Is living in a condo considered a failure?

[Anonymous]

600K is cheap!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We lived in a condo with a young child in the Bethesda area. A neighbor actually pulled me aside outside and said something along the lines of, “Look around, people with children do not live here. This is not an appropriate place for children.”

I was floored, it was an incredibly rude and inappropriate comment, but it was also rather true.

Having someone live directly below us who complained about every jump or ball bounce was incredibly stressful. We all felt an enormous relief when we moved into a SFH and my child could run around without fear.

DP. There are many families with children in our building. I've never had any issues whatsoever. How do people think families raise children in densly populated cities where detached homes are off limits or virtually non-existent?

High density cities have much lower fertility rates, so clearly it’s not conducive to raising children. Especially if you want more than 1 or 2 kids. There is a very strong negative correlation between density and total fertility rates.

All the papers I've seen so far look at differences in fertility and density between countries and not at the fertility between families as a function of their living situation. I also don't see how's that relevant given OPs question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:600K is cheap!

It's cheap by DCUM standards where everyone makes 200k and aspires to live in a million dollar home. The average household wouldn't get approved for a mortgage that high unless they had a big down payment, which is unlike for a household that is average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:600K is cheap!

It's cheap by DCUM standards where everyone makes 200k and aspires to live in a million dollar home. The average household wouldn't get approved for a mortgage that high unless they had a big down payment, which is unlike for a household that is average.

If you make 200K, and you're trying to get a house that costs more than 600K, you're going to feel really cash strapped every month.

That said, there's nothing wrong with aspiring to live in a million dollar home. It's not like your dreams die once you get a career.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:600K is cheap!

It's cheap by DCUM standards where everyone makes 200k and aspires to live in a million dollar home. The average household wouldn't get approved for a mortgage that high unless they had a big down payment, which is unlike for a household that is average.

If you make 200K, and you're trying to get a house that costs more than 600K, you're going to feel really cash strapped every month.

That said, there's nothing wrong with aspiring to live in a million dollar home. It's not like your dreams die once you get a career.

Which proves my point. The average family isn't making 200k. I don't see anything wrong with expensive homes, I just think it's ridiculous to say that 600K is cheap.

[Anonymous]

God no. We are rich and the moment our last goes to college we are going back to condo life.

[Anonymous]

I have lived in my beautiful new townhouse in a really lovely and convenient setting with friendly neighbors for close to a year now and I still miss my condo every day. It was small, and like the OP we often got comments about “when you move to a real place” but it was awesome and I would go back in a heartbeat if I could click my ruby slippers to make it happen. Consider yourself lucky OP if you & your partner are both happy in the same place!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We lived in a condo with a young child in the Bethesda area. A neighbor actually pulled me aside outside and said something along the lines of, “Look around, people with children do not live here. This is not an appropriate place for children.”

I was floored, it was an incredibly rude and inappropriate comment, but it was also rather true.

Having someone live directly below us who complained about every jump or ball bounce was incredibly stressful. We all felt an enormous relief when we moved into a SFH and my child could run around without fear.

DP. There are many families with children in our building. I've never had any issues whatsoever. How do people think families raise children in densly populated cities where detached homes are off limits or virtually non-existent?

High density cities have much lower fertility rates, so clearly it’s not conducive to raising children. Especially if you want more than 1 or 2 kids. There is a very strong negative correlation between density and total fertility rates.

All the papers I've seen so far look at differences in fertility and density between countries and not at the fertility between families as a function of their living situation. I also don't see how's that relevant given OPs question.

There are studies within countries and the results are similar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We lived in a condo with a young child in the Bethesda area. A neighbor actually pulled me aside outside and said something along the lines of, “Look around, people with children do not live here. This is not an appropriate place for children.”

I was floored, it was an incredibly rude and inappropriate comment, but it was also rather true.

Having someone live directly below us who complained about every jump or ball bounce was incredibly stressful. We all felt an enormous relief when we moved into a SFH and my child could run around without fear.

DP. There are many families with children in our building. I've never had any issues whatsoever. How do people think families raise children in densly populated cities where detached homes are off limits or virtually non-existent?

High density cities have much lower fertility rates, so clearly it’s not conducive to raising children. Especially if you want more than 1 or 2 kids. There is a very strong negative correlation between density and total fertility rates.

Yikes. You think condos negatively impact fertility rates?

Seriously, this is a legitimate issue. I'm not saying that no condos should be built, but it absolutely does reduce fertility rates when government policies prioritize high density housing. Have you ever tried to drive a large (with space for 7 plus people and room for a bunch of groceries) in DC before? I have and it is utterly unworkable in many circumstances. Large cars that are suitable for families with 3+ kids cannot even fit in most parking garages and it is challenging to maneuver around the streets. It's unrealistic to expect a parent with (especially 3+ young kids) to go by themselves (with all of their kids) on the metro. Many parents do not feel like they can ensure their kids safety doing this and it is downright exhausting. The US TFR is already 1.62, which is 23% below the population replacement level (2.1 kids). Fertility rates are trending below replacement level almost everywhere and immigration will no longer be a sustainable strategy to maintain US population levels well before the end of this century. The US TFR is also declining by around 2% per year, and at this rate, the TFR will only be around 50% of population replacement levels 20 years from now. We need a variety of housing types, including low-density residential with sufficient room for parking, large vehicles, and fenced yards for kids to play in. US society will collapse if birth rates go too low and the consequences will be disastrous. The US needs to ensure continued availability of lower-density housing for people who want to have large families to prevent societal collapse from extremely low fertiilty rates.

