|
Aliquid posted:also this shows me that you're The Worst and probably part of the problem when it comes to urban living http://www.marketplace.org/2013/04/05/life/renting-homes-recovering-addicts-profit this is the sort of housing I'm talking about by the by, not some orphanage or non-profit. I didn't make any NIMBY claims, just that it's loving crazy a tiny ancient tiny 2 bedroom house would go for that much even with things that normally should tank asking price.
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 07:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 22:41 |
|
|
This is your periodic reminder that news media still report rising home prices as though they were a good thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 07:21
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:I think most people have no idea how mayonnaise is made because you can get a huge jar if it for like $6. Smaller more reasonable jars you can find for like $2 or $3 or so. It's meringue with oil mixed in to keep it like that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 08:56
|
|
|
ShadowHawk posted:This is your periodic reminder that news media still report rising home prices as though they were a good thing. Reminds me of the barely unrestrained glee they had when they spoke about raising gas prices back in the day "Well Jill, my stock portfolio sure does love these higher gas prices! But why don't you tell our folks at home what peasants can do to save gasoline with a dumb segment?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 13:31
|
|
|
Coolness Averted posted:You kinda missed his point. 2 bedroom condos in so-so places are going for 400k in the more livable cities an hour or so from LA for example, and that's hardly the SF boom area. That's again, the point. SF/NYC/Vancouver are insane for similar reasons (well, Vancouver because of rich Chinese folks getting their money out of the country as fast as they possibly can). In most of the country, a software person can expect a salary trajectory of something like 60k -> 110k over a career, buy a house in the 200k-range, and retire to a fishing town in west Michigan or North Florida or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 14:04
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:The number of people in my org (of a well-established SV company) who have relocated out of California to work remotely in the past six months alone is pretty ridiculous, but tells the tale. This and legal pot are major contributors to Denver real estate going insane right now. I've got contacts out there telling stories of people from CA paying what is stupid money by CO standards because they're used to $$$+ CA prices and thinking they're getting a good deal. One of my broker friends has heard, more than once, a client saying (on a $500K+ property) "man this is so cheap, let's buy two and rent out the second one". You also have a huge chunk of remote workers fleeing from Phoenix to Denver, from what I've seen. Phoenix has turned into a sizable IT/Dev/DevOps hub for financial service companies like PayPal, Amex, Wells Fargo, AAA Insurance, Intuit, BoA, VISA, Fidelity, etc, plus the likes of Boeing and Intel, yet people are getting out because of brutal heat (105+ for 6+ months with regular 115+ peaks), sun so brutal it literally hurts, and rapidly progressing pollution that may soon rival LA in the 70s, according to the EPA. There's got to be a sizable chunk fleeing from the likes of Seattle, Chicago, and Detroit for various reasons as well, I'd imagine. See also: Austin, TX. EnergizerFellow fucked around with this message at 14:33 on Jun 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
Detroit is picking up a bit, actually. With all the Dan Gilbert companies giving salary bonuses for employees that live in the city and some neighborhoods (Corktown, Mexicantown, the Woodward Corridor) getting both nicer and safer, it's turning into something of a draw, at least regionally.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:oh no you can totally live by yourself in sf on a six figure salary If you are over the age of 28 and live in a situation where there is an RA (even if you are the RA), there's a good chance you hosed up in life. EDIT: EnergizerFellow posted:See also: Austin, TX. We have it crazy, but one thing that is to our advantage is that the city council is actively working to try and make the city more dense and encourage development. There are new high-rise condos and apartment buildings going up all the time, so supply is almost keeping up with demand. Some areas are still seeing insane price increases, though mostly because they were terribly under-valued before. e_angst fucked around with this message at 14:54 on Jun 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
a foolish pianist posted:Detroit is picking up a bit, actually. With all the Dan Gilbert companies giving salary bonuses for employees that live in the city and some neighborhoods (Corktown, Mexicantown, the Woodward Corridor) getting both nicer and safer, it's turning into something of a draw, at least regionally. I'd even argue that the smart money is on Detroit right now. While some may flee because of weather and state-level politics, the automotive industry has recovered, along with extensive growth in peripheral industries like tooling, automation hardware/software, IT, logistics, etc. You also have companies like Toyota and other non-US auto makers and suppliers moving in in a big way. Bonus points for the Public Ivy that is University of Michigan, plus good logistics infrastructure and a decent airport.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 15:14
|
|
|
