Better pay but with lay offs…

[Dottleshead ★]

26 minutes ago, ChrisL said:

Pretty comparable to SoCal, their tax rate is likely lower but probably pay more for medical.  Jobs are always plentiful here though.  .  

This seems like Seattle deal too.  There are a lot of job ops down there but honestly the taxes and prices of everything were making it difficult to live there.  Once I sold my house in that market and moved into this market, I know live what I would call a 1960's market.  I can work full time, my wife can work part time, and we can meet are retirement goals as well as most medical.  But even then there isn't a lot of flex room.  There's no way I could do it now as a young man and not possible in the Seattle market.  I cringe to think of the SF or LA market.

[dinneR ★]

I know $20/hr min wage seems outrageous to many. Maybe it should have been fazed in. Around here, the min wage is $7.25. If you are not offering $20, you are not hiring. Target starts at $24. That's just shy of $50k/year for full time. PinkyG's, a local pizza joint, was offering $60-70k/year to make pizza.

At the end of the day. Wages are paid. Business succeeds. People make money.

The rich get richer the poor get the picture. Nobody dances better than Peter Garrett.

 

[maddmaxx ★]

8 hours ago, ChrisL said:

See I disagree with this.  The point you two are missing is the same thing that’s happening to food service workers out here.  Wages across the board are much higher.  My daughter makes as much as I do now and she’s 30.  She’s chosen a field that pays well, excels and is a manager.  My SIL earns as much as her. He’s a tax accountant & CPA.

Not only can it be done, it is being done.  My daughter & SIL bought their townhouse in their late 20’s and we didn’t help them.  I just don’t buy the narrative the youth are screwed.  The lazy, uninformed slacking youth is but that was the case with every generation.  

I still believe there is a path to wealth in America.  You just have to work your ass off to get it. 

No question about it.  If you start near the top of the middle class you can work your way to the middle.

[Randomguy]

9 hours ago, Wilbur said:

So, can I send them to America?  

Our entry level housing her is 1.2 million.  Rent is over $3000.  Job security is questionable. Inflation is insane and pretty much everything here eats up 30% more post tax dollars than in the US.  It is a tough gig for youth here right now. 

I read yesterday that corporate ownership of ALL single family homes in the Toronto area is 23.7% and climbing, and corporations own over 50% of new condos built  (I think the figure was the last 5 years, but I can't remember exactly-could have been just the previous year) there.  How are the vast majority of people going to compete against deep-pocketed investment firms?  It is very obvious that it has been happening in the states for quite a while, too.

Young people don't have a great chance to own a home, and anyone not currently a home owner has an uphill climb.  You aren't in a good-paying field or have in demand skills and well-off and helpful parents?  You aren't owning a home, unless the planets line up in exactly the right way and you make zero mistakes on your way to getting there.  It is no wonder that most people have little faith in the current economic environment, they feel that multiple folks are just around every corner intent on taking everything for themselves with nothing left for them.

It is pretty bleak out there.

[ChrisL]

26 minutes ago, Randomguy said:

I read yesterday that corporate ownership of ALL single family homes in the Toronto area is 23.7% and climbing, and corporations own over 50% of new condos built  (I think the figure was the last 5 years, but I can't remember exactly) there.  How are the vast majority of people going to compete against deep-pocketed investment firms?  It is very obvious that it has been happening in the states for quite a while, too.

Young people don't have a great chance to own a home, and anyone not currently a home owner has an uphill climb.  You aren't in a good-paying field or have in demand skills and well-off and helpful parents?  You aren't owning a home, unless the planets line up in exactly the right way and you make zero mistakes on your way to getting there.  It is no wonder that most people have little faith in the current economic environment, they feel that multiple folks are just around every corner intent on taking everything for themselves with nothing left for them.

It is pretty bleak out there.

