Millennials aren't going to buy your ugly mcmansions, silly Boomers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
But no one knows that or can predict that with any degree of certainty. The current suburbs are packed with what used to be bright-eyed twenty-somethings roughing it up in the city. Thirty years from now milennials will be the same aging, stressed, adult people that 50-somethings are today. Times change. Things change. People change. Thirty years from now there will be another 20-something generation out in the world, just as convinced that it was them who invented all the cool things in life.

Not really. The suburbs are mostly packed with people who grew up in suburban environments. Their children are reacting to the barrenness of the suburbs and are flocking to cities, and preferring it to suburban life. Look at the trends - the age cohort has fewer drivers licenses, is driving less, biking more, and is preferring to live in smaller units and being closer to the hustle and bustle of the city. Yes, it will be interesting to see what happens when they procreate, but at least in the District, folks are generally staying and investing their time in the schools and the neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
There are no neighborhoods in DC that are currently full of umc families that were impossible a generation ago.

You are kidding, right?

H Street
U Street
14th Street
Navy Yard
Barracks Row
Brookland
Lamont-Riggs
Edgewood
Trinidad

That is off the top of my head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
But no one knows that or can predict that with any degree of certainty. The current suburbs are packed with what used to be bright-eyed twenty-somethings roughing it up in the city. Thirty years from now milennials will be the same aging, stressed, adult people that 50-somethings are today. Times change. Things change. People change. Thirty years from now there will be another 20-something generation out in the world, just as convinced that it was them who invented all the cool things in life.

Not really. The suburbs are mostly packed with people who grew up in suburban environments. Their children are reacting to the barrenness of the suburbs and are flocking to cities, and preferring it to suburban life. Look at the trends - the age cohort has fewer drivers licenses, is driving less, biking more, and is preferring to live in smaller units and being closer to the hustle and bustle of the city. Yes, it will be interesting to see what happens when they procreate, but at least in the District, folks are generally staying and investing their time in the schools and the neighborhoods.

Again, all this purported sweat equity in the schools has produced are one decent MS and one mediocre HS in a city of over 650K people.

Yes, there are a bunch of whites moving to the city and largely deferring most aspects of adulthood, but in a country that will become majority-minority very soon it won't keep upwardly mobile, successful minorities from seeking out the suburbs. Your urban lifestyle doesn't mean that much to people looking for space, quiet and good schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I said middle and umc families. You have shaw, DuPont, Logan circle, brookland, Capitol Hill, etc. all neighborhoods where you probably wouldn't have raised a family 25 years ago and now it's an option. Dc has changed a lot.

DC had one OK high school, and one OK middle school, 25 years ago, just the same as today. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.

Used to be UMC folks did not live east of the park. Then they did not live there with kids. Then they did not live there with school age kids. Now the "gentrification denial" meme is they do not live there with middle school age kids. Yes, things change.

This is not completely true. There are upper 16th St. neighborhoods like Colonial Village where elderly doctors, judges, and other professionals have lived for decades. Typically their kids were in private. The difference now is that non-minorities have "discovered" these neighborhoods. Yes, things change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is too long and getting boring. A summary of the players:

1. The millennials love the city now but many of them -- despite their protests here -- will likely want to move to the burbs when they have kids (or older kids)

2. There are lot's of folks posting here (boomers, Xers, etc.) who live in big houses in the outer burbs and are desperately trying to justify living in an area that is becoming less and less attractive/appealing to anyone.

3. There are other folks posting here who live in big houses in the inner burbs (CC, Bethesda, Arlington) that will always be attractive to new folks with lot's of money.

4. There are other folks posting here who envy #3 above and will never be able to afford those houses, and thus, consistently try to lump all big houses together as McMansions.

Am I missing anyone?

5. People who are sidetracked, offended, or amused by what does or doesn't constitute a millennial.

[Anonymous]

Again, all this purported sweat equity in the schools has produced are one decent MS and one mediocre HS in a city of over 650K people.

Yes, there are a bunch of whites moving to the city and largely deferring most aspects of adulthood, but in a country that will become majority-minority very soon it won't keep upwardly mobile, successful minorities from seeking out the suburbs. Your urban lifestyle doesn't mean that much to people looking for space, quiet and good schools.

This. While white kids who grew up in suburbia are moving to the cities, the minorities who grew up in the cities are moving to the suburbs.

Signed,

someone who grew up in the country (as in cows), lived in the city (Chicago) during her 20's and now lives in the suburbs of VA where more and more minorities are moving into the neighborhood

[Anonymous]

But part of the minority migration is economic. It is cheaper to live in the suburbs. You can already see the demographic (by economics) shift of middle and lower middle class residents to places like Damasus, Olney, Dale City etc. Over time, the people who are living "out there" will be living in houses that were not designed or built with materials that will last more than 20-30 years. So what happens? You have a massive degradation of housing quality with people who generally will not be able to renovate/rebuild.

So the title of the thread is correct, millennials will not want to buy ugly, shoddily built McMansions.

[Anonymous]

Millennials are so cute!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But part of the minority migration is economic. It is cheaper to live in the suburbs. You can already see the demographic (by economics) shift of middle and lower middle class residents to places like Damasus, Olney, Dale City etc. Over time, the people who are living "out there" will be living in houses that were not designed or built with materials that will last more than 20-30 years. So what happens? You have a massive degradation of housing quality with people who generally will not be able to renovate/rebuild.