nm posted:Also remember that if you are a boomer, CA's tax structure makes selling make less sense. We forget about the human element all too often when it discussions of housing. "Sell your overpriced Bay Area house and move 1k miles away from everyone you know and love" is something an accountant might suggest, but its not what a lot of people want to do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
cheese posted:A friend's boomer parents are in this situation. ~1.5m Mountain View house they bought in the 80's for a fraction, but what are they gonna do if they sell? All 3 of their kids live in the Bay Area (SJ, Pleasanton and Daly City) and are either recently married or engaged, and they have lifelong friends nearby. They could sell and buy 40 arces and a McMansion in Missouri, but why? So they can start their lives over and be 1500 miles from their impending grandchildren? I imagine this is also part of the push for working remotely; if you move to the Bay Area but literally everybody you knew before is in Maryland then it's going to start being "boy I miss my people." So not only do you live in an area with a stupidly high cost of living all of the sudden as well as a host of other problems but you miss the people you like.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
cheese posted:A friend's boomer parents are in this situation. ~1.5m Mountain View house they bought in the 80's for a fraction, but what are they gonna do if they sell? All 3 of their kids live in the Bay Area (SJ, Pleasanton and Daly City) and are either recently married or engaged, and they have lifelong friends nearby. They could sell and buy 40 arces and a McMansion in Missouri, but why? So they can start their lives over and be 1500 miles from their impending grandchildren?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
cheese posted:A friend's boomer parents are in this situation. ~1.5m Mountain View house they bought in the 80's for a fraction, but what are they gonna do if they sell? All 3 of their kids live in the Bay Area (SJ, Pleasanton and Daly City) and are either recently married or engaged, and they have lifelong friends nearby. They could sell and buy 40 arces and a McMansion in Missouri, but why? So they can start their lives over and be 1500 miles from their impending grandchildren? If the cohort that includes your friend's boomer parents hadn't spent the 80s, 90s and 00s NIMBYing the poo poo out of different types of housing, maybe they'd have some place in the area to move.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
twodot posted:People who own million dollar homes simply do not appear anywhere on my priority list of people to be concerned about. Anyone concerned about the human element needs to have a thousand other concerns before they get to "What if someone owns an asset that is too valuable?".
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:For me, it's not the human element so much as the consequences of the human element. It isn't financially feasible for people who have outgrown their houses to move down to a smaller house or an apartment. That feeds the housing shortage, and it also means that people bid high for the smaller houses , tear down, and rebuild enormous houses to justify the land price. Right now, there are enormous financial penalties to anybody in the Bay Area switching homes, and that disrupts the normal cycle of housing. Starter homes are ruinously expensive, which means they're pulled from the market and turned into more expensive homes, which means there aren't any starter homes, which means people bid even more to avoid being shut out of the market, lather rinse repeat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
twodot posted:People who own million dollar homes simply do not appear anywhere on my priority list of people to be concerned about. Anyone concerned about the human element needs to have a thousand other concerns before they get to "What if someone owns an asset that is too valuable?". MickeyFinn posted:If the cohort that includes your friend's boomer parents hadn't spent the 80s, 90s and 00s NIMBYing the poo poo out of different types of housing, maybe they'd have some place in the area to move. twodot posted:Ok, but the reason housing prices being high is bad isn't because people who own million dollar homes feel like they have inadequate options, it's because people who don't have homes have no options. If the solution to affordable housing or almost any problem is "people with millions of dollars don't get to live near their grandchildren" then I don't give a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
cheese posted:That is fine, but the dad climbed poles for AT&T for 35 years and the mother is about to retire as an elementary school teacher - the entire point of my post is that the bay area has created a strange situation where boomers who bought affordable, "normal" houses in the 70's/80's/even 90's and raised their families in them now have a house that is worth a ton but that they often don't really have any choice but to continue to live in. They are not poor or even "working class" at this point, but it would be a brutal financial penalty for them to sell it and move to a small condo, and that is all they could afford if they want to continue to live near 30 years worth of family and friends. quote:If they sold their house for 1.5M dollars and moved to Kansas, would the housing crisis improve?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
twodot posted:They have approximately infinity more choices than people who can't afford to live. "People with millions of dollars exacerbate a problem through following their self interests" isn't a thing I will ever support. Yes, the best way to fix things is to harbor intense jealousy at anyone who has more than you, and to villainize them at every turn. Ignore their conditions and ignore what motivates them to do what they do, because they have money (or at least valuable assets) and therefor gently caress them!