You reference the situation in one city and then state “most” people feel this way… Do corporations own a majority of the single family homes in the cities were “most” of the population lives?  Sure cities like Honolulu, LA, NYC & Toronto may be outliers but do most people in cities across America feel this way?  It seems so as you seem to speak for most people.

I get not everyone feels the way I do but do most people share your views? Is it really that bleak?  I sure hope most people don’t feel that way. 

[Randomguy]

22 minutes ago, ChrisL said:

You reference the situation in one city and then state “most” people feel this way… Do corporations own a majority of the single family homes in the cities were “most” of the population lives?  Sure cities like Honolulu, LA, NYC & Toronto may be outliers but do most people in cities across America feel this way?  It seems so as you seem to speak for most people.

I get not everyone feels the way I do but do most people share your views? Is it really that bleak?  I sure hope most people don’t feel that way. 

Yeah, it has been happening even in traditionally less desirable cities.  Talking to cousins, nephews, and nieces in Cleveland of all places. are saying the same thing.  I have a friend in who owns a house a couple of hours outside NYC and who has a real estate license he isn't actively doing anything with, says he doesn't think his 17 year old son will ever have a chance to own until he (the dad, dies).  I have a friend in Dallas who started buying properties with his wife about 10 years ago, he says they'd never be able to replicate what they did if they were young and started now (the wife inherited a nice house from her mom to start).  An ex coworker from just a few years ago here moved to Atlanta with his wife to buy a house after receiving an inheritance, he said they were outbid multiple times by corporations.  We talked about this at dinner when I was in Atlanta last month.

The city I referenced is not mine, not even in our country.  Just more of the same of a steady stream of depictions stating the exact same thing I said.

Seriously, look around, it isn't my imagination.

[ChrisL]

46 minutes ago, maddmaxx said:

No question about it.  If you start near the top of the middle class you can work your way to the middle.

I know a young lady, the daughter of immigrant parents.  She grew up poor, worked her way through college.  She started in the call center, is now a loan officer, earning 6 figures & just bought her first place, a condo in Long Beach.  We talk often as we both started with the firm the same day & we’re in orientation together. 

Its because of people like her that I refuse to believe the American dream is dead, most people are screwed do lives of poverty & failure.  It’s out there, like generations before, kids today just have to hustle like those before them did. 

[ChrisL]

6 hours ago, dinneR said:

I know $20/hr min wage seems outrageous to many. Maybe it should have been fazed in. Around here, the min wage is $7.25. If you are not offering $20, you are not hiring. Target starts at $24. That's just shy of $50k/year for full time. PinkyG's, a local pizza joint, was offering $60-70k/year to make pizza.

At the end of the day. Wages are paid. Business succeeds. People make money.

The rich get richer the poor get the picture. Nobody dances better than Peter Garrett.

I would have preferred a tiered increase over time.  $4.50 is a big jump but as you noted businesses did have to offer higher wages to attract employees.  Many were already paying more than the minimum wage.  

I recently increased wages for my staff to $1.50 an hour and will likely bump them another $1.50 next year.  I already pay several dollars over minimum wage.  I don’t have retention issues and I think I’m having the opposite issue, my staff has been with me for so long they don’t realize local wages have passed them by.  But that $1.50 increase amounts to a $90K hit to my budget. 

It’s easy to say give the working man more and many here are sure happy to give away corporate money.  But I see it as my money and I try to be judicious with my budget as it impact my job.  

[ChrisL]

17 minutes ago, Randomguy said:

Yeah, it has been happening even in traditionally less desirable cities.  Talking to cousins, nephews, and nieces in Cleveland of all places. are saying the same thing.  I have a friend in who owns a house a couple of hours outside NYC and who has a real estate license he isn't actively doing anything with, says he doesn't think his 17 year old son will ever have a chance to own until he (the dad, dies).  I have a friend in Dallas who started buying properties with his wife about 10 years ago, he says they'd never be able to replicate what they did if they were young and started now (the wife inherited a nice house from her mom to start).  An ex coworker from just a few years ago here moved to Atlanta with his wife to buy a house after receiving an inheritance, he said they were outbid multiple times by corporations.  We talked about this at dinner when I was in Atlanta last month.

