Housing is the new source of inequality

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We bought our first home in 2002. Our interest rate was 6.75%, so not that different from today. My parents bought their first house in 1980. Their interest rate was 15%. The recent sub 4% interest rates were the anomaly, not the norm.

Dimwit housing costs as a % of income were different then.

In 1980 a single income couple bought a fixer upper small cape with no central AC, no landscaping service. No maid, no Internet. No cable tv, no cell phones, no Starbucks and no fancy vacations with one used car in driveway. Dad fixed car and house himself and mom made meals never ate out or got take our. Of course they could afford it one income and homes cost less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We bought our first home in 2002. Our interest rate was 6.75%, so not that different from today. My parents bought their first house in 1980. Their interest rate was 15%. The recent sub 4% interest rates were the anomaly, not the norm.

Dimwit housing costs as a % of income were different then.

In 1980 a single income couple bought a fixer upper small cape with no central AC, no landscaping service. No maid, no Internet. No cable tv, no cell phones, no Starbucks and no fancy vacations with one used car in driveway. Dad fixed car and house himself and mom made meals never ate out or got take our. Of course they could afford it one income and homes cost less.

You mean how some of us do it now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see how this has to do with “inequality”. You are talking about affordability. But this is hardly a new phenomenon.

This. We don’t do socialism here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We bought our first home in 2002. Our interest rate was 6.75%, so not that different from today. My parents bought their first house in 1980. Their interest rate was 15%. The recent sub 4% interest rates were the anomaly, not the norm.

Dimwit housing costs as a % of income were different then.

In 1980 a single income couple bought a fixer upper small cape with no central AC, no landscaping service. No maid, no Internet. No cable tv, no cell phones, no Starbucks and no fancy vacations with one used car in driveway. Dad fixed car and house himself and mom made meals never ate out or got take our. Of course they could afford it one income and homes cost less.

You mean how some of us do it now?

Sure, those who can afford it. It's getting further out of reach, especially for people on one income, very rapidly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do you think people felt who were starting their life during the financial meltdown in 2008-2010? At some point, the majority of law firm associates were fired (unlike during the pandemic when partners learned that they wouldn’t be able to replace them and companies got massive subsidies)?? I had a baby and was pregnant when both DH and I lost our jobs. It took us years to get back into the workforce. No one was hiring in our fields until 2012 and 2013 and by then they didn’t want stale workers anymore. I bought my first house when I was 35. Kids were in elementary school and the neighborhood wasn’t great. It massively appreciated during the pandemic but I am now in my mid 40s and my career was basically ruined because of how it started out. And I am certainly not the only one, it happened to thousands of lawyers and Wall Street workers. No one cared. No one gave subsidies like Trump and Biden did.

Subsidies wouldn't have stopped the layoffs in law firms in 2008/9. There was a huge glut of useless big firm lawyers working on securitized b.s. and related financial world legal work. Those jobs went away because those big firms were just handmaidens for parasitic financial shenanigans. Plenty of people chose better paths (maybe not as lucrative right off the bat) or pivoted when it all went away. The fact that you weren't able to participate in that nonsense doesn't make you a victim. No one is entitled to a multimillion dollar house in Arlington just because they graduated from law school and were willing to work for whatever parasitic industry was paying the most.

[Anonymous]

Housing is tough to afford, you've to work hard, save a lot, live simply and be lucky to dodge life's curveballs. That being said, people tend to live large and spend more than they can on rent, cars and lifestyle, then complain about housing inequality.

My tenants have better cars, furniture and lifestyle then I do but complain about $100 annual rent hike and inability to afford a home.

My friend is a teacher, husband is a high level fed, inherited a small home. They sold the house, lived all their life in expensive rentals in fancy areas, sent kids to private schools, paid for their weddings and never bought a house. Now they complain about not being able to afford a house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Housing is tough to afford, you've to work hard, save a lot, live simply and be lucky to dodge life's curveballs. That being said, people tend to live large and spend more than they can on rent, cars and lifestyle, then complain about housing inequality.

My tenants have better cars, furniture and lifestyle then I do but complain about $100 annual rent hike and inability to afford a home.

My friend is a teacher, husband is a high level fed, inherited a small home. They sold the house, lived all their life in expensive rentals in fancy areas, sent kids to private schools, paid for their weddings and never bought a house. Now they complain about not being able to afford a house.

+1 to the bolded. Your friends are fidiots for selling their home and blowing the proceeds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We bought our first home in 2002. Our interest rate was 6.75%, so not that different from today. My parents bought their first house in 1980. Their interest rate was 15%. The recent sub 4% interest rates were the anomaly, not the norm.

Dimwit housing costs as a % of income were different then.

In 1980 a single income couple bought a fixer upper small cape with no central AC, no landscaping service. No maid, no Internet. No cable tv, no cell phones, no Starbucks and no fancy vacations with one used car in driveway. Dad fixed car and house himself and mom made meals never ate out or got take our. Of course they could afford it one income and homes cost less.

You mean how some of us do it now?

Sure, those who can afford it. It's getting further out of reach, especially for people on one income, very rapidly.

It will get better for these people soon. We're in the middle of a very brief period of high home costs and high interest rates. Would-be buyers should live as frugally as possible now to save aggressively so they can buy a home when home values decrease in most areas.

