Why buy real estate when population isn't growing?

[Anonymous]

Why buy real estate when population isn't growing?

Who is going to buy all these houses in 20 years?

[Anonymous]

This is my question to all of the housing supply advocates trying to push through a bunch of new building

[Anonymous]

"Over the last 50 years (roughly 1972-2022), the U.S. population grew significantly, from around 208 million to over 334 million, an increase of about 123 million or 60%."

No guarantee this trend continues, but there will always be a demand for rental properties because even with a stable population with little or no population growth, there will be people who chose to rent for various reasons: young people just starting out, retirees looking to downsize into apartments, people moving to new areas or moving temporarily for work, people still saving up for a downpayment on a home purchase, etc.

[Anonymous]

No politician is going to answer this question EVER. So many Americans have their wealth tied to real estate and it's scary. And still today real estate keep being shoved down people's throat as the only way to build wealth.

If you want to buy a house, buy the cheapest house in the safest neighborhood you can afford. Buy a small house with low maintenance cost

If you are rich and don't care whether you can sell your house at a profit (after taking into account inflation, maintenance, property taxes, etc) then you go ahead and splurge on a 10k sqft home with marbles fancy pool extravagant kitchen marbles crown molding etc...But for most of us if we really want a house we have to stick to basic homes. IMO though most of us are better off without real estate ownership.

[Anonymous]

Real estate is always local.

Depopulating in rural areas and small towns isn't affecting prices in DC or even affluent suburbs of flyover.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Over the last 50 years (roughly 1972-2022), the U.S. population grew significantly, from around 208 million to over 334 million, an increase of about 123 million or 60%."

No guarantee this trend continues, but there will always be a demand for rental properties because even with a stable population with little or no population growth, there will be people who chose to rent for various reasons: young people just starting out, retirees looking to downsize into apartments, people moving to new areas or moving temporarily for work, people still saving up for a downpayment on a home purchase, etc.

I think OP is talking about single family homes. When you run the numbers, I think it's a fair debate to have whether it's a good investment for the future. Population is not only slowing in the US. In fact I just looked at fertility rate around the world even countries in Africa that were around 7 children per woman are slowing to 6 and the trend is downward.

When you look at the Western world it's bleak and irreversible. We are just not having enough kids to keep growing.

There is a reason more and more colleges are closing merging etc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Real estate is always local.

Depopulating in rural areas and small towns isn't affecting prices in DC or even affluent suburbs of flyover.

Are you saying that the demand in the affluent suburbs will be the same in these neighborhoods you have cited when the pool of buyers decreases? Isn't it a math problem? Less kids, less demand no?

[Anonymous]

Household size continues to drop- less kids but more people living as singles or couples.

That's why demand continues to increase even with population now flat- probably will drop this year with immigration slowed to almost a trickle.

[Anonymous]

The responses so far show how much real estate plays a role in people's wealth. They will argue that demand will always be there.

[Anonymous]

They aren't making more land either. Real estate in certain places will always be good. As people move for climate change reasons etc.

[Anonymous]

I’ve been thinking about this given that we downsized a couple of years ago and kept our larger house and rented it out, but are now getting ready to sell it. The potential tax hit is the biggest driver in this decision along with a disinclination to deal with the risks associated with being a landlord. But I kept thinking about how I kind of liked the idea of having some money in real property given how things are in the world—and it’s always good to diversify. But yeah—I’ve thought about the issue posed by OP as well and how that could play in. But I think that inside the beltway in DC is not likely to become a wasteland of real estate nobody wants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why buy real estate when population isn't growing?

Who is going to buy all these houses in 20 years?

The Chinese, of course. It’s already happened. Look at So California. Then will come other international families. Same as what happened with colleges.

[Anonymous]

Yup, look at Japan to see what happens to RE when population implodes. R.I.P.

[Anonymous]

Location, location, location. Doesn't matter how many houses there are total, it's how many houses near jobs, nice places to live, etc.

There are already tons of vacant homes.

[Anonymous]

First of all, the US population is still growing.

Secondly, a global trend is people in rural areas moving to urban areas. That has certainly happened in the US and will continue. COVID rural movement was a blip.