The city I referenced is not mine, not even in our country.  Just more of the same of a steady stream of depictions stating the exact same thing I said.

Seriously, look around, it isn't my imagination.

Nah, I’ll walk around with my head in the clouds, or maybe up my arse!  

I could share the same view with my son & his GF.  He’s got a tough road ahead of him based on the choices he’s made.  But then I see my daughter & her friends who are earning great money, buying houses and starting families.  Also the loan officer I referenced.  

SoCal is expensive and yet young people are figuring it out.  So I’m seeing both sides..

 

[Randomguy]

33 minutes ago, Randomguy said:

The city I referenced is not mine, not even in our country.  Just more of the same of a steady stream of depictions stating the exact same thing I said.

I have a friend in Boulder who bought a house for $220k 25 years ago, and inherited a house in Missoula that he grew up in a few years ago. He kept the house in Boulder over the last 10 years because he knew he would never be able to buy back in (that house was assessed this year for S1.6M but I believe he challenged it and it was reduced to $1.3M).   The house in Missoula has gone up in value from $240k to nearly $460 in THREE years, he says it is from corporate ownership en masse driving prices up.

Listen to what Dottie is saying, listen to what Wilbur is saying, things are blowing up because the resources everyone needs are being bought up to rent back at ever increasing prices.  You can point to examples of people overcoming increasingly significant challenges to purchase, and there will always be that subset of people, but ask yourself if you and your wife could qualify right now to buy your own house under the current conditions if you didn't have a lifetime of equity and decent jobs.

I stand by the bleak sentiment.  Again, it ain't just me imagining it.

[Randomguy]

11 minutes ago, ChrisL said:

SoCal is expensive and yet young people are figuring it out.  So I’m seeing both sides..

Yes, but the people figuring it out have good jobs and good heads on their shoulders and incredible determination and are sacrificing for the chance.  This is what has to occur if you will be able to buy.   If one partner doesn't have a good job?  Unlikely to own.  Any health issues?  Another obstruction.  Other bumps in the road may drive them from Laguna Beach to Bakersfield or Yuma to buy a condo, if that.  The stars have to increasingly align, and it is an uphill climb rather than an assumption that you'll own at this point.  Yeah, it can be done, and will be done by some, and less frequently in the general population, though.

[ChrisL]

9 minutes ago, Randomguy said:

I have a friend in Boulder who bought a house for $220k 25 years ago, and inherited a house in Missoula that he grew up in a few years ago. He kept the house in Boulder over the last 10 years because he knew he would never be able to buy back in.   The house in Missoula has gone up in value from $240k to nearly $460 in THREE years, he says it is from corporate ownership en masse driving prices up.

Listen to what Dottie is saying, listen to what Wilbur is saying, things are blowing up because the resources everyone needs are being bought up to rent back at ever increasing prices.  You can point to examples of people overcoming increasingly significant challenges to purchase, and there will always be that subset of people, but ask yourself if you and your wife could qualify right now to buy your own house under the current conditions if you didn't have a lifetime of equity and decent jobs.

I stand by the bleak sentiment.  Again, it ain't just me imagining it.

Yeah we could buy now if we had no equity. It would be tough but doable.   

I’m a firm believer that if people are still succeeding, then it can be done.  Is it bleak? I don’t know, people are figuring it out but maybe it’s bleak for some.  Most? I dunno…

[ChrisL]

3 minutes ago, Randomguy said:

Yes, but the people figuring it out have good jobs and good heads on their shoulders and incredible determination and are sacrificing for the chance.  This is what has to occur if you will be able to buy.   If one partner doesn't have a good job?  Unlikely to own.  Any health issues?  Another obstruction.  Other bumps in the road may drive them from Laguna Beach to Bakersfield or Yuma to buy a condo, if that.  The stars have to increasingly align, and it is an uphill climb rather than an assumption that you'll own at this point.  Yeah, it can be done, and will be done by some, and less frequently in the general population, though.