So what's the alternative? Urban sprawl where transportation and other services become inefficient?

Yes, otherwise the US government will collapse humans will eventually go extinct. Suburban sprawl is the only solution to save humanity from extinction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We lived in a condo with a young child in the Bethesda area. A neighbor actually pulled me aside outside and said something along the lines of, “Look around, people with children do not live here. This is not an appropriate place for children.”

I was floored, it was an incredibly rude and inappropriate comment, but it was also rather true.

Having someone live directly below us who complained about every jump or ball bounce was incredibly stressful. We all felt an enormous relief when we moved into a SFH and my child could run around without fear.

DP. There are many families with children in our building. I've never had any issues whatsoever. How do people think families raise children in densly populated cities where detached homes are off limits or virtually non-existent?

High density cities have much lower fertility rates, so clearly it’s not conducive to raising children. Especially if you want more than 1 or 2 kids. There is a very strong negative correlation between density and total fertility rates.

Yikes. You think condos negatively impact fertility rates?

Seriously, this is a legitimate issue. I'm not saying that no condos should be built, but it absolutely does reduce fertility rates when government policies prioritize high density housing. Have you ever tried to drive a large (with space for 7 plus people and room for a bunch of groceries) in DC before? I have and it is utterly unworkable in many circumstances. Large cars that are suitable for families with 3+ kids cannot even fit in most parking garages and it is challenging to maneuver around the streets. It's unrealistic to expect a parent with (especially 3+ young kids) to go by themselves (with all of their kids) on the metro. Many parents do not feel like they can ensure their kids safety doing this and it is downright exhausting. The US TFR is already 1.62, which is 23% below the population replacement level (2.1 kids). Fertility rates are trending below replacement level almost everywhere and immigration will no longer be a sustainable strategy to maintain US population levels well before the end of this century. The US TFR is also declining by around 2% per year, and at this rate, the TFR will only be around 50% of population replacement levels 20 years from now. We need a variety of housing types, including low-density residential with sufficient room for parking, large vehicles, and fenced yards for kids to play in. US society will collapse if birth rates go too low and the consequences will be disastrous. The US needs to ensure continued availability of lower-density housing for people who want to have large families to prevent societal collapse from extremely low fertiilty rates.

It’s not a legitimate issue. The density doesn’t cause the lower birth rates. It may be correlated with lower birth rates for a variety of reasons. I’d improve my critical reasoning skills before I start preaching to people about where to live.

[Anonymous]

Hi, Jeff Bezos here. I just wanted each and every one of you to know you're a considered a failure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We lived in a condo with a young child in the Bethesda area. A neighbor actually pulled me aside outside and said something along the lines of, “Look around, people with children do not live here. This is not an appropriate place for children.”

I was floored, it was an incredibly rude and inappropriate comment, but it was also rather true.

Having someone live directly below us who complained about every jump or ball bounce was incredibly stressful. We all felt an enormous relief when we moved into a SFH and my child could run around without fear.

DP. There are many families with children in our building. I've never had any issues whatsoever. How do people think families raise children in densly populated cities where detached homes are off limits or virtually non-existent?

High density cities have much lower fertility rates, so clearly it’s not conducive to raising children. Especially if you want more than 1 or 2 kids. There is a very strong negative correlation between density and total fertility rates.

All the papers I've seen so far look at differences in fertility and density between countries and not at the fertility between families as a function of their living situation. I also don't see how's that relevant given OPs question.

There are studies within countries and the results are similar.

COuld you provide me a link to these studies. I'm having a hard time finding them. Also, do these studies compare the fertility rates between people by living situation or they only compare cities/metropolitan areas? If it's the later, the problem might be the cost of living.

[Anonymous]

Yes OP, you're a failure. You're not a proper adult unless you're willing to experience house-poverty to impress your well-meaning and totally not classist colleagues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We lived in a condo with a young child in the Bethesda area. A neighbor actually pulled me aside outside and said something along the lines of, “Look around, people with children do not live here. This is not an appropriate place for children.”

I was floored, it was an incredibly rude and inappropriate comment, but it was also rather true.

Having someone live directly below us who complained about every jump or ball bounce was incredibly stressful. We all felt an enormous relief when we moved into a SFH and my child could run around without fear.

DP. There are many families with children in our building. I've never had any issues whatsoever. How do people think families raise children in densly populated cities where detached homes are off limits or virtually non-existent?

High density cities have much lower fertility rates, so clearly it’s not conducive to raising children. Especially if you want more than 1 or 2 kids. There is a very strong negative correlation between density and total fertility rates.

Blessed be the fruit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We lived in a condo with a young child in the Bethesda area. A neighbor actually pulled me aside outside and said something along the lines of, “Look around, people with children do not live here. This is not an appropriate place for children.”

I was floored, it was an incredibly rude and inappropriate comment, but it was also rather true.

Having someone live directly below us who complained about every jump or ball bounce was incredibly stressful. We all felt an enormous relief when we moved into a SFH and my child could run around without fear.

This doesn’t surprise me at all. Bethesda is a 55-and-older planned community. It’s Leisure World West.

I hope you are happier in your home.