As a commercial banker, I hear clients and people in general talk about "when rates go back down." This, of course, is conjecture and wishful thinking.

While rates HAVE risen dramatically over the last couple years, we are still experiencing residential mortgage rates that are comparable to the historical average. Anyone waiting around for rates to magically fall back to the 3-4% range we experienced since 2000 may be waiting a long, long while. There are literally ZERO current economic indicators that point to this happening in the foreseeable future.

I know this is a likely possibility. It seems like recession talk has largely gone away and we will be coasting with rates around what they are now for awhile, barring unforeseen economic changes like a giant student debt default.

Im not sure of any truly affordable housing being proposed much less built in Edmond. IMO, true affordable housing means subsidized, or at least income based rents. None of that has happened that Im aware of. In Edmond's case, it just means something thats not $500,000 for a single family home. There have been some apartments approved recently and will get built soon, which is good. There also needs to be less pushback when a builder wants to build 4 homes per acre rather than just 1.

If you want to build on .25 acre lots in Edmond, you're getting absolutely zero pushback. That's an exaggeration. In Edmond, a homeowner woud be thrilled to know an addition of .25 acre lots is going in nearby as that removes the chance that it'll be something else.

And while maybe that's true in some markets re apartments and strong incentives for high rents, I would dispute the 1:9 claim, but if you're a homeowner, are you even happy with a 1:9 chance the development down the street will be gang land in 20 years? Anecdotally, I think I have a pretty good handle on multifamily in Edmond as I grew up theree, went to college there, and now live there after a 15 year break living downtown and then in NWOKC.

I recall complexes being built 20ish years ago in Edmond which are absolutely terrible now. Horribly maintained, been through several owners. Not fit for habitation.. and that's most of them.

Any kind of subsidized housing I've known of in Edmond basically rots where it's built. There's a reason NIMBY is so strong in Edmond, and it's because this community has a long history of some really terrible rental property owners.

And new homes being $500K isn't on the current homeowners, it's on the developers who I've seen charge as much as $400/sq. ft. in Edmond--all while getting TIF money to do it. Not being affordable isn't on the homeowners, its' on the landlords who have nearly doubled rents in the last 5 years.

Corporate greed wants to run wild here and seeks to villify homeowners who are sometimes able to effectively stand up to being its collateral damage. And gosh, it must be frustrating to not be able to develop garbage developments wherever you want because some folks are able to effectively block it. Sounds like a developer problem, not a homeowner problem.

As a commercial banker, I hear clients and people in general talk about "when rates go back down." This, of course, is conjecture and wishful thinking.

While rates HAVE risen dramatically over the last couple years, we are still experiencing residential mortgage rates that are comparable to the historical average. Anyone waiting around for rates to magically fall back to the 3-4% range we experienced since 2000 may be waiting a long, long while. There are literally ZERO current economic indicators that point to this happening in the foreseeable future.

Not to mention the Fed isn't buying all the MBS like they were for so long. Probably why the spread on the 10 year T-bill & 30 year mortgage rate is around 300 basis point spread now. We have quite literally polar opposite differences in monetary policy that aren't reversing anytime soon. We'll be more likely to experience financial conditions like the 90's and maybe even 80's before we go back to the 2000's.

Sad really but we are paying for the fiscal irresponsibility of our government and easy money everyone got so accustomed to.

If you want to build on .25 acre lots in Edmond, you're getting absolutely zero pushback. That's an exaggeration. In Edmond, a homeowner woud be thrilled to know an addition of .25 acre lots is going in nearby as that removes the chance that it'll be something else.

And while maybe that's true in some markets re apartments and strong incentives for high rents, I would dispute the 1:9 claim, but if you're a homeowner, are you even happy with a 1:9 chance the development down the street will be gang land in 20 years? Anecdotally, I think I have a pretty good handle on multifamily in Edmond as I grew up theree, went to college there, and now live there after a 15 year break living downtown and then in NWOKC.

I recall complexes being built 20ish years ago in Edmond which are absolutely terrible now. Horribly maintained, been through several owners. Not fit for habitation.. and that's most of them.