[Anonymous]

Housing —and real property more generally— has always been a primary (and probably the primary) source of inequality. In feudal days, a small group of aristocrats owned vast estates and leased out portions of them to tenant farmers who worked the land in exchange for housing and a small portion of the yield. Very wealthy people exploiting very poor people, and the system itself was structured so it was nearly impossible for a non-land owner to become a landowner. It was exceedingly hard for poor people to move up the socioeconomic ladder, and exceedingly hard for the landed families to lose their vast economic advantages. Generational wealth was passed down in fee tails and other ownership forms that meant it was nearly impossible for even the most incompetent of offspring or heirs to lose the family estate.

Housing/land/property has historically been the way most wealth was generated, and really not that much has changed given that housing is most Americans’ single greatest asset and source of generational wealth.

[Anonymous]

https://www.redfin.com/DC/Washington/668-Kenneth-St-NE-20017/home/113744044

$444,573

four levels, three bedrooms, two and a half bathrooms, den, living room, dining room, kitchen, family room, with second and fourth floor roof top deck. Walking distance to Catholic University, Trinity University, and the Brookland Metro Station. This property (inclusionary Zoning /Affordable Dwelling Unit) can only be transferred to a household with an annual income up to eighty percent (80%) of area median income (AMI or median family income, MFI) as calculated through the formula provided in the Covenant. Those maximum income amounts are provided below. Also, the purchaser may not spend more than 41% of their gross income on housing costs. Household Size (number of people) Maximum Income (80% of MFI) for 4 people $113,840; 5 people $125,224; 6 people $136,608. Home Purchase Assistance Program (HPAP), Employer Assisted Housing Program (EAHP), and Negotiated Employee Affordable Home Purchase Program (NEAHP) are welcomed and encouraged to purchase.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.redfin.com/DC/Washington/668-Kenneth-St-NE-20017/home/113744044

$444,573

four levels, three bedrooms, two and a half bathrooms, den, living room, dining room, kitchen, family room, with second and fourth floor roof top deck. Walking distance to Catholic University, Trinity University, and the Brookland Metro Station. This property (inclusionary Zoning /Affordable Dwelling Unit) can only be transferred to a household with an annual income up to eighty percent (80%) of area median income (AMI or median family income, MFI) as calculated through the formula provided in the Covenant. Those maximum income amounts are provided below. Also, the purchaser may not spend more than 41% of their gross income on housing costs. Household Size (number of people) Maximum Income (80% of MFI) for 4 people $113,840; 5 people $125,224; 6 people $136,608. Home Purchase Assistance Program (HPAP), Employer Assisted Housing Program (EAHP), and Negotiated Employee Affordable Home Purchase Program (NEAHP) are welcomed and encouraged to purchase.

Honestly I don't get this. With 20% down, aka the max annual income of a household eligible to buy this, the monthly payment is $3k/month. That's not affordable! We make around 150k With one in day care, and that's well above the max housing budget we've ever had. God forbid it needs repairs.

[Anonymous]

Housing, like other forms of consumption, is merely the reflection/consequence of income, not the cause of income differences. Less income = corresponding housing, vehicles, recreation, size of investment portfolio, amount of savings, etc.

The question around disparities in income is unrelated to housing and should instead be simply why people have different levels of income - educational accomplishment, ambition, choice of employer, choice of location where living/working, spending choices, saving/investing practices, tax burden, and so on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you think people felt who were starting their life during the financial meltdown in 2008-2010? At some point, the majority of law firm associates were fired (unlike during the pandemic when partners learned that they wouldn’t be able to replace them and companies got massive subsidies)?? I had a baby and was pregnant when both DH and I lost our jobs. It took us years to get back into the workforce. No one was hiring in our fields until 2012 and 2013 and by then they didn’t want stale workers anymore. I bought my first house when I was 35. Kids were in elementary school and the neighborhood wasn’t great. It massively appreciated during the pandemic but I am now in my mid 40s and my career was basically ruined because of how it started out. And I am certainly not the only one, it happened to thousands of lawyers and Wall Street workers. No one cared. No one gave subsidies like Trump and Biden did.

Subsidies wouldn't have stopped the layoffs in law firms in 2008/9. There was a huge glut of useless big firm lawyers working on securitized b.s. and related financial world legal work. Those jobs went away because those big firms were just handmaidens for parasitic financial shenanigans. Plenty of people chose better paths (maybe not as lucrative right off the bat) or pivoted when it all went away. The fact that you weren't able to participate in that nonsense doesn't make you a victim. No one is entitled to a multimillion dollar house in Arlington just because they graduated from law school and were willing to work for whatever parasitic industry was paying the most.

I dislike lawyers and our financial system as well but you just come across as a special type of miserable human being — ragging on PP for being entitled and working for a “parasitic” type of law when he / she didn’t say anything indicating that this was the case. She could be a non-profit lawyer representing widows and orphans for all you know. My guess is you aren’t happy with your job / house, so you come
On here with crazy levels of negativity. Hope I’m wrong.

[Anonymous]

Baltimore has approximately 15k vacant homes. We don't have a housing shortage. We just all want to live in the zip codes with low FARM students, metro access and, cushy well-paying governmet jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Baltimore has approximately 15k vacant homes. We don't have a housing shortage. We just all want to live in the zip codes with low FARM students, metro access and, cushy well-paying governmet jobs.

OMG, I am sick of reading this as a non-laywer fed who hasn't broken 100k and has a horrible non-metro commute. That said, it's true that I didn't move to downtown Baltimore....