays the same as it was when our grandparents were buying homes, we have no grounds to complain.
 
dishdude said:
No one mentioned the root cause of this, all the investors buying up the inventory! They're even building subdivisions now as rentals...not even offering the chance for someone to buy them.
Click to expand...

Investment firms came in & bought every empty lot in the neighborhood (40-50) probably, Most being undesirable....Requiring a retaining wall & a bunch of backfill for a pad to build on.
They're putting 2 duplexes on each lot....So that's 4 families living in a space meant for one.

Luckily my street got built out long ago, But others in the neighborhood have had issues....Mostly parking disputes as these 4 families have 8 vehicles between them.
 
SC Maintenance said:

​

"Nepo-Homebuyers: 40% Of Under 30s Received Family Money For Down Payment"


If I give my kids the money they need for a house (and I probably will), who is actually buying what?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/darylf...r-30s-received-family-money-for-down-payment/
Click to expand...
I've been wondering if we are not regressing to an earlier time, the feudal times, where property passed down through family lines. And the younger generation, if wiser, could grow that wealth--but they were unlikely to get ahead if they didn't have a certain amount given to them. If not feudal then just earlier times when property and possessions passed through blood lineage.

Works well when birth rate drops to two--even better if less.

Makes me wonder if financial acuity becomes all the more important to teach to one's offspring. If it's no longer true that one can get ahead by sheer hard work (and I'm not sure that is the case, but still), then all the more important to raise one's offspring well.

Supposedly blood runs thicker than water. Many a generation has complained about the upcoming generation not respecting the ways of the elders. If the younger generation becomes all the more dependent on the older generation... might a trend towards divergent family ties be reverted back towards strong family ties? What is old becomes new again. Maybe some day men will again plant trees that they know they will not sit under.
 
supton said:
I've been wondering if we are not regressing to an earlier time, the feudal times, where property passed down through family lines. And the younger generation, if wiser, could grow that wealth--but they were unlikely to get ahead if they didn't have a certain amount given to them. If not feudal then just earlier times when property and possessions passed through blood lineage.

Works well when birth rate drops to two--even better if less.

Makes me wonder if financial acuity becomes all the more important to teach to one's offspring. If it's no longer true that one can get ahead by sheer hard work (and I'm not sure that is the case, but still), then all the more important to raise one's offspring well.

Supposedly blood runs thicker than water. Many a generation has complained about the upcoming generation not respecting the ways of the elders. If the younger generation becomes all the more dependent on the older generation... might a trend towards divergent family ties be reverted back towards strong family ties? What is old becomes new again. Maybe some day men will again plant trees that they know they will not sit under.
Click to expand...
You might be right. Economists call it a K-shaped economy. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Its not exactly categorized by age, but by definition older people tend to have more saved. There really just starting to study it now.

I think in the end the whole thing is built on a pile of debt. Are a bunch of homeless basement dwelling young people that make up the largest block going to choose to continue funding the debt, deficit, medicare, SS, etc. My guess is probably not. Its not in there interest to do so. The leaders propping the current system up are mostly geriatric. I think that will change too.

In the mean time there isn't much you can do but play the hand your dealt. These threads come up here often, and while interesting, its clear there are no real solutions.
 
bbhero said:
It will fall…. Again

Big time….

This time I think it will be bigger than 2008 -09.
Click to expand...
Well, its been 15 years since, markets correct but the buyers since 08/09 are much more qualified and new regulations have made sure both the banks and the buyers are more solvent then ever.
So I dont think a house crash, with that said housing sometimes corrects once the public can no longer afford it. This isn't new though, been going on for 100 years almost. Still as we sit here discussing the housing market is rolling along nicely and we are only a few years out from when the world economy was shut down. I think we have a ways to go.
 
SupremePossum said:
...

Its very strange you are defending the current situation so much, its not good for anyone. Its like you yourself own 10 investment properties or something
...
Click to expand...
Hmmmm... stating facts is defending? Sorry, Im analytical and its fact, homeownership rate if the same as it has been for the last 60 years. How is that defending? I base investment decisions on facts and the more people think things are bad is better for the investor because sooner or later they see that nothing has changed.
Different areas of the country feel differently. I know of no couple, young couples, struggling to buy homes, other areas they do struggle and the bottom line is still the same percentage of people own homes than they did from 1965 to 2000.

If anything. I find those posting how the young have it hard and decades ago was easy insulting and not based on fact.
 
That’s enough. Dozens of posts blaming other generations. Veiled political points. Bickering.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
20,000 miles in a CX-5 GT-R
3 4 5
Replies
92
Views
22K
Tshane3000
C
  • Locked
Better Hydrodynamics with Thicker Oil? (Long)
2
Replies
33
Views
19K
moribundman
Back
Top Bottom