Any kind of subsidized housing I've known of in Edmond basically rots where it's built. There's a reason NIMBY is so strong in Edmond, and it's because this community has a long history of some really terrible rental property owners.

And new homes being $500K isn't on the current homeowners, it's on the developers who I've seen charge as much as $400/sq. ft. in Edmond--all while getting TIF money to do it. Not being affordable isn't on the homeowners, its' on the landlords who have nearly doubled rents in the last 5 years.

Corporate greed wants to run wild here and seeks to villify homeowners who are sometimes able to effectively stand up to being its collateral damage. And gosh, it must be frustrating to not be able to develop garbage developments wherever you want because some folks are able to effectively block it. Sounds like a developer problem, not a homeowner problem.

some of that is just a function of the metro growing, the cost of capital being significantly higher, and things being way more expensive today than they were pre-covid.

As a commercial banker, I hear clients and people in general talk about "when rates go back down." This, of course, is conjecture and wishful thinking.

While rates HAVE risen dramatically over the last couple years, we are still experiencing residential mortgage rates that are comparable to the historical average. Anyone waiting around for rates to magically fall back to the 3-4% range we experienced since 2000 may be waiting a long, long while. There are literally ZERO current economic indicators that point to this happening in the foreseeable future.

I remember buying a house in 1981 and my mortgage rate was 16%. That was a challenge.

Given the country's debt to GDP ratio and the expanding roll of SS recipients due to Baby Boomer retirement, inflation is here to stay for the foreseeable future. To that end, the Fed will likely keep rates between 3.75 and 7.25 through the end of the decade, which means the cheapest a mortgage is likely going to be would be 5.5%+

What we decide to do with SS in the long run will have a major impact on our debt and interest obligations and those decisions will have to be made between 2028 and 2032.

Waiting to buy a first home right now (or getting out of a declining area to go to something with more upside) due to rates will probably cost you more in 10-20 years than timing this market over the next 5. And given debt to GDP, a first time home buyer's program probably doesn't surface in the next 15 years.

So then it will just be a waiting for enough Boomers to pass away to alleviate the supply side of the pricing equation.

some of that is just a function of the metro growing, the cost of capital being significantly higher, and things being way more expensive today than they were pre-covid.

Yeah, things have not become 400% more expensive in the last 5 years. This is just greed.

--which is fine. I don't blame the developer as much as I blame the folks who actually buy this product at this price.

And given debt to GDP, a first time home buyer's program probably doesn't surface in the next 15 years.


Man.. want to see home prices do some ridiculous things? Offer free money for first time buyers.

Man.. want to see home prices do some ridiculous things? Offer free money for first time buyers.

No doubt...but given the rate home prices may continue to rise, it's crazy to think that 3% down payments are going to look like $10k...in OKC that probably is closer to $6k, but still.

I think OKC probably gets a pretty big in migration due to cost of living alone at some point in the next 15 years.

No doubt...but given the rate home prices may continue to rise, it's crazy to think that 3% down payments are going to look like $10k...in OKC that probably is closer to $6k, but still.

I think OKC probably gets a pretty big in migration due to cost of living alone at some point in the next 15 years.

Honestly seems like it is already starting to happen. Certainly in the early stages, but I think there are a lot of comparisons to be made between OKC now and Denver/Austin 20-25 years ago. Who knows whether we'll ever truly boom like either of those cities have, as our natural beauty and counterculture are a lot more understated than Denver and Austin, respectively, but I think that a lot of people in the region are at least tangentially aware of the momentum that is currently occurring here, and that we have a lot to offer at the moment in terms of amenities relative to our cost of living.

Cities with the highest and lowest Rental Vacancy Rates
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/realestate/cities-with-the-highest-and-lowest-rental-vacancy-rates/ss-AA1fxxSJ?ocid=socialshare&pc=U531&cvid=8c7f843953d44f459ee19f7f1c529508&ei=11

No doubt...but given the rate home prices may continue to rise, it's crazy to think that 3% down payments are going to look like $10k...in OKC that probably is closer to $6k, but still.

I think OKC probably gets a pretty big in migration due to cost of living alone at some point in the next 15 years.

