- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Americans need to earn 70% more than 6 years ago to comfortably afford a median price home
Posted on 5/13/25 at 9:41 am to YouKnowImRight
Posted on 5/13/25 at 9:41 am to YouKnowImRight
You said this
Then said this
Which is making the point that people are more self-centered today.
Which is the point of what I said
quote:
Americans have always been out for themselves, and our politicians and wealthy have always been crooked.
Then said this
quote:
The difference is, today you have influencers who make you think you're special and different and that your opinion and your struggle matters more than anyone else's (true on the right and the left).
Which is making the point that people are more self-centered today.
Which is the point of what I said
This post was edited on 5/13/25 at 9:42 am
Posted on 5/13/25 at 9:50 am to YouKnowImRight
quote:
. Poor people of the past couldn't afford ANY luxuries, but the "poor" in America have cars, TV's air conditioning, and cell phones.
poor people of the past couldn't afford things that didn't exist or were exceptionally more expensive than they are today (TVs/AC)
A window unit is cheaper today than it was in 1970, not even counting for inflation
Posted on 5/13/25 at 10:09 am to YouKnowImRight
quote:
Millenials seem to think everything is worse because it happened in their lifetime.
Those events did not happen in a vacuum how stupid are you?
Posted on 5/13/25 at 10:15 am to YouKnowImRight
quote:
Gen X had it great, and every generation after us has had it even better.
My dad graduated in advertising and got a house making minimum wage, in the mid 80s and supported a wife and son (me).
A advertising grad today will be lucky to be able to afford an apartment in a good area of town, let alone support a stay at home mom and child.
You are so detached from reality - change your username to "Time traveler from the 60s"
Posted on 5/13/25 at 10:22 am to YouKnowImRight
quote:
Gen X had it great, and every generation after us has had it even better.
Thanks democrats!!!!
Posted on 5/13/25 at 10:24 am to RaoulDuke504
The same people complaining are the same people that thought it was great to issue stimulus checks aka inflation causing money.
Posted on 5/13/25 at 10:36 am to Spankum
quote:
Well, I don’t think home prices have gone up by 70%….so there appears to funny math going on.
We bought our house 8 years ago, if someone was attempting to buy our house currently, and put down the same percentage that we put down (which would still be more out of pocket than what we put down), their monthly mortgage payment would be ~67% higher than our current payment.
ETA: and that's just the price of a home, not to mention the prices of other things that have eaten into the budget of a prospective homebuyer.
This post was edited on 5/13/25 at 10:38 am
Posted on 5/13/25 at 10:53 am to Epic Cajun
Good point, we've been in our house for 10 years and our monthly payment (mortgage, insurance, and taxes) is about 13% of our take home pay each month. I went online and looked at comparable homes in our area and if you include the equity we have in our house plus a little more cash for a down payment, it would jump to 29.5% of our take home pay each month going to housing. As I said in an earlier post, my wife and I have good jobs and live below our means and this would definitely change how much we could save and invest and live our lives. I can't imagine what it's like for people trying to get their foot in the door now.
Posted on 5/13/25 at 11:04 am to grsharky
quote:
Good point, we've been in our house for 10 years and our monthly payment (mortgage, insurance, and taxes) is about 13% of our take home pay each month. I went online and looked at comparable homes in our area and if you include the equity we have in our house plus a little more cash for a down payment, it would jump to 29.5% of our take home pay each month going to housing. As I said in an earlier post, my wife and I have good jobs and live below our means and this would definitely change how much we could save and invest and live our lives. I can't imagine what it's like for people trying to get their foot in the door now.
We're in the same boat. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing, but we're pretty much stuck in our house. In order to "upgrade" our current living situation we'd have to make a ridiculous amount of money more than we already make, and we do okay for ourselves.
Posted on 5/13/25 at 11:08 am to Epic Cajun
quote:
We're in the same boat. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing, but we're pretty much stuck in our house. In order to "upgrade" our current living situation we'd have to make a ridiculous amount of money more than we already make, and we do okay for ourselves.
that is where we are at too. One positive from it is that no one on our street has moved recently and everyone has kids. Pretty much everyone has out grown their house but has to stay cause no one wants to ditch the rate. That kids benefit from a good crew all around the same age
Forced community bonding. There is only one neighbor i wouldn't mind seeing move but she inherited house so she ain't going anywhere
This post was edited on 5/13/25 at 11:09 am
Posted on 5/13/25 at 12:13 pm to Ihatethiscity
quote:
At least when men came back from WW2 they could buy a house.
