Why city dwellers are seeking out second homes in the suburbs
Quote:
In many ways, this is what I'm doing except my "suburb" is 950 miles from my city and the back/forth is more of a seasonal than a weekly thing plus the "suburb" has a better climate the half year I choose to spend there while the city has the better climate the half I spend THERE. |
^ You're a walking argument for why Prop 13 needs to be repealed. Young professionals can't afford homes while aging boomers pay next to no tax on their incredibly appreciated real estate assets and purchase second properties.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
It wouldn't eliminate everybody's problems. But it would go a very long way for affordability for anyone buying for the first time.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
https://science.howstuffworks.com/li...s/jealousy.htm |
Wow...equal taxation would be "social engineering"?!
The current situation is social engineering. I've owned my place for 11 years (not in CA)...the idea of asking for special treatment is absurd. |
Quote:
One fine day I wanted to go visit some friends in the suburbs so I went to my car in my building's parking garage I hadn't seen in weeks and found the battery dead for lack of being charged by driving the car. I said to myself, "Self, why do you have this thing?" At about the same time, a friend came back from Tucson to San Francisco's drippy winter and told me how great it was being in the warm sunny desert. I decided to check it out. I went for a visit. I discovered not only was the weather great but the price of property was such that I could buy a small, quaint home with a mortgage payment of about as much as my garage payment in SF. I bought a home, drove the car to its garage, left it there and stopped paying for a space in SF--net cash flow = no change. The car was even useful in the Tucsion exurbs. That was 18 years ago now. Prices for everything concerned have escalated--garage spaces in SF, homes in Tucson and especially homes in SF. Might not work now. I'm thinking I should blame millennials who must all be winners in their own minds. |
Quote:
It is what it is. If you are envious, move to CA and in 35 years or so of paying taxes to the state you too may be smiling. Or maybe not. Maybe by then the bill for the excessively generous pensions of state employees who keep the politicians in office may have come due. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
In respect of owner-occupied residential property, however, no. It's probably not going to change nor should it. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
You're advocating for the idea that people should be forced out of their homes just because their property values increase and that's just absurd and totally contradictory to your wealth building ideas. Younger people will not have any better chance to build wealth, these homes will still be outrageously expensive only they'll be owned by a handful of uber rich landlord investors instead of regular people.
If you can't afford a home in your state then increase the supply or fucking move. |
Quote:
|
My good friends, both middle age Gen X professionals, recently sold their two bedroom Manhattan condo and moved into a new 1 bedroom rental on the Upper West Side. They also bought a small SUV (600 bucks a month to garage in their new building) and located a weekend home in Columbia County. They found an interesting place situated on 40 wooded acres for less than the price of their old Manhattan condo. They plan to put most of their housing dollar into the weekend home, but they have not ruled out buying another apartment in Manhattan since prices there are somewhat stagnant at present. My friends are a childless gay couple with a high income, so probably their experience is not all that typical. I think it does reflect a desire that many big city dwellers have to enjoy some of the benefits of ex-urban or country living.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 2:25 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.