This is one of the reasons it's hard to see prices pulling back much here regardless of any national correction. Relative to other major cities we are still very cheap here. Average sale price is around $250k currently, while the national average is low-mid 400's trending a little lower as of recent

OKC should do a large ad campaign that boasts the low cost of living with a city that isn't completely boring. Market it toward younger professionals that likely work remote jobs.

There are a lot of tech jobs that are almost exclusively remote where people are making 6 figures that could live like kings and queens in OKC.


Work for a company located in the red, then live in a blue area. Out of all these blue areas, OKC is a clear winner.

https://www.move.org/app/uploads/2022/08/mov-cities-with-lowest-cost-of-living-2022-map-768x576.png

Just something I noticed today driving to get my coffee. A home in Nichols Hills off Grand was razed a year after it was purchased. The home built in 1935, sold in July of 22 for 2.2 million. Almost a 100 year old home, that in itself is sometimes hard to fathom, is gone from the architectural landscape. What struck me as how nuts the home prices have increased in Okc was this house. March of 2023- value was 2.2, Feb of 2022 was 1.1, and it fluctuated for several years prior to that from 800k-1M. I can see how a single income family is struggling real hard right now with costs, especially with rent.

OKC should do a large ad campaign that boasts the low cost of living with a city that isn't completely boring. Market it toward younger professionals that likely work remote jobs.

There are a lot of tech jobs that are almost exclusively remote where people are making 6 figures that could live like kings and queens in OKC.


Work for a company located in the red, then live in a blue area. Out of all these blue areas, OKC is a clear winner.

https://www.move.org/app/uploads/2022/08/mov-cities-with-lowest-cost-of-living-2022-map-768x576.png

Ah, if it were just that easy.

Also, many, many companies do cost of living adjustments for the place you work in.

Ah, if it were just that easy.

Also, many, many companies do cost of living adjustments for the place you work in.

Ive had a few friends get jobs with Tech companies in CA and it is the CA wage. Full remote so they live here. Large boost overall!

That is the shopping center just north of 50th & Shartel; actually on either side of Shartel but not including the CVS.

That state agency makes real estate investments and then the income (they lease the commercial space or do ground-leases on land) helps fund the State Department of Education. It's the same group that bought Sandridge Tower which is now called Oklahoma Commons.

But this property is an outlier and different than most the things they buy. Also, the month before the state bought it, it changed hands and then a month later the new owner sold it again to the state for a $5 million mark-up. Something seems off here.

Uhhh yes, something definitely seems off. Way off.

Uhhh yes, something definitely seems off. Way off.

Time to call Getner!

Ah, if it were just that easy.

Also, many, many companies do cost of living adjustments for the place you work in.

How do companies keep track of employee location to make sure taxes, U/E insurance and other local requirements of employment are met? It seems like that would be burdensome.

How do companies keep track of employee location to make sure taxes, U/E insurance and other local requirements of employment are met? It seems like that would be burdensome.

Most companies use payroll software and/or outsource payroll to a third-party firm for exactly this reason.

Most companies use payroll software and/or outsource payroll to a third-party firm for exactly this reason.

Payroll software is not tracking where people work. The accuracy of a software's payroll calculations is only as good as the data that goes into it. Garbage in, garbage out. The company still has to manage knowing where employees are and then ensuring that the correct taxes are available to be utilized.

There are plenty of good, quality HR systems that can easily tract where an employee lives. That will be the base for any payroll tax calculation. If an employee travels for work, it is irrelevant, as their base will be the state they live. Think about a traveling salesman. They don't have to file 20 different state income tax returns. They file one in the state they love. Same with all of these remote employees. So if you live in OK but get paid a CA rate, then you get the best of both worlds.

Payroll software is not tracking where people work. The accuracy of a software's payroll calculations is only as good as the data that goes into it. Garbage in, garbage out. The company still has to manage knowing where employees are and then ensuring that the correct taxes are available to be utilized.

My employer has people in many different states, and I'm pretty sure that the systems they utilize interface with each other and the payroll system takes the employee's address from the HR system and uses that for the proper deduction amounts, etc., pretty simple.