I think part of it is expectations. The average WWII vet was buying a house like this in the late 1940s..
No one is building or buying houses like this any more.
Posted on 5/13/25 at 12:19 pm to grsharky
quote:
Good point, we've been in our house for 10 years and our monthly payment (mortgage, insurance, and taxes) is about 13% of our take home pay each month. I went online and looked at comparable homes in our area and if you include the equity we have in our house plus a little more cash for a down payment, it would jump to 29.5% of our take home pay each month going to housing.
What percentage of your take home pay was it 10 years ago?
Posted on 5/13/25 at 12:21 pm to Darth_Vader
Somebody would pay $450k in Dallas to buy the lot that house sits on and tear it down and build a $3MM home on it
Posted on 5/13/25 at 12:35 pm to Mingo Was His NameO
quote:
Somebody would pay $450k in Dallas to buy the lot that house sits on and tear it down and build a $3MM home on it
I do think that’s part of the problem. What constitutes a starter home today is nothing like what was considered a starter home even 20 years ago. And one of the drivers of this phenomenon is a lack of real starter homes. I think part of the problem there is if someone were to start building them, maybe even build a whole neighborhood of them, they’d be filled up quickly with government funded section 8 hood rats. Then no one would want to move in and neighboring neighborhoods would see their property values collapse because now they’re “in the hood”.
So basically a lot of it boils down to new home buyers avoiding low-cost starter homes, even if they can find them, because of the justified fear of what their neighborhood will look like in 10 years.
This post was edited on 5/13/25 at 12:37 pm
Posted on 5/13/25 at 12:45 pm to Darth_Vader
Plan B on that image is almost identical to the house my wife, I, a baby, and two dogs lived in for 6 years before moving into our current house. It did have a wonderful fenced-in two acres and a large shed for storage, also a small add-on to the back door for a laundry room, which made it livable.
This post was edited on 5/13/25 at 12:47 pm
Posted on 5/13/25 at 1:09 pm to Darth_Vader
As someone who is 31 and smack dab in the middle of all this, everyone here is right, to some extent.
I think it is generally harder to "make it" financially than it was for my parents or their parents, the numbers don't lie.
But there is also truth to the idea that my generation expects bigger houses, more toys, etc.
These problems work hand in hand.
I also believe that there is probably a higher ceiling for someone these days than you may have had in the 70's-90's, simply by working hard and being smart.
I think it is generally harder to "make it" financially than it was for my parents or their parents, the numbers don't lie.
But there is also truth to the idea that my generation expects bigger houses, more toys, etc.
These problems work hand in hand.
I also believe that there is probably a higher ceiling for someone these days than you may have had in the 70's-90's, simply by working hard and being smart.
Posted on 5/13/25 at 1:11 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
I also believe that there is probably a higher ceiling for someone these days than you may have had in the 70's-90's, simply by working hard and being smart.
And a higher floor than people had then or especially than people had in the 20s-60s.
Posted on 5/13/25 at 1:22 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
And a higher floor than people had then or especially than people had in the 20s-60s.
I don't know, it just depends on how you judge it.
People have more gadgets these days but I think it was easier to buy a home and raise a family on a single income in the 80's or 90's.
In terms of home ownership specifically, I think there was a higher floor back then due to all of the factors discussed here.
I bought my home when I was 27 on a single income, I was one of the few people I know that had did that in my age group and I was only able to because I was extremely careful and also had some luck in timing.
It seems like it was fairly common to purchase or build a home on a single income in decades past, by at least your late 20's.
Posted on 5/13/25 at 1:30 pm to RaoulDuke504
My home insurer tried levying a 57% increase on me. We have been in the house a decade with nary a claim. The city is attempting to levy another prop tax hike on me—ensuring a 10% CAGR over the next 3 years when they reassess, which they did in 2022.
I have no idea how anyone near the median could be starting a family right now.
I have no idea how anyone near the median could be starting a family right now.
Posted on 5/13/25 at 1:43 pm to The Third Leg
quote:
The city is attempting to levy another prop tax hike on me—ensuring a 10% CAGR over the next 3 years when they reassess, which they did in 2022.
Blame voters. In Houston, there's a reason the Fort Bend County assessor nails people with 10% increases in value year in and year out. Someone has to fund all those cricket complexes for Sugarland, "reimagining" a town square for a town with 10k people, a ridiculous gondola transit system (I wish I were kidding,) etc.
Popular
Back to top



0






