Boomers can’t downsize

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like people don’t downsize until they are forced to. Once people hit their 80s, things can fall apart rapidly. If you are wheelchair bound or demented or disabled, it doesn’t really matter that you will lose money selling your house. You just have no choice. (Unless you can afford full time aides or dally help).

We plan on downsizing long before we hit our 80s. I saw my MIL going through this, and it was awful. DH kept telling her to move while she could relatively easily, but she was so attached to the house, and she insisted that she would be fine. Well, she wasn't fine. She fell a few times, and one time, got knocked out cold. The house had too many trip hazards, including stairs.

She finally moved, but by then, she was desperate, and spent way more moving because she couldn't do anything herself.

My parents were the opposite. As soon as we all moved out, my parents downsized to a one level condo. They were in their 60s. This is what I want to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live in an expensive in-city neighborhood on the west coast. What we’re finding out here is that boomers who are not downsizing in price and downsizing minimally in size are the ones who are buying. Our neighborhood has traditionally been university professors and medical professionals, and recently has been dominated by tech workers with young children. While many families want to move here because of the housing stock and ok school, plus a few neighborhood amenities that are rare in our area, the few houses that are selling are ALL going to 70-80 year olds who are relocating to be near their adult children. The adult children all live in slightly less nice nearby neighborhoods. The boomers who are relocating and buying may be downsizing because they’re buying 2000-3500 sq ft houses after living in 4000 sq ft houses on the east coast, but they’re clearly paying cash and are probably not paying any less than what they sold for. Our zoned elementary is shrinking fast and soon there will be rezoning to pull in kids from crowded, more affordable areas

Our newest neighbors just moved here from northern VA and they’re 1 of 4 older couples in our 10-block area who have done that. And nothing else is really going on the market because the existing boomers have nowhere to go, so our neighborhood feels like a 55+ community.

If they are 70-80, in ten years, they will probably not be able to stay in those homes and their children will upsize or they will sell and the younger families will purchase the homes.

Maybe, maybe not- I‘m the PP who wrote about this in my neighborhood and I can tell you about the flip side. Many of my DD’s classmates’ parents have moved into their childhood homes and their parents now spend most of their time in 2nd houses and maintain basement apartments or MIL suites in the original house. It’s one of the ways few younger people are breaking into the neighborhood, and of course it comes with a lot of literal and figurative inherited privilege.

The darker side of people aging in place is that we have more than a few houses where 90+ year olds live in varying degrees of health. Some are doing great and I’d love to be them one day! Some are not but have all of their wealth wrapped up in their house and stay on until the very last minute, which means their houses are basically collapsing around them and they cash out to fund assisted living. I get anxious when I haven’t seen some of these people outside in a while or see lots of leaves gathering on their car. Then developers buy their crumbling houses (because no one else can maintain a second residence while waiting out 2+
years of permitting and construction) and they build really hideous new builds that languish until someone relocates from SF, NYC or London who is desperate to buy.

[Anonymous]

Not in this economy. I'm Gen X, and praying we don't have to move anytime soon. I don't want to give up that sweet home loan interest rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Find a house or condo on a lake in Michigan or Kentucky. Nice view, lower prices.

Nope. Great Lakes-adjacent prices are at all-time highs since COVID.

Sure, but if you're coming from the East or West coast these prices are nothing.

[Anonymous]

I see a lot of boomers aging in place in these 2 story 3500 square foot homes and it doesn’t seem very economical to me—Paying taxes on, cooling, heating, and cleaning all that? Some rooms even sit empty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of boomers aging in place in these 2 story 3500 square foot homes and it doesn’t seem very economical to me—Paying taxes on, cooling, heating, and cleaning all that? Some rooms even sit empty.

My mom is one of those. She is willing to downsize but only if it’s a newish, SFH with a yard large enough for a garden. No shared walls. And it can’t be too big.

Houses new enough to require less maintenance than her current house either aren’t SFH or they are bigger than her current 3000 sq ft house but crammed onto a 5000 sq ft lot with neighbors 5’ away and barely any yard. She has deemed that unacceptable, and also refuses the idea of a condo, apartment, or row house because she says she should not have to listen to neighbors after 50 years of sfh living.

People aren’t really building cute new cottages on medium-size lots these days so she’s stuck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in an expensive in-city neighborhood on the west coast. What we’re finding out here is that boomers who are not downsizing in price and downsizing minimally in size are the ones who are buying. Our neighborhood has traditionally been university professors and medical professionals, and recently has been dominated by tech workers with young children. While many families want to move here because of the housing stock and ok school, plus a few neighborhood amenities that are rare in our area, the few houses that are selling are ALL going to 70-80 year olds who are relocating to be near their adult children. The adult children all live in slightly less nice nearby neighborhoods. The boomers who are relocating and buying may be downsizing because they’re buying 2000-3500 sq ft houses after living in 4000 sq ft houses on the east coast, but they’re clearly paying cash and are probably not paying any less than what they sold for. Our zoned elementary is shrinking fast and soon there will be rezoning to pull in kids from crowded, more affordable areas

Our newest neighbors just moved here from northern VA and they’re 1 of 4 older couples in our 10-block area who have done that. And nothing else is really going on the market because the existing boomers have nowhere to go, so our neighborhood feels like a 55+ community.