There are plenty of good, quality HR systems that can easily tract where an employee lives. That will be the base for any payroll tax calculation. If an employee travels for work, it is irrelevant, as their base will be the state they live. Think about a traveling salesman. They don't have to file 20 different state income tax returns. They file one in the state they love. Same with all of these remote employees. So if you live in OK but get paid a CA rate, then you get the best of both worlds.

That's not at all how that works. Taxation of earned income is primarily determined based on where the work is performed.

There are plenty of good, quality HR systems that can easily tract where an employee lives. That will be the base for any payroll tax calculation. If an employee travels for work, it is irrelevant, as their base will be the state they live. Think about a traveling salesman. They don't have to file 20 different state income tax returns. They file one in the state they love. Same with all of these remote employees. So if you live in OK but get paid a CA rate, then you get the best of both worlds.

As someone who traveled for work for many years and had to file income taxes in multiple state because of it, I can confidently say you have this exactly backwards.

To be sure, one of the reasons why employers are pushing hard for return to office is exactly because the risk exposure to having employees working from other states you do not have tax accounts in is a liability they have little protection against. If an employee that lives in CA working remotely for a CA company moves to OKC without telling his employer, that employer would not magically be relieved of needing to withhold Oklahoma taxes since the work is being performed in OK. Once the employee files their OK return, the state will now know this CA company did not comply with the requirement to withhold taxes in OK assuming there is legitimate nexus in that situation.

Some combination of lived in/worked in states even require that you withhold taxes in full for both states and employees wouldn't reconcile these differences until taxes are filed for both states (and in most situations, the taxes paid to the works in state are credited against the taxes owed in the lives in state.)

Golly, I thought Paycom takes care of all that? I see their ads on TV.

Golly, I thought Paycom takes care of all that? I see their ads on TV.

i mean, if you actually update your address in the systems.... most of these payroll platforms do take care of that. but you have to inform your employer and update your records accordingly for it to work. they can't magically know you are working in another state, if you don't inform anyone

i mean, if you actually update your address in the systems.... most of these payroll platforms do take care of that. but you have to inform your employer and update your records accordingly for it to work. they can't magically know you are working in another state, if you don't inform anyone

Yes, your tax witholdings could be wrong if you don't provide the correct information to your employer. That's true in all cases, Most larger payroll/HR systems have an employee facing app or interface, so the employee just informs the employer by making changes to their profile.

Jersey Boss's original question was how do companies keep track...the answer is they rely on their employees to be transparent and understand what needs to be done. I suppose they could track like IP addresses but that's not something most places are doing. Even that, with VPNs being so ubiquitous, knowledge of where someone truly is without seeing them is suspect.

Jersey Boss's original question was how do companies keep track...the answer is they rely on their employees to be transparent and understand what needs to be done. I suppose they could track like IP addresses but that's not something most places are doing. Even that, with VPNs being so ubiquitous, knowledge of where someone truly is without seeing them is suspect.

Some payroll apps can use geolocating tools or a blue-tooth beacon. I would think an employer could require the work from home employee be within a perimeter to be "clocked in". Location would be confirmed in the app.

I interned at a place that was looking into doing geofencing on days employees worked from home. One of the (many) reasons I decided not work there.

Some payroll apps can use geolocating tools or a blue-tooth beacon. I would think an employer could require the work from home employee be within a perimeter to be "clocked in". Location would be confirmed in the app.

I imagine you could probably VPN into a computer that is connecting to the beacon.

Also those are definitely additional costs on the employer that ultimately fail to mitigate their risk.

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230830582533/en/Real-Estate-Investors-Pull-Back-Buying-45-Fewer-Homes-Than-A-Year-Ago Prices still high though. Why?

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230830582533/en/Real-Estate-Investors-Pull-Back-Buying-45-Fewer-Homes-Than-A-Year-Ago Prices still high though. Why?

Not a lot of houses on the market because interest rates are so high. We'll see how long that can last. As well as the high prices and values.

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230830582533/en/Real-Estate-Investors-Pull-Back-Buying-45-Fewer-Homes-Than-A-Year-Ago Prices still high though. Why?

Home prices went down slightly here in August from an average sale price of $260k to $258k. This was the first dip since January. Prices did something similar last year and dipped from August - January this year. It would not surprise me if we see a repeat this year if rates hold. I don't think the dip will be much, however and I think they ultimately climb higher next year and beyond when the environment looks more favorable.