So the title of the thread is correct, millennials will not want to buy ugly, shoddily built McMansions.

It's amusing that you'd cite "Damascus, Olney, Dale City" in your post, because the obvious shift of middle and lower middle class county has been to an entire county - Prince Georges (none of whose communities you mentioned). I wonder why? Is it tacky for a white city-lover to celebrate the displacement of black Washingtonians to the DC-area equivalent of the Parisian banlieues.

As for the housing stock in the other suburbs, it's misleading to claim that they were designed with such planned obsolescence in mind, and who is to say that their residents, regardless of their incomes, would not attempt to renovate or maintain their homes?

The snotty urban crowd, whether Millennials or not, really are scum.

[Anonymous]

But part of the minority migration is economic. It is cheaper to live in the suburbs. You can already see the demographic (by economics) shift of middle and lower middle class residents to places like Damasus, Olney, Dale City etc. Over time, the people who are living "out there" will be living in houses that were not designed or built with materials that will last more than 20-30 years. So what happens? You have a massive degradation of housing quality with people who generally will not be able to renovate/rebuild.

So the title of the thread is correct, millennials will not want to buy ugly, shoddily built McMansions.

Does "millennial" only mean non-minority people of a certain age? Minorities in that age group are not considered "millennials"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But part of the minority migration is economic. It is cheaper to live in the suburbs. You can already see the demographic (by economics) shift of middle and lower middle class residents to places like Damasus, Olney, Dale City etc. Over time, the people who are living "out there" will be living in houses that were not designed or built with materials that will last more than 20-30 years. So what happens? You have a massive degradation of housing quality with people who generally will not be able to renovate/rebuild.

So the title of the thread is correct, millennials will not want to buy ugly, shoddily built McMansions.

Does "millennial" only mean non-minority people of a certain age? Minorities in that age group are not considered "millennials"?

For the most part, that is exactly what it means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But part of the minority migration is economic. It is cheaper to live in the suburbs. You can already see the demographic (by economics) shift of middle and lower middle class residents to places like Damasus, Olney, Dale City etc. Over time, the people who are living "out there" will be living in houses that were not designed or built with materials that will last more than 20-30 years. So what happens? You have a massive degradation of housing quality with people who generally will not be able to renovate/rebuild.

So the title of the thread is correct, millennials will not want to buy ugly, shoddily built McMansions.

It's amusing that you'd cite "Damascus, Olney, Dale City" in your post, because the obvious shift of middle and lower middle class county has been to an entire county - Prince Georges (none of whose communities you mentioned). I wonder why? Is it tacky for a white city-lover to celebrate the displacement of black Washingtonians to the DC-area equivalent of the Parisian banlieues.

As for the housing stock in the other suburbs, it's misleading to claim that they were designed with such planned obsolescence in mind, and who is to say that their residents, regardless of their incomes, would not attempt to renovate or maintain their homes?

The snotty urban crowd, whether Millennials or not, really are scum.

PP, I think you are incorrect. PG County, while a suburb, is incredibly convenient to Washington, and is for the most part, middle class. Parts of PG county are growing and seeing new development everywhere. Our housing values are rising, the same as most of the region. I live near Bowie and have not seen any real demographic changes in my area. It was middle class before and remains middle class.

People think PG county only the areas you hear about on the news, but it's not.

[Anonymous]

The average per person income of those moving from DC to PG over the past three years for which data is available has been around $20-22K, while the average per person income of those moving into DC from MoCo has ranged from $53-64K. It's just that the urban white Millenials who welcome gentrification are loathe to acknowledge that majority-black PG is the primary destination of people leaving or forced out of DC, so they instead prefer to predict the suburbanization of poverty in places like Olney (seriously?) where they think it's less likely their snotty, bike-riding asses will get called out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The average per person income of those moving from DC to PG over the past three years for which data is available has been around $20-22K, while the average per person income of those moving into DC from MoCo has ranged from $53-64K. It's just that the urban white Millenials who welcome gentrification are loathe to acknowledge that majority-black PG is the primary destination of people leaving or forced out of DC, so they instead prefer to predict the suburbanization of poverty in places like Olney (seriously?) where they think it's less likely their snotty, bike-riding asses will get called out.

Where are you finding all this data? You need to look at more than this to determine demographic changes in PG county. I would bet good money that the average per person income of those moving from DC to any local county over the past three years is low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average per person income of those moving from DC to PG over the past three years for which data is available has been around $20-22K, while the average per person income of those moving into DC from MoCo has ranged from $53-64K. It's just that the urban white Millenials who welcome gentrification are loathe to acknowledge that majority-black PG is the primary destination of people leaving or forced out of DC, so they instead prefer to predict the suburbanization of poverty in places like Olney (seriously?) where they think it's less likely their snotty, bike-riding asses will get called out.

Where are you finding all this data? You need to look at more than this to determine demographic changes in PG county. I would bet good money that the average per person income of those moving from DC to any local county over the past three years is low.

No, the income per person of those moving out of DC to other area jurisdictions is much higher - for example, around $69K per person for those moving out of DC to Arlington in 2013-14.