When buying our first house in 2008 the mortgage company was pushing us to buy more by saying, “why are you purchasing this house at $197,000 when you can afford twice that?” My response was, “we’ve done the math, we can’t afford twice as much.” Never listen to a mortgage broker. They all want you to spend more so they make more.
I bought in 2022 and can't imagine having that much interaction with a mortgage broker. My interaction consisted of giving them my information. Getting pre approved for a stupidly large mortgage (about twice what I could afford). Then, when I found a place to buy, they punched in the address for the "virtual appraisal" and approved the loan.
I had the exact same experience a few years ago. A lender did some quick math within like 20 minutes of talking and was like "I think we could go ahead and lock you in at loan in the mid 600's"
Lmao we could never in a million years dream of affording that. Idk wtf that dude was thinking but I can't even begin to try and figure out how I'd be able to afford that mortgage unless it was like a 3,000 year 1.08% loan or something.
The amount I "qualified for" when applying for a mortgage was fucking insane. I would be completely under water if I had taken the bank up on that full amount. I assume plenty of people jump at the chance to spend huge piles of money they don't have and will likely never have.
Alternative headline: "Homes buyers can comfortably afford increasingly rare."
Seriously, what a fucking disgusting headline... It reads as if the people are being irresponsible and buying things larger than they should...
Way to blame the people for an issue that isn't their fault...
Well, the thing is, this is exactly what led to the housing crash of '08. Back then it was because the banks were pushing people into it (and then selling the bundled loans as better rated than they were, where inside investors bet on the loans failing). If this is what's happening now, it's certainly because the banks are enabling it again. That would be insanely stupid of the banks after what happened in '08, but somehow we've gotten stuck in the stupidest timeline, so...
That would be insanely stupid of the banks after what happened in '08,
Would it be though? Leeman fell, but then we started with the "too big to fail" bullshit and gave a nice lesson to the bankers that we'll be here to bail them out should their greed take them too far. Only Joe schmoe should suffer the consequences of their actions, not the ownership class naturally. :/
Washington Mutual didn't get bailed out. The feds forced Chase to buy their accounts, making it less dramatic than Leeman.
Well, yeah. We can't afford rent either.
Should we suffer from rent we can't afford or a house that might one day have some value?
Because renting a home that's barely enough to get by is even more expensive and will go up faster than inflation, so if you're lucky you buy a house that's barely enough to get by and wait for the day when it's finally affordable since the payments don't increase as much as inflation.
Every home I can afford is a home I can barely afford, for both rent and mortgage.
I have been house hunting for over a year. I don't have crazy requirements....I want a 3 bedroom house with a sub basement (tornadoes) and a fenceable yard within an hour of work.
The average price for that around here is 425k. A house that needs major work might only go down to 300k.
Down payment on a 300k house is 60k. A 240k mortgage plus taxes and insurance is $2100/month. $2100 is 30% of $7000. That's a $140k salary. The median income in my county is 78k.
I make above that, have 200k for a down payment, and am still struggling to find a place.
[Edit] fixed math
Might want to double check your math there. $2,100 is 30% of a gross $72,000 salary. That’s under your median income target.
You're right, I estimated 40% to taxes/insurance/etc and jumped to typoed it to 240k (which I then changed to 200k+ because of the estimate)
But the point remains that making the median salary only affords you a house in terrible condition. If something is listed for anything less than 400k, it's all but guaranteed that there's major structural or mechanic work needing to be done...
And it's not natural inflation - the houses listed for 450k today were 350-375k a year ago.
Are we talking gross or net income as the baseline? Before taxes, $7k a month is still under $100k annually.
Down payment is not $60k. That's only if you want to avoid PMI. That said, putting down less means several hundred more a month in payment.
Also, not sure how you are doing the math to get to a required $200k income. $7k/month is $84k/year. Even with taxes, that is a little over $100k.
7k a month is 84k a year, not 200k. I bought my house with similar numbers (house price, down, and monthly mortgage) and while I earn higher than average, I’m nowhere close to 200k.