Investors are still buying here, maybe not quite as much but there's still plenty of activity. I've closed several recent investor deals. They're also part of the reason it's hard to imagine prices falling too much as there are so many of them waiting for a dip to buy.

Home prices went down slightly here in August from an average sale price of $260k to $258k. This was the first dip since January. Prices did something similar last year and dipped from August - January this year. It would not surprise me if we see a repeat this year if rates hold. I don't think the dip will be much, however and I think they ultimately climb higher next year and beyond when the environment looks more favorable.

Investors are still buying here, maybe not quite as much but there's still plenty of activity. I've closed several recent investor deals. They're also part of the reason it's hard to imagine prices falling too much as there are so many of them waiting for a dip to buy.

Do you pay any attention to what happens with investor properties after the sale? I'd love to know percentages of what ends up happening with these properties. These are the categories I can think of:

1. Short term rental (ABNB, VRBO, etc.)
2. Long Term rental
3. Flip
4. Tear-down and rebuild
5. Buy and hold 12+ mos (including buy, tear down, and hold) before activity.

Do you pay any attention to what happens with investor properties after the sale? I'd love to know percentages of what ends up happening with these properties

Yes I stay in touch with nearly all of my past clients after the sale. Majority are held as longer term rentals.

Stuff is just sitting

Looked at zillow, lots of price drops

We just moved to San Antonio the last week of July and didn't get our house listed until August 11th, and we had the winning offer to buy within 11 days, and just closed last Friday. We didnt ask as much as we wanted to, but still within what they were selling for per sq ft in our neighborhood, and told our realtor we weren't budging or including anything extra like paying closing costs, etc. In my opinion, we left about $15K on the table but we wanted it to sell fast since we were already down here in SA and already making another house payment. Luckily we had an offer at list, then 2 others came back and made higher bids after finding out, but one was still asking for a concession, the other offered us $3K over listing and nothing else needed - winner winner, chicken dinner!

https://www.redfin.com/OK/Yukon/10116-NW-140th-Cir-73099/home/173535309

About a dozen of houses in my neighborhood -- just about everything on the market -- went under contract in the last 30 days.

Most are selling for around $180-190/SF.

Theres a house down the street from me that underwent a complete remodel. It was listed for 199 but has been sitting for weeks now. They recently dropped the price to 190

Yes I stay in touch with nearly all of my past clients after the sale. Majority are held as longer term rentals.

This is just the selfish Boomers stealing from the Millennial and Zoomers future. I am lucky that I have my house in order, I made good investments, and I am gravy for the rest of my life. The majority of you are negatively impacting your children and grand children's future. Boomers have been the most selfish and short-sighted generation in the history of this planet. The Boomers have collectively killed the American dream by being entitled assholes and pulling the ladder up behind them. It is honestly despicable. The boomers are coasting off the hard work and sacrifice their parents made and are an embarrassment to the world.

This is just the selfish as **** Boomers stealing from the Millennial and Zoomers future. I am lucky that I have my **** in order, I made good investments, and I am gravy for the rest of my life. The majority of you are ****ing up your children and grand children's future. Boomers have been the most selfish and short-sighted generation in the history of this planet. The Boomers have collectively killed the American dream by being entitled assholes and pulling the ladder up behind them. It is honestly despicable. The boomers are coasting off the hard work and sacrifice their parents made and are an embarrassment to the world.

In before this post is deleted.

I don't necessarily disagree with it, but the cursing isn't really needed.

This is just the selfish as **** Boomers stealing from the Millennial and Zoomers future. I am lucky that I have my **** in order, I made good investments, and I am gravy for the rest of my life. The majority of you are ****ing up your children and grand children's future. Boomers have been the most selfish and short-sighted generation in the history of this planet. The Boomers have collectively killed the American dream by being entitled assholes and pulling the ladder up behind them. It is honestly despicable. The boomers are coasting off the hard work and sacrifice their parents made and are an embarrassment to the world.

Why are you so angry?

People have been investing in real estate since the beginning of time.

