Real Estate Harbinger

[Hardcore troubadour 12,667]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

If you’ve got a mortgage at 2.5% why would you want to “downsize” to a 7% mortgage that would cost you as much or more for a smaller, sh1tier house? That’s a big part of the issue there, but time will heal that as people eventually HAVE to move — hell, to the cemetery if nowhere else in between 

Because your house is going for top dollar right now? If you’re downsizing and old why would you want a mortgage at all? Why don’t you people ever read the whole thing? 

[Strike 3,982]

18 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

A big problem is boomers not selling their houses as they age. My subdivision has about 30 houses and over half of them are older people with no kids or adult children 

If they sold their house, where would they live?

[TimHauck 1,804]

3 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

If you’ve got a mortgage at 2.5% why would you want to “downsize” to a 7% mortgage that would cost you as much or more for a smaller, sh1tier house? That’s a big part of the issue there, but time will heal that as people eventually HAVE to move — hell, to the cemetery if nowhere else in between 

To cash in on the equity.  Then could either buy a smaller house in cash, rent, or move to a retirement home/community.  Although the cost of even buying a smaller house in cash is likely deterring some from doing it though. 

[IGotWorms 3,319]

2 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Because your house is going for top dollar right now? If you’re downsizing and old why would you want a mortgage at all? Why don’t you people ever read the whole thing? 

Ideally, yes. But it seems many boomers did not plan that well

[Hardcore troubadour 12,667]

2 hours ago, Strike said:

If they sold their house, where would they live?

Apartment, condo, retirement home. 

[Strike 3,982]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Apartment, condo, retirement home. 

Why would they do that?  The only people I've ever known who moved to a retirement home were those who couldn't take care of themselves.  Every other elder person I've know who was capable stayed in their homes until they died, including my Mother.  It's the main reason most of us buy a home and hope to own it free and clear by the time we retire.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,667]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

Why would they do that?  The only people I've ever known who moved to a retirement home were those who couldn't take care of themselves.  Every other elder person I've know who was capable stayed in their homes until they died, including my Mother.  It's the main reason most of us buy a home and hope to own it free and clear by the time we retire.

Not all retirement homes are for invalids. Also a smaller house can be bought in a lot of circumstances, like in a 55+ community.  

[Strike 3,982]

4 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Not all retirement homes are for invalids. Also a smaller house can be bought in a lot of circumstances, like in a 55+ community.  

CAN be doesn't mean SHOULD be. 

[Baker Boy 1,485]

LA mayor pleads for wealthy to help buy housing for the homeless: 'Unprecedented partnership'

L.A. Mayor Karen Bass said the new campaign, LA4LA, would depend on the 'humanity and generosity of the private sector'

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/la-mayor-pleads-wealthy-help-buy-housing-homeless-unprecedented-partnership

[Hardcore troubadour 12,667]

4 minutes ago, Strike said:

CAN be doesn't mean SHOULD be. 

Hey man, I’m just talking about houses not being available and one of the reasons for that.  People live longer now.  

[TimHauck 1,804]

19 minutes ago, Strike said:

Why would they do that?  The only people I've ever known who moved to a retirement home were those who couldn't take care of themselves.  Every other elder person I've know who was capable stayed in their homes until they died, including my Mother.  It's the main reason most of us buy a home and hope to own it free and clear by the time we retire.

“Capable” is relative.   There are still a lot of boomers that were/are “capable” of taking care of their longtime home but just don’t/didn’t want to so they sold it.  Even if they don’t go to a retirement home, they could still buy a smaller home (presumably for similar or less than their current home is worth) or move to an apartment or condo (that’s what my parents did).    Obviously they don’t “have” to do that but historically that’s what’s happened.  I think with the huge increase in equity there were a lot of boomers that renovated their houses to make them more liveable for an older person.  Also I’m sure a decent amount that have their millenial kids that may not be able to afford their own home living with them and maybe taking care of them.

[Strike 3,982]

24 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Hey man, I’m just talking about houses not being available and one of the reasons for that.  People live longer now.  

How is selling one's longtime residence to buy a smaller residence going to help with supply?  Swapping one item for another of the same item doesn't really help.

[Strike 3,982]

10 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

“Capable” is relative.   There are still a lot of boomers that were/are “capable” of taking care of their longtime home but just don’t/didn’t want to so they sold it.  Even if they don’t go to a retirement home, they could still buy a smaller home (presumably for similar or less than their current home is worth) or move to an apartment or condo (that’s what my parents did).    Obviously they don’t “have” to do that but historically that’s what’s happened.  I think with the huge increase in equity there were a lot of boomers that renovated their houses to make them more liveable for an older person.  Also I’m sure a decent amount that have their millenial kids that may not be able to afford their own home living with them and maybe taking care of them.

I'm not sure what your or HT's point is.  People have to have a place to live.  HT suggested older people moving would help with supply issues.  Selling their home to buy a smaller home, even a condo, doesn't help with the supply issue of homes.  Moving to a retirement home MIGHT, assuming the retirement home is a multi person dwelling (they usually are obviously) such that they increase the density of people being housed in a given building footprint.  But that's a small subset of older people.  Older people have always stayed in their homes as long as possible.   Some do choose to downsize but I don't think that's a huge percentage unless forced to by economics or other reasons, and as I already noted this wouldn't help with supply anyways. 

[TimHauck 1,804]

2 hours ago, Strike said:

I'm not sure what your or HT's point is.  People have to have a place to live.  HT suggested older people moving would help with supply issues.  Selling their home to buy a smaller home, even a condo, doesn't help with the supply issue of homes.  Moving to a retirement home MIGHT, assuming the retirement home is a multi person dwelling (they usually are obviously) such that they increase the density of people being housed in a given building footprint.  But that's a small subset of older people.  Older people have always stayed in their homes as long as possible.   Some do choose to downsize but I don't think that's a huge percentage unless forced to by economics or other reasons, and as I already noted this wouldn't help with supply anyways. 

What I’ve seen a lot of articles quote is something to the effect of that empty nesters own a higher % of 3+ bedroom homes than people with children.

Condos are a very different market than SFH’s, moving from a larger SFH home to a condo would absolutely impact the supply of homes that families are looking for.

Moving to a smaller home not quite as much, but still likely different homes than families are usually looking for.  And if retirees sell one home to buy another one they will often (but not always of course) move out of bigger metros and to more retirement-friendly destinations.