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 18:31
|
|
|
cheese posted:Yes, if they had been able to predict the future like some kind of wizard then I'm sure they and their friends would have had a different perspective. I'm not trying to white knight for white, middle class Boomers but hindsight is 20/20 and they are flawed, short sighted people just like they rest of us. I'm sure I and my Millenial cohort are going to have to explain to our grandkids in 40 years why we refused to look up from our cat videos as the scientists warned us about climate change. They didn't have to be able to predict the future, they merely had to not be assholes to everyone that wasn't a homeowner. Now that their lovely behavior is affecting them, they are the last people we should be worried about. All I'm saying is that this cohort is the maker of their choice between riches and seeing their grandchildren. e_angst posted:Yes, the best way to fix things is to harbor intense jealousy at anyone who has more than you, and to villainize them at every turn. Ignore their conditions and ignore what motivates them to do what they do, because they have money (or at least valuable assets) and therefor gently caress them! Considering that we are in this situation because we spent the last 30ish years listening almost exclusively to these people, yes, it is time their interests are put on the farthest back burner. MickeyFinn fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Jun 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
The comfortable middle class are a large part of the problem, but the worst of their impact on the housing crisis is NIMBY refusal to allow high-density housing, not having bought houses back when they were cheap(er). I'm on my local Nextdoor (which is great for stuff like forming a garden club and getting rid of unwanted furniture/plums/Kaffir lime leaves) and it's amazing the number of people who are furious at any apartment development because traffic (ostensibly). One person flat-out said that apartment dwellers were likely to commit crimes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
Couldn't these people sell their house worth a fuckload of money and move just a little bit away and not half a country away if they want to visit grandchildren? It doesn't seem like a huge problem.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Couldn't these people sell their house worth a fuckload of money and move just a little bit away and not half a country away if they want to visit grandchildren? Probably not, unless you mean "a few hours away" given the area. Because of the mentioned NIMBY stuff going on anything with more density than single-family houses is just plain loathed and resisted. That's also part of why suburban/exurban traffic can get positively horrendous. That same NIMBY stuff leads to making properly planning the road network (that and resistance to taxes) literally impossible. It's seriously a perfect shitstorm of absolutely everything about the situation being awful. The solutions to fix it all can't happen because of NIMBYism. White homeowners of middle class or higher decided that their idyllic neighborhoods should be frozen in time and stay the way they are forever. Unfortunately the world is changing and the human race needs to rethink housing something fierce for a multitude of reasons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Probably not, unless you mean "a few hours away" given the area. That's exactly what I mean. I'm fairly certain they could take the $1.5 million from selling the house, find a very nice other house like 2 hours away, and still have hundreds of thousands of dollars left over. Their only other option is not "40 acres in Missouri."
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
e_angst posted:Yes, the best way to fix things is to harbor intense jealousy at anyone who has more than you, and to villainize them at every turn. Ignore their conditions and ignore what motivates them to do what they do, because they have money (or at least valuable assets) and therefor gently caress them! I mean it's not perfect but it's certainly on the right track.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
Chicago is doing well actually, a lot of companies are moving some or all of their jobs back into the city. Turns out nobody desirable under the age of 40 wants to take a job in the suburbs and smarter employers are belatedly realising this: Allstate just relocated a bunch of their IT downtown for example, and McDonalds just announced their HQ is moving to the West Loop. You're also seeing employers from shittier Midwestern cities moving their HQ operations to Chicago. With tech in particular you already have some successful local startups (Groupon, Grubhub, Jellyvision etc) and a lot of smaller but well funded ones popping up. Health, education, marketing, enterprise IT, and transport/logistics related startups are most of what you get here. Google and AWS recently opened up good sized offices as well. The downtown/North Side real estate market is hot but housing stock has mostly kept pace so there's still plenty of affordable options for professionals. Infrastructure is solid if a bit old, weather still kinda sucks but climate change will fix that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:That's exactly what I mean. I'm fairly certain they could take the $1.5 million from selling the house, find a very nice other house like 2 hours away, and still have hundreds of thousands of dollars left over. Their only other option is not "40 acres in Missouri." oh no but what about all that traffic that these retirees will hafta deal with in their already-constrained schedule
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Couldn't these people sell their house worth a fuckload of money and move just a little bit away and not half a country away if they want to visit grandchildren? Its a red herring because these people don't want to actually move they just want other people to not move in which is why they have fought against any sort of responsible city planning for 30 years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