If there's anyone to be angry with it would be our leaders & Fed that are turning us into a nation of renters though to be sure.

That is a very good point. I made some edits, while I speak like a sailor normally. Not everyone appreciates that.

People are angry because an entire generation was gifted the best economy in the world, and they have been pulling the rope up behind them when they got their share. So many of my friends do not own houses and likely never will. Many of them will never retire. Almost all of them have ridiculous debt from the college education we were told we had to have. We have lowered taxes on the rich and consistently pushed the effect of those tax cuts on the 99%. I have nothing against real estate agents or people who have a second house. The problem are individuals having multiple air bnb properties and corporations owning thousands of single-family homes. Neoliberalism has been a massive wealth transfer from the 99% to the 1%. We need to start directly addressing some of these issues before things get even worse.

We had historically low interest rates for basically the last 15 years along with a prolonged economic expansion. The only reason people don't own a house is because they chose something else. I started with 0, saved $10k my first year out of school and bought a house in my early 20's. That was rare in 09 and has become exceedingly rare as younger generation prefers renting & less responsibility. There are still plenty of opportunities out there for home ownership and first time buyers esp if they're willing to put in a little sweat equity.

We had historically low interest rates for basically the last 15 years along with a prolonged economic expansion. The only reason people don't own a house is because they chose something else. I started with 0, saved $10k my first year out of school and bought a house in my early 20's. That was rare in 09 and has become exceedingly rare as younger generation prefers renting & less responsibility. There are still plenty of opportunities out there for home ownership and first time buyers esp if they're willing to put in a little sweat equity.

I was looking into this a couple of weeks ago. (I think it was for OKC, but there are a few cities I have conversations about.

I was looking at the number of homes less than 3x the median family income for OKC, and I want to say it was fewer than 150 homes. That doesn't seem like a lot of opportunities for most people, especially if they will have to spend even more to fix it up - even with sweat equity.

I am a millennial, so I get that I am not a member of the younger generation, but most GenZ I know can barely make rent, let alone squirrel away money for a down payment. Like, all my colleagues who rent pay more than my mortgage, and most of them pay more than $400 over my mortgage. That seems like a really hard thumb to get out from under. I was just lucky that I moved here when I did, and have the employer I have, so that I didn't have to have more than like $3k to buy my house. I don't think that opportunity exists for most people.

I was looking into this a couple of weeks ago. (I think it was for OKC, but there are a few cities I have conversations about.

I was looking at the number of homes less than 3x the median family income for OKC, and I want to say it was fewer than 150 homes. That doesn't seem like a lot of opportunities for most people, especially if they will have to spend even more to fix it up - even with sweat equity.

I am a millennial, so I get that I am not a member of the younger generation, but most GenZ I know can barely make rent, let alone squirrel away money for a down payment. Like, all my colleagues who rent pay more than my mortgage, and most of them pay more than $400 over my mortgage. That seems like a really hard thumb to get out from under. I was just lucky that I moved here when I did, and have the employer I have, so that I didn't have to have more than like $3k to buy my house. I don't think that opportunity exists for most people.

Yes rent has gone way up and is higher than a lot of mortgages. It was much cheaper to buy than rent when rates were 2-4%- didn't stop people from renting. I think more than anything it has been a generational shift away from responsibility. In my adult lifetime it has always been more expensive to rent than buy long term (really much more expensive with appreciation + equity gains while paying down the mortgage ) and that is still the case. It's just a matter of personal discipline, same with saving & investing. Most people just don't understand the opportunity cost and take the easy road. Buying may be the harder choice but renting for any significant period of time is a detriment to building long term wealth regardless of the market conditions.

Yes rent has gone way up and is higher than a lot of mortgages. It was much cheaper to buy than rent when rates were 2-4%- didn't stop people from renting. I think more than anything it has been a generational shift away from responsibility. In my adult lifetime it has always been more expensive to rent than buy long term (really much more expensive with appreciation + equity gains while paying down the mortgage ) and that is still the case. It's just a matter of personal discipline, same with saving & investing. Most people just don't understand the opportunity cost and take the easy road. Buying may be the harder choice but renting for any significant period of time is a detriment to building long term wealth regardless of the market conditions.