Good dialogue, we just see things differently I guess.  

[Wilbur ★]

16 minutes ago, Randomguy said:

I have a friend in Boulder who bought a house for $220k 25 years ago, and inherited a house in Missoula that he grew up in a few years ago. He kept the house in Boulder over the last 10 years because he knew he would never be able to buy back in.   The house in Missoula has gone up in value from $240k to nearly $460 in THREE years, he says it is from corporate ownership en masse driving prices up.

Listen to what Dottie is saying, listen to what Wilbur is saying, things are blowing up because the resources everyone needs are being bought up to rent back at ever increasing prices.  You can point to examples of people overcoming increasingly significant challenges to purchase, and there will always be that subset of people, but ask yourself if you and your wife could qualify right now to buy your own house under the current conditions if you didn't have a lifetime of equity and decent jobs.

I stand by the bleak sentiment.  Again, it ain't just me imagining it.

A couple of years ago, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, a government owned entity, started sounding alerts and recently claimed it takes 25 years for the average family income, to save the required deposit on an entry level home.  The government has partially opened the door to longer term mortgages, possible 100 years, but there are still hoops to jump and banks to cooperate on that one.  Housing is largely out of reach for both young and old as taxes and inflation soar.  That is not affordability and it does paint a very bleak future for the youth. 

[Razors Edge ★]

4 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

Housing is largely out of reach for both young and old as taxes and inflation soar.  That is not affordability and it does paint a very bleak future for the youth. 

I wonder what made it so folks could buy homes down here back in the go-go 70s/80s when mortgages were well into the double digits?  Are kids just "soft" today with no long term strategic thinking?  High mortgage rates, inflation, and taxes were quite ordinary back in the day.  Oddly, kids from then (pretty much anyone here under 60) all seem to own homes - except @Randomguy who is a slacker.

[Randomguy]

5 minutes ago, ChrisL said:

Yeah we could buy now if we had no equity. It would be tough but doable.   

I’m a firm believer that if people are still succeeding, then it can be done.  Is it bleak? I don’t know, people are figuring it out but maybe it’s bleak for some.  Most? I dunno…

Add in some student loans, too, or other debt, and it is REALLY bleak for most.   

It is funny, when I was born my dad worked in a steel factory, had two kids, and was putting my mom through the first of her many degrees, and were able to buy a house and send us to Catholic school on not a large salary.  The assumption was you'd buy a house, why the hell wouldn't you?  Now, somebody buys a house, and people are all ears asking "How did you manage to buy"?  I really wish that was my era at this point, but my bleakness is informed by my own choices and observations.  I would be more optimistic if the situation were different, I am sure.

 

[Wilbur ★]

2 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

I wonder what made it so folks could buy homes down here back in the go-go 70s/80s when mortgages were well into the double digits?  Are kids just "soft" today with no long term strategic thinking?  High mortgage rates, inflation, and taxes were quite ordinary back in the day.  Oddly, kids from then (pretty much anyone here under 60) all seem to own homes - except @Randomguy who is a slacker.

Are you a visual learner?  This starts at 1984 when interest rates were double digit. 

https://packaged-media.redd.it/zvro9az256ic1/pb/m2-res_608p.mp4?m=DASHPlaylist.mpd&v=1&e=1711468800&s=d83eea4d7c01aba80e1dddb84a3b8a336718516d#t=0

 

[Randomguy]

9 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

except @Randomguy who is a slacker.

I will get half of my parent's house, but they had to refinance due to mom's cancer, so I don't think I will get much.  Yay.  I do have a great deal on rent, though, so I am luckier than most in NYC.