twodot posted:They have approximately infinity more choices than people who can't afford to live. "People with millions of dollars exacerbate a problem through following their self interests" isn't a thing I will ever support. To be fair to city planers, the kind of growth and income explosion that the Bay Area has experienced over the last 25 years (but specifically over the last 10) is pretty close to unprecedented. They did a lovely job but I'm not sure even 8-10 years ago people really could have been expected to anticipate the madness we are in. ToxicSlurpee posted:Probably not, unless you mean "a few hours away" given the area. Because of the mentioned NIMBY stuff going on anything with more density than single-family houses is just plain loathed and resisted. That's also part of why suburban/exurban traffic can get positively horrendous. That same NIMBY stuff leads to making properly planning the road network (that and resistance to taxes) literally impossible. It's seriously a perfect shitstorm of absolutely everything about the situation being awful. All of this discussion is somewhat broken as long as Prop 13 exists.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
cheese posted:Selling their 1.5M dollar house to some east coast country club guy who moved out for a tech job is going to improve the housing crisis? No it won't, because the housing crisis you are worried about is not tech workers buying million dollar properties. Its people without tech jobs having access to affordable apartments. And them moving or not moving will have no impact on that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
cheese posted:Is it objectively wrong to want to live in a neighborhood of single family homes that mirrors the kind you grew up in? Its a moot point of course, because those people have the power and the money, and cities like Mountain View and Palo Alto will stay single family homes with a mix of new 4 story luxury apartment buildings. It isn't wrong to want that and there are areas of the world where that is a perfectly fine thing. San Francisco is currently not one of those areas; this is why suburban sprawl happens in the first place and causes all of the problems that it does. The problem is the adamant opposition to dense housing or mixed use zoning that so many areas have. There's also the issue that cities as they are now weren't planned for the world population we have now and more importantly neither was the housing. When you get highly desirable areas full of high paying jobs like the Bay Area you get poo poo loads of people eager to move there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
cheese posted:Is it objectively wrong to want to live in a neighborhood of single family homes that mirrors the kind you grew up in?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
twodot posted:When people that want to spend $1,500,000 on a house show up and discover all the $1,500,000 houses are inhabited by retirees that want to live near their grand kids, they don't just move on, they bid up whatever housing is available. And when the people who were living in whatever was available get out bid, they proceed to bid up the cheaper properties. And even that is ignoring people that might want to convert a 1,500,000 house into housing for multiple families. ToxicSlurpee posted:It isn't wrong to want that and there are areas of the world where that is a perfectly fine thing. San Francisco is currently not one of those areas; this is why suburban sprawl happens in the first place and causes all of the problems that it does.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
http://qz.com/710126/a-massive-79-million-heist-just-happened-and-its-threatening-the-future-of-blockchains/ Remember that blockchain-based VC firm?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
JamesKPolk posted:http://qz.com/710126/a-massive-79-million-heist-just-happened-and-its-threatening-the-future-of-blockchains/ dont tell me someone stole millions of dollars from bitcoiners
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
exploding mummy posted:dont tell me someone stole millions of dollars from bitcoiners Worse. Someone stole millions of dollars from wannabe bitcoiners -- people that saw Bitcoin and thought it was such a good idea that they would make their own cheaper, disrupted Bitcoin.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
Bitcoin, without the oppressive regulation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
Lote posted:Worse. Someone stole millions of dollars from wannabe bitcoiners -- people that saw Bitcoin and thought it was such a good idea that they would make their own cheaper, disrupted Bitcoin. I think they just stole the Monopoly money, not actual dollars. Converting cryptocurrencies into actual cash isn't easy, especially since they will have to cover their tracks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
Cicero posted:It's not wrong to want it, but it's wrong to push for those restriction on other people's property at the expense of people being able to do things like pay their rent or have sub-1-hour commutes. Much like it's not exactly wrong to not want to live next to a homeless shelter, but if you demand that all homeless shelters be built in everywhere but your own neighborhood you're kind of a dick. Which is kind of they key issue of NIMBYism; the next neighborhood over is thinking exactly the same thing. When you ask "where should we put this thing that is necessary but people don't like?" everybody responds with "not here." Same thing keeps happening with so, so many things; but you can't effectively change zoning laws because chances are the people elected to make those are elected by the same people demanding that their quaint little communities be frozen in time exactly as they are forever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
cheese posted:Selling their 1.5M dollar house to some east coast country club guy who moved out for a tech job is going to improve the housing crisis? No it won't, because the housing crisis you are worried about is not tech workers buying million dollar properties. Its people without tech jobs having access to affordable apartments. And them moving or not moving will have no impact on that. Supply and demand are real things in the housing market.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 22:41 |
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:It's a downright bizarre thing to think about because entire vast swathes of America are just plain abandoned right now. The area I'm originally from is just awash with abandoned buildings and cheap housing; an enterprising software company could probably just buy up entire drat city blocks on the cheap and fill them with programmers. Yeah, but they wouldn't pay them bay area wages, and thus wouldn't get the level of people they want. And after all, being a startup who doesn't have the balls to bet on SF means you're not going to get as much VC love. Liquid Communism fucked around with this message at 01:20 on Jun 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 01:10
|
|