I realize it is always fun to crap on younger generations - hopefully I maintain discipline and don't do it - but, respectfully, there is no generational shift away from the responsibility, in general, or from the responsibility of homeownership. It is much more complicated that.

For example:

For Unmortgaged Millennials: Rising home prices are the most commonly reported challenge to homeownership (45%), and compounded with low income (42%), nearly half of respondents aren’t sure they’ll ever be a homeowner (49%). However, they still rank a down payment as the number one most important financial milestone, even when compared to saving money for a new car (21%), travel (22%), and paying off student loans (29%).
"Owning a home remains the number-one feature of the American dream, cited by 74 percent of Americans. That milestone placed homeownership ahead of being able to retire (cited by 62 percent of respondents), having a successful career (61 percent), owning a car or truck (52 percent), having children (42 percent) or getting a college degree (33 percent). (Respondents could select more than one answer.)"

What millennials want — and don’t want
As it turns out, millennial desire to own a home is strong. The report contains some interesting findings, including:


69 percent of millennials would prefer homeownership to renting
54 percent want a home to raise a family in
51 percent yearn for better living conditions
50 percent are tired of paying rent to a landlord
62 percent are willing to relocate more than 50 miles away to purchase a home, with 1 in 5 prepared to move more than 500 miles away
52 percent have felt an increased urgency to own a home over the past year
49 percent aren’t confident they will ever become a homeowner
56 percent have less than $25,000 in savings
47 percent would be willing to delay vacations for five years if it saved them enough to buy a home
66 percent use real estate apps



The Millennial Desire for Homeownership | Opendoor (https://www.opendoor.com/articles/the-millennial-desire-for-homeownership)
73% of Aspiring Homeowners Cite Affordability As Their Primary Obstacle | Bankrate (https://www.bankrate.com/mortgages/homeownership-remains-centerpiece-of-american-dream/)
Millennials and Gen Zers want to buy homes—but they can't afford it (cnbc.com) (https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/12/millennials-and-gen-zers-want-to-buy-homes-but-they-cant-afford-it.html)
‘Unmortgaged Millennials’: Understanding Gen Y Buyers | Bankrate (https://www.bankrate.com/real-estate/unmortgaged-millennials-study/#want)

Younger millennials (24 to 32 years old) and older millennials (33 to 42 years old) have been the top group of buyers since 2014, but they saw their combined share fall from 43% in 2021 to 28% last year.
"As the youngest generation of home buyers and sellers, it's encouraging to see Gen Z entering the market," Lautz said. "Their desire for homeownership is strong, and many are relying on family support systems to help make their first real estate purchase."
Baby Boomers Overtake Millennials as Largest Generation of Home Buyers (nar.realtor) (https://www.nar.realtor/newsroom/baby-boomers-overtake-millennials-as-largest-generation-of-home-buyers)


Nearly 52% of the first generation to grow up in the Internet age ​​— people born from 1981 to 1996 — were homeowners in 2022, making the largest ownership gains of any generation in the last five years
Homeowners generation: More millennials own homes than rent (axios.com) (https://www.axios.com/2023/04/07/real-estate-housing-market-millennial-homeowners-renters)

From 2016 to 2022, homeownership rates rose most for those under 44, according to recent analysis from the US Census, and much of that came during the pandemic period.
Millennials powered America's homeownership boom | CNN Business (https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/08/homes/homeownership-young-people/index.html)

While millennials have been considered the generation of perpetual renters, it appears that Generation Z does not plan to follow in their footsteps. A new Rocket Homes® survey of over 1,400 adult members of Gen Z (ages 18 – 24) finds that 86.2% have already set their sights on homeownership.
The Future of Gen Z Homeownership | Rocket Homes (https://www.rockethomes.com/blog/housing-market/gen-z-home-buying)

I know prices and mortgage rates have gone way up, but the entire American economy is geared toward rewarding homeowners. I get why people would want to rent for a while but if you don't get into the housing market it only gets harder over time.

Spending a lot of time in Europe and particularly the UK taught me how incredibly lucky we are here and how at some point you just have to buckle down, buy something you can afford, and build up from there.