[Razors Edge ★]

5 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

Are you a visual learner?  This starts at 1984 when interest rates were double digit. 

So, home values are up? More than taxes, inflation, and mortgage rates?  Ouch.  I guess the younger folks here who bought homes in the past 30 yrs or so were just in before the lock?

[Razors Edge ★]

6 minutes ago, Randomguy said:

I will get half of my parent's house, but they had to refinance due to mom's cancer, so I don't think I will get much.  Yay.

@dinneR has it tougher in his market. 

[maddmaxx ★]

16 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

I wonder what made it so folks could buy homes down here back in the go-go 70s/80s when mortgages were well into the double digits?  Are kids just "soft" today with no long term strategic thinking?  High mortgage rates, inflation, and taxes were quite ordinary back in the day.  Oddly, kids from then (pretty much anyone here under 60) all seem to own homes - except @Randomguy who is a slacker.

We did it by having two good paying jobs and with a Government loan due to 8 years in the Navy.  The mortgage was for 30 years but the house sold 10 years after we bought it for almost 4 times what we paid for it.  That in turn financed the bulk of the cost of the present house.  Even at that the first house purchase included some help from my mother who had a very good paying job.

Could we do it in today's market.  Maybe not, maybe yes.  It would be borderline.

There are some equally high paying jobs in CT building submarines.

[Wilbur ★]

5 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

So, home values are up? More than taxes, inflation, and mortgage rates?  Ouch.  I guess the younger folks here who bought homes in the past 30 yrs or so were just in before the lock?

RG hit the nail on the head.  By far the biggest driver is foreign ownership.  Properties are acquired for money laundering and convenience of passports.  Most sit empty.  Poor urban planning and developmental red tape are also big factors.  It is a multi-variate effect, none of which are being addressed by government. 

[Randomguy]

3 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

@dinneR has it tougher in his market. 

This is true, I think only nuclear weapon-armed grizzly bears raping the town's population nightly and coupled with daily earthquakes could bring that market down to affordable!

[Razors Edge ★]

4 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

RG hit the nail on the head.  By far the biggest driver is foreign ownership.  Properties are acquired for money laundering and convenience of passports.  Most sit empty.  Poor urban planning and developmental red tape are also big factors.  It is a must-variate effect, none of which are being addressed by government. 

One of my Wall Street cousins pivoted to this "corporate" ownership sector and spent quite a few of the last several years commuting from Conn to LA to buy residential properties. Definitely much deeper pockets for his investors than the average "Joe" off the street.  Cash offers, instant closings, etc. make it sort of a no brainer for sellers, but killer to the normal guy.  

[Razors Edge ★]

3 minutes ago, Randomguy said:

This is true, I think only nuclear weapon-armed grizzly bears raping the town's population nightly and coupled with daily earthquakes could bring that market down to affordable!

I imagine weekly events involving nuclear weapon-armed grizzly bears would be sufficient.  The earthquakes would just add to the fun.

[dinneR ★]

Minneapolis saw lots of homes being bought up by foreign corporations. Homes sold on the first day so locals never really saw it.

https://www.npr.org/2024/02/17/1229867031/housing-shortage-zoning-reform-cities

 

To ramp up supply, cities are taking a fresh look at their zoning rules that spell out what can be built where and what can't. And many are finding that their old rules are too rigid, making it too hard and too expensive to build many new homes.

 

So these cities, as well as some states, are undertaking a process called zoning reform. They're crafting new rules that do things like allow multifamily homes in more neighborhoods, encourage more density near transit and streamline permitting processes for those trying to build.

 

One city has been at the forefront of these conversations: Minneapolis.

 

That's because Minneapolis was ahead of the pack as it made a series of changes to its zoning rules in recent years: allowing more density downtown and along transit corridors, getting rid of parking requirements, permitting construction of accessory dwelling units (ADUs), which are secondary dwellings on the same lot.