You have essentially described my neighborhood in a moderately-close-in DC suburb. Neighborhood was built in 1995 and still has many (I'd venture to say majority) original owners - Boomers. Last two houses that sold (4000 sf SFHs for for $1M+) went to Boomer couples moving to live near their kids...who are young adults living in apartments. In both cases, they out-bid families with young children, either on price or by waiving contingencies/paying cash. On my block alone, there are two widows and one widower living alone in their giant SFHs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of boomers aging in place in these 2 story 3500 square foot homes and it doesn’t seem very economical to me—Paying taxes on, cooling, heating, and cleaning all that? Some rooms even sit empty.

My mom is one of those. She is willing to downsize but only if it’s a newish, SFH with a yard large enough for a garden. No shared walls. And it can’t be too big.

Houses new enough to require less maintenance than her current house either aren’t SFH or they are bigger than her current 3000 sq ft house but crammed onto a 5000 sq ft lot with neighbors 5’ away and barely any yard. She has deemed that unacceptable, and also refuses the idea of a condo, apartment, or row house because she says she should not have to listen to neighbors after 50 years of sfh living.

People aren’t really building cute new cottages on medium-size lots these days so she’s stuck.

55+ communities that have little sfh. Lots of those communities popping up, so they are new builds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not in this economy. I'm Gen X, and praying we don't have to move anytime soon. I don't want to give up that sweet home loan interest rate.

I mean. yea.. ours is like 2.5% on $190k loan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of boomers aging in place in these 2 story 3500 square foot homes and it doesn’t seem very economical to me—Paying taxes on, cooling, heating, and cleaning all that? Some rooms even sit empty.

My mom is one of those. She is willing to downsize but only if it’s a newish, SFH with a yard large enough for a garden. No shared walls. And it can’t be too big.

Houses new enough to require less maintenance than her current house either aren’t SFH or they are bigger than her current 3000 sq ft house but crammed onto a 5000 sq ft lot with neighbors 5’ away and barely any yard. She has deemed that unacceptable, and also refuses the idea of a condo, apartment, or row house because she says she should not have to listen to neighbors after 50 years of sfh living.

People aren’t really building cute new cottages on medium-size lots these days so she’s stuck.

55+ communities that have little sfh. Lots of those communities popping up, so they are new builds.

The ones with yards near her are sold as condos in spite of being standalone houses, so no gardening allowed except in pots and on patios. And don’t get me started on her “not wanting to live near a bunch of old people”- that’s another thread for another day and the midlife concerns forum!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of boomers aging in place in these 2 story 3500 square foot homes and it doesn’t seem very economical to me—Paying taxes on, cooling, heating, and cleaning all that? Some rooms even sit empty.

My mom is one of those. She is willing to downsize but only if it’s a newish, SFH with a yard large enough for a garden. No shared walls. And it can’t be too big.

Houses new enough to require less maintenance than her current house either aren’t SFH or they are bigger than her current 3000 sq ft house but crammed onto a 5000 sq ft lot with neighbors 5’ away and barely any yard. She has deemed that unacceptable, and also refuses the idea of a condo, apartment, or row house because she says she should not have to listen to neighbors after 50 years of sfh living.

People aren’t really building cute new cottages on medium-size lots these days so she’s stuck.

55+ communities that have little sfh. Lots of those communities popping up, so they are new builds.

I can't be the only Gen Xer who abhors those types of place. We are just a few years from being eligible, and there's no way. They are at the absolute bottom of the housing list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why boomers are annoying to so many of us.

You’re so entitled.

Entitled to the things they earned?

"Entitled" to an exponential increase in home values? "Earned" that?

I look forward to capturing my home appreciation too but I'm not going to complain about timing the market so I can extract the maximum debt on the backs of a young family.

This! My parents (early 70s) somehow have an inflated idea of the value of their home (but Zillow says so! But we have a new kitchen!) that doesn’t reflect recent sales on their street AND simultaneously have mentally benchmarked the cost of other homes at 2008 prices and act as if each house that is listed is an anomaly as opposed to accepting that the baseline price per sq ft has changed. You can’t sell today’s prices and then complain you can’t buy at yesterday’s prices.

[Anonymous]

I don't think current elevated home prices are sustainable.

There is no way we could even afford to buy in our own neighborhood where we purchased in 2016. If some of our elderly neighbors sold, they still could barely buy a decent condo in this general area for the same price.

A bigger issue are the houses standing empty because the heirs don't want to sell them, for whatever reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My parents sold their 4/3.5 house in the DC suburbs, and moved to SC. My mom says she “downsized” because she now has 3/3.5, but after all the “must have” upgrades, she only saved about $40k in purchase price. In rural SC. It blows my mind.

This. All the places that used to be cheap are not. In fact, they’re relatively expensive when you account for the things you lose by leaving a big city. I was willing to move to places I don’t even like that much for low COL and good weather. Similar COL? What’s the point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think current elevated home prices are sustainable.

There is no way we could even afford to buy in our own neighborhood where we purchased in 2016. If some of our elderly neighbors sold, they still could barely buy a decent condo in this general area for the same price.

A bigger issue are the houses standing empty because the heirs don't want to sell them, for whatever reason.

If they’re near an urban area with limitations on multi family housing, the prices will absolutely be maintained. My city has increased in population by hundreds of thousands of people since the pandemic began. Commutes are long and challenging even with many people still doing wfh. Heirs (and in the case of my city, overseas owners) will absolutely hold on to an asset that is stable or increasing in value. That’s the entire problem of housing as an investment vs. a place to live.

Now if you’re talking a townhouse an hours’ commute away, that’s different.