Even with the craziness in California and Manhattan, if you can just buy something -- anything -- you end up benefitting greatly.

There are even bigger benefits in commercial real estate which is why almost every rich American owns commercial property.

^ Good points- the last one is a reminder that virtually all millionaires own real estate (typically multiple properties). Becoming a millionaire without owning any property makes it much harder for sure. Granted some people make it big first but there's a reason all rich people are invested.

. . . and there are a few of us around who remember when interest rates were around 15% (early/mid 80's). .

Interest rates were high, but the cost of things like houses, college tuition, and cars were lower than they are now relatively speaking.

That is a very good point. I made some edits, while I speak like a sailor normally. Not everyone appreciates that.

People are angry because an entire generation was gifted the best economy in the world, and they have been pulling the rope up behind them when they got their share. So many of my friends do not own houses and likely never will. Many of them will never retire. Almost all of them have ridiculous debt from the college education we were told we had to have. We have lowered taxes on the rich and consistently pushed the effect of those tax cuts on the 99%. I have nothing against real estate agents or people who have a second house. The problem are individuals having multiple air bnb properties and corporations owning thousands of single-family homes. Neoliberalism has been a massive wealth transfer from the 99% to the 1%. We need to start directly addressing some of these issues before things get even worse.

Do not blame the Boomer for investing in his best interest. Blame the powers that be (80 year old senators ect.) that made purchasing the young's future the best investment. I am pretty sure congress once had a tax credit for offshoring jobs.

We had historically low interest rates for basically the last 15 years along with a prolonged economic expansion. The only reason people don't own a house is because they chose something else. I started with 0, saved $10k my first year out of school and bought a house in my early 20's. That was rare in 09 and has become exceedingly rare as younger generation prefers renting & less responsibility. There are still plenty of opportunities out there for home ownership and first time buyers esp if they're willing to put in a little sweat equity.

You would see it happen again if the housing market crashed like it did in '09. The only difference is that you are being a 40-year-old would be bidding against your 20-year-old self. Honestly would you win against your 20-year-old self?

You would see it happen again if the housing market crashed like it did in '09. The only difference is that you are being a 40-year-old would be bidding against your 20-year-old self. Honestly would you win against your 20-year-old self?

Of course not head to head, what's the point? The only reason I'm in the position I am today is because I started saving and investing very young. Most of my peers did not and I've watched the trend with several younger siblings and generation as well. More prone to be renters. I've been way ahead all of my 20's and now significantly ahead through my 30's just by making smart decisions. I did not make a lot of money either when I was starting out I just sacrificed to build wealth. It's no different today.

Home prices have increased 1,608% since 1970, while inflation has increased 644%, so it's a little different.

The median house value would only be $177K today if home prices had advanced along with inflation. Let's not get too carried away with how it's no different today.

Home prices have increased 1,608% since 1970, while inflation has increased 644%, so it's a little different.

The median house value would only be $177K today if home prices had advanced along with inflation. Let's not get too carried away with how it's no different today.
So, please compare cost per ft increases. The median sizes also inflate. Needs to compare actual cost increases apples to apples. Sizes have increased, features have increased, etc.

I'm betting salaries/wages have not increased 644% or 1608% since 1970, and that's pretty much why buying a house isn't affordable for a lot of people today that it should be affordable for (along with student debts and increased cost of living in everything else).

https://www.google.com/search?q=why+buying+a+house+isn%27t+feasible+for+m illennials&client=firefox-b-1-d&sca_esv=567587230&ei=gpUNZcPeHPm3qtsPxoGPmA8&oq=why+buying+a+house+isn%27t+feasible+for+mille&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiK3doeSBidXlpbmcgYSBob3Vz ZSBpc24ndCBmZWFzaWJsZSBmb3IgbWlsbGUqAggAMgUQIRigAT IFECEYoAEyBRAhGKABMgUQIRigAUj8JVCFAljhGHABeAGQAQGY AZIBoAGaCaoBAzIuOLgBA8gBAPgBAcICChAAGEcY1gQYsAPCAg UQIRirAsICBxAhGKABGAriAwQYACBBiAYBkAYI&sclient=gws-wiz-serp