And most of those willing to take on the additional risk will look back at their decision positively. Shit’s not getting any cheaper.
When the options are rent you can barely afford or a mortgage you can barely afford ,the choice is obvious .
More importantly, can you lock in a mortgage payment that won't change much, vs. a rent that may skyrocket in the next 6 months? And sometimes a mortgage can be less than rent (although there are other costs to be considered). In our situation we were very lucky to be able to leverage money and jump on a house before things got stupid, and if we hadn't taken that jump I'm not sure where we'd be right now since rent prices got crazy while we're now still paying a decent monthly price.
Then there's the unlucky few like myself who are perpetually single and stuck in a state where I spend half my income on renting someone's garage, but a house would be almost 80% of it...
I literally just hit an income level where I could start looking for a house and then fucking COVID ruined everything...
It's a gamble, as long as your income remains steady and you don't have any major expenses crop up, the gamble pays off.
At least you roughly lock in a monthly rate. I was happy to not have 15% rent increases each year.
This is the real explanation. There is no more choice to rent a cheap apartment or buy an expensive house. You can live in a van maybe but that's being outlawed in many states. My brother in law and his family are paying almost $2000/month for a shitty apartment built in the 1970s. I bet the same place will be $4000 in 10 years, and even shittier.
That's because to get the actual value of a home in 2024 you have to cut its price in half.
I get it. My wife and I just bought a home in Canada this summer and the pressure is very real. The prices just keep climbing and there is so much competition for everything that comes up on the market. Throw in periodic drops in interest rates and you feel like you have to pounce now or you'll never get one.
We were very fortunate that the sellers chose us specifically because of our family dynamic and the vacancy their own family was leaving in our little neighborhood of playing/communal children. We got the house at asking price and are well within our budget, but things were looking a bit grim there until fate worked itself out. People put shit-holes up for 400k and half the time people buy it anyway. If they don't, the price drops by 15k and it's sold the next day.
Yes, because if they don't then somebody else will and they won't have anywhere to live.
That's how shortages of essential commodities work. Build more homes where people want to live and ensure businesses don't buy them for renting.
So a re-run of 2006-2007, but this time around there wasn't even an actual boom preceeding this.
I’m in the US. House values in my neighborhood have doubled since 2017 (7 years). Things are the same where the rest of my family lives, 11 states away. Are we not in a boom?
No this is another housing bubble, similar to what happened back in 2010. My house is now worth more than double what I paid for it, which is more than it was at the peak of the housing bubble right before it crashed back in 2010.
But biggest difference this time around is the bubble has been intentionally accelerated by a handful of investment firms that have been buying up all the houses across the US for the past decade.
The Economy is not booming, it's only the prices of Assets such as houses that are in a bubble.
Last time around the "wealth" (even if illusory) was spreading a lot more and causing all sorts of things to grow by feeding consumption, as well as a general feeling of prosperity (until it turned out it was illusory and the whole castle of cards fell) whilst this time around it's pretty much only large asset owners who are actually gaining from this whilst the rest just increasingly feel poorer and more treading water ever harder merelly not to drown.
It's a different Economic climate and even a different feeling for most people, even if both periods share the house price bubble.
PS: And, by the way, this is not just in the US.
Where I am, one would need to be making $29.70/hr (working 40 hours a week) to afford to only be paying 30% of their income on housing, and there aren't many actual slums left. State minimum wage is $14/hr. Federal is $7.25/hr. The cheapest bottle of alcohol and a thin rag costs $12.95, though you can save a quarter if you rip your shirt into strips instead of using rags.
because 30% is an impossible amount to spend on housing anyway. If rent costs 50% of your income, then "only" spending 40% of your income on a mortgage payment is a massive step up. You're also quite a bit less likely to have your mortgage payment suddenly increase year after year in the way that rent hikes, so getting into a slightly expensive mortgage early can pay dividends later if your wages increase annually.
Buckle up, here we go again!
People have been buying beyond their means since the '70s
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.