 

 

 

 

[Razors Edge ★]

Just now, dinneR said:

zoning reform.

MORE LAWS?!?!?!?!?  WTF, @dinneR?!?!  

[dinneR ★]

Here, the issue is corporations and the wealthy buying up homes and not living in them. They do it for tax purposes. WY does not have state income tax or a residency requirement.

We have a lot of empty homes creating more pressure on the market for those looking for housing.

[Razors Edge ★]

30 minutes ago, dinneR said:

They do it for tax purposes. WY does not have state income tax or a residency requirement.

Good to know.  Heck, no need for normal folks like me to buy in Jackson when there must be some pretty cheap real estate in other parts of WY to use for a "home base" for tax purposes.

This is right up the road from Fort Collins and not too far from Denver!  Taxes = $80!!!!!

[dinneR ★]

51 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

Good to know.  Heck, no need for normal folks like me to buy in Jackson when there must be some pretty cheap real estate in other parts of WY to use for a "home base" for tax purposes.

This is right up the road from Fort Collins and not too far from Denver!  Taxes = $80!!!!!

Kanye has a ranch near Cody.

[Longjohn ★]

22 hours ago, Randomguy said:

I don't know about that, it seems a value issue.  Do you value the company's ability to extract value from the employees over the employee's right to a livable wage?

He laid off 10 high school kids. They don’t need a livable wage, they need money for dates or save up for a guitar. They won’t stay on a minimum wage job after graduation. When they move on the next generation of high school kids will gladly take their place.

[Randomguy]

26 minutes ago, Longjohn said:

He laid off 10 high school kids. They don’t need a livable wage, they need money for dates or save up for a guitar. They won’t stay on a minimum wage job after graduation. When they move on the next generation of high school kids will gladly take their place.

I wonder how else they spent their cookie dough?

[Longjohn ★]

3 minutes ago, Randomguy said:

I wonder how else they spent their cookie dough?

I was going to say beer money but they are not old enough. 

[12string]

CAN kids in the next generation succeed, through hard work and intelligent money management?  Sure!

But the opportunites will be far lower.  They will be the first generation to not do better economically than their parents.  There are too many headwinds.  The good news, they seem to be OK with not having so much stuff, reprioritizing.

So, in cases like my kids - all bought houses in cities in their late 20's.  They all have retirement accounts started, as well as investment and savings.  And still take nice trips, have nice things  But (time to brag a little), they are all quite intelligent, have well paying professional jobs, stable home environments.  We taught them to be frugal, to plan ahead, research decisions thoroughly, prioritize well.  They are already doing better than their parents.

Now let's look at the more common situation.  Graduate from college with $!00K in debt, get an average job that covers expenses, pays off a little of the college debt.  But since housing is so scarce and expensive, if they can buy, they can't save for the future.  Or, kids that couldn't do college, end up with a low income job.  Health care costs are crushing.  They barely get by.`

There ARE changes finally starting to address some of this.  But the momentum is so strong in favor of the very wealthy it's going to take more than 1 generation to change that wealth distribution to a more equitable - and historically normal - level.

More of the things we do backwards: Home ownership is by far the defining factor in financial security.  But the only people who can take advantage of that are those who are already financially secure.

[sheep_herder ★]

2 hours ago, dinneR said:

Here, the issue is corporations and the wealthy buying up homes and not living in them. They do it for tax purposes. WY does not have state income tax or a residency requirement.

We have a lot of empty homes creating more pressure on the market for those looking for housing.

Doesn't it have to be the primary residence to get a tax break? I think it does when selling to avoid capital gains. We would be faced with that on our other property.

[dinneR ★]

39 minutes ago, sheep_herder said:

Doesn't it have to be the primary residence to get a tax break? I think it does when selling to avoid capital gains. We would be faced with that on our other property.

It does not or possibly they are claiming it as such. You can pass through neighborhoods of vacant homes. It has an odd feeling.