this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2024
204 points (95.9% liked)

News

23627 readers
2479 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Squeezed by high interest rates and record prices, homeowners are frozen in place. They can’t sell. So first-time buyers can’t buy.

If buying a home is an inexorable part of the American dream, so is the next step: eventually selling that home and using the equity to trade up to something bigger.

But over the past two years, this upward mobility has stalled as buyers and sellers have been pummeled by three colliding forces: the highest borrowing rates in nearly two decades, a crippling shortage of inventory, and a surge in home prices to a median of $434,000, the highest on record, according to Redfin.

People who bought their starter home a few years ago are finding themselves frozen in place by what is known as the “rate-lock effect” — they bought when interest rates were historically low, and trading up would mean a doubling or tripling of their monthly interest payments.

They are locked in, and as a result, families hoping to buy their first homes are locked out.

Non-paywall link

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 77 points 6 months ago (7 children)

I hate the phrase "starter home." People don't need 3000 sqft homes unless they have 10 kids.

I lived most of my childhood in a 100 year old 1000 sqft home with 1-2 siblings. Some extra space would have been nice but definitely not 3x as much. My current home would be considered a starter home at 1200 sqft. We will likely add on to get another bedroom and also not have a myriad of toys in the living room but I can't see it adding more than 300 sqft. That would make it a 4 bedroom house with a den which is perfectly fine. People seem to consider anything under 2000 sqft to be a starter home which is absurd.

What we do need is for many starter homes to become available for sale. Many are simply turned into rentals.

[–] razorwiregoatlick@lemmy.world 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)

People don’t need 10+ kids either.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

The never ending diapers that would be 10 kids....

[–] ChexMax@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago

I grew up in an almost 3000 sq foot home with only 5 kids. I know you were using hyperbole with the ten kids thing, but it was cramped with 7. Always sharing bedrooms, never actually getting your own space, no playing music without bothering someone, hard to do homework when your sister is practicing her oboe. If you want a dining room table that fits everyone and a living room where your family can stretch out for a movie, you need the space. (Also I grew up in Florida so no basement or attic. Not sure how those figure into sq footage)

[–] Transporter_Room_3@startrek.website 9 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Give me 750ft^2 and 5 acres of woods with enough sunny space for growing some food.

I'd be thrilled.

My wife's best friend, however, has decided their 3500ft^2 2.5 floor + basement house on 3-4 acres with two sheds and a small barn (or xl shed?) isnt enough space for 2 dogs 3 cats and her and her husband.

They just bought this house last year.

I do not understand some people.

[–] Dozzi92@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Different strokes and all that, but I tend to say the more space you have, the more shit goes in it. We have about 1350sf, two kids, cat, on a quarter acre. We rely on the kids being able to (when they're a bit older) go out around our town, which are homes on properties just like mine, but with parks and a downtown and a meandering Brook with green space all around it. I say to my wife, could we use a little more space? Absolutely. Could we use the space we have a little more wisely? Also absolutely. I just know that if we had more space, we would instantly fill it with more crap, so we're good.

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I fear the same. I am largely a minimalist but my wife is not and kids never are. But it would be nice to have a living room without toys absolutely everywhere and it would also be nice for them to each have their own space (own rooms). My sister in law lives in a very large house (~3300 sqft) and it is still filled with stuff that often doesn't get used.

[–] Dozzi92@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Yeah, I believe you will absolutely find something to put there. But I also write this from my dining room, which the China hutch behind me also has Lego sculptures and slime, and there's cabinets with children's art supplies and whatnot. And I to my right is the kids playroom, but also the way to our ground floor bathroom, and so you take your life (at least your feet) into your hands when nature calls. But I just tell myself, when they're older, they have less shit, it'll be better. Right?

My kids do each have their own rooms though, and I think that's a fair line to draw. Boy and girl. Boy's room is a shoebox, but he'll survive.

Unfortunately, I renovated my detached garage into a place to hangout, and so I can kiss that goodbye in like 10 years.

[–] TonyOstrich@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

Isn't that essentially worse? I get it on an individual level and having near private access to that much outdoors would be pretty sweet, but even if a small, but sizeable, portion of the population wanted something similar how tenable would it be?

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 5 points 6 months ago

"I just want so much land such that if everyone wanted the same amount, there wouldn't be enough land in the world."

[–] card797@champserver.net 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

My $750/month mortgage is offended at the term starter home. I like to call it my "forever home".

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

cries into his $2400/month mortgage

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

1800/month buuuuuuuuut it’s at 2.7%

I could afford a lot more house but I love my interest rate, so MY starter home is off the market indefinitely.

The rate hike has been at the expense of you and I, the real offenders when it comes to inflation are the ones hoarding the wealth.

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

Cries into 3.6k a month...

[–] SuperSaiyanSwag@lemmy.zip 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This might be kinda unique, but I’m in a situation where I want to move to a different location (I mostly want something bike-able) and I’m remote so there is not that much of an urgency. It would be silly for me to get rid of my “starter home” because I got it at a very low interest rate.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Same. Sub 3% interest rate and my starter home is off the market indefinitely.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

And this is why the housing market sucks.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I mean, I live here, the house is occupied and in use as a primary residence.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

No no, not you. I meant no offense.

I mean the fact that there's people who work remote and would rather move but have a great deal and can't give that up. Combine that with the fact that lenders don't look favorably on remote work especially when the property is rural and it helps to stall the market.

[–] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I would kill for 1200sqft living in NYC

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 3 points 6 months ago

That was also one of my thoughts. My friend lives in Manhattan with two kids in a 900 sqft condo. He is an investment banker.

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Ikr. Just bought 1200 and 4 bedrooms (major city, not NYC) and I couldn't be happier

It's going to be about 4k a month though... Not too happy about that part

[–] Xanis@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

I'd happily live in a shed if it was large enough to fit the usual amenities. Basically, give me 200sqft and half the cost in rent and watch as I live with almost nothing and be happy. Computer, bed on the floor, small standing shower, and we're like 80% of the way there.