Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.
I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!
It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
7. Content should match the theme of this community.
-Content should be Mildly infuriating.
-At this time we permit content that is infuriating until an infuriating community is made available.
...
8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.
-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.
...
...
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.
My salary didn't change at all, but homes went up 82%. The money I saved for a down payment and my salary no longer are good enough for this home and many others. This ain't even a "good" home either. It was a 200k meh average ok home before. Now it's simply unaffordable
Time to eat the rich
Best hurry ... Ozempic is destroying the caloric benefit
I like the utility feed hanging off the front of the house going straight through the roof and blocking them from installing the other fake shutter. I wonder what other construction horrors lurk inside.
Not that this is "ok" but it's why "buy whatever you can as soon as you can" is good advice. If you'd put whatever you had into a shitty condo four years ago, and kept saving at the same rate, you'd likely be in good position to trade up soon.
I see a lot of people I know end up in the same position because they've been waiting for either the exact right circumstances or for prices to "crash." All the people i know who started with anything they could afford now have a huge amount of equity in nice homes. The difference is real and primarily about timing more than income or location.
I bought 5 years ago when it was still reasonable. I have a great rate on a great house that has increased by about 50% since I bought it.
I don't want to, because this is just about the perfect size house for us in a great location, but I can't really "trade up" as the interest rates are through the roof and everything is more expensive too.
I think you misunderstand. He didn't have the financial wherewithal to acquire a home of any sort because a down payment was expected even of the shitty condo. He didn't have the money then he doesn't have the money now he's on the same shitty treadmill that the rest of us in the permanent underclass are.
You just need to stop watching Netflix and buying avocado toast.
At least that's what old people say anyway.
Can confirme. I stopped drinking Starbucks and now I own a 50 acre plot with a 6 bedroom house on it. If only I would have listened to their Facebook comments sooner, I could have afforded that private jet too. Edit: Apparently sarcasm is lost on a few. So for explicitness - /s
Assuming you spend $10 on avocado toast every day, as well as $75 on eating out for every meal, $20 for Starbucks, and ALSO assuming you have $150 worth of monthly subscriptions:
It will take you 25 years to save one million dollars. That's assuming you never get sick, never lose a job, never need to buy a car or have major repairs, or basically any kind of surprise expense or setback that could wipe out savings.
To be the richest person on earth, you would need to save that money every year for over 6 MILLION YEARS
Not to devalue your point, but if you truly were spending (10 + 3*75 + 20)*30 + 150 per month (so a total of 7800 USD) and you invest it in an index fund getting back 5%, you'll have your million in 10 years. 8 years at 10% which is the long-term growth rate of DJIA and S&P 500.
You'll still never be the richest person in the world, but if you truly were burning away that much money, you could make decent dough just from investing it passively. In 30 years you'd have like 15 million, more than enough to retire.
Now the only real problem is that nearly nobody is actually burning that much cash and the "stop eating avocado toast" suggestions are indeed stupid af.
In my area, it's a 100-150% increase in four years.
It doesn't sound like much until you see numbers.
A $350k house is now $700k for no reason.
A $400k house is now a million.
It's depressing.
This is everywhere. I've been looking for houses for 3 months in NW Ohio. 300k is the new 150k, and all the houses are beat to shit on the inside needing 50k just to make them passable inside because nobody takes care of them.
I wonder what proportion of it is also due to people fleeing 1 million + average house markets during the pandemic work from home wave. Not saying this about you, but it makes me think it's funny how the common refrain of "Don't like it? Just move" is often uttered by NIMBYs.
A lot of boomers are going to die in the next ten years or so. That is the biggest age demographic in the u.s. the population is going to shrink by a lot. That's why there's a push to make people have more kids, because otherwise workers and consumers have a lot more power.
Private equity is already gobbling up the houses. Boomers are cashing in to finance extravagant retirement. Those who are not, are leaving it to their children who will then sell to private equity groups.
So occasionally I look out of curiosity and the reason is pretty plain.
I look for houses for sale in a suburban area as public listings, and there's like 1 within a few square miles of the area.
I switch over to renting, and there's like 12 houses just like the one for sale available, all owned by companies. I also know a coule that aren't listed that have no tenants, but are still owned by one of those companies. You can tell because those yards are now waist deep grasses (in an area where HOA throws a hissy fit if your yard looks just a smidge unkempt).
Don't know why the companies find it more profitable to buy houses people aren't looking to actually move into, at least at the rent they are willing to accept. If I fully understood why, it might just piss me off more. Like maybe the houses work better as a loan basis than other assets, so even empty and unused they are valuable as some sort of financial trick.
My understanding is that these companies are investment companies that need stable assets for their billions of dollars portfolios and they actively look to keep buying property as a stable form of appreciating asset. They have so much money that needs to find some way to make more money for their investors.
Don’t know why the companies find it more profitable to buy houses people aren’t looking to actually move into, at least at the rent they are willing to accept. If I fully understood why, it might just piss me off more. Like maybe the houses work better as a loan basis than other assets, so even empty and unused they are valuable as some sort of financial trick.
That's one thing, but housing has been a low-risk investment for a long, long time. If they bought the house OP posted in 2020 and sold it in 2024 they would have almost doubled their money even without renting it out.
A house in Austin
2018: $275,000
2022: $725,000
Those are actual numbers from East Austin. I believe the 2024 market rate is $625,000 but it hasn't changed hands again so I can't say for certain.
Is this one of the areas where corps are buying up a shitload of real estate?
I believe it's on earth, yes.
My moon base is not gaining ANY land value....
This won't change as long as property ownership and property renting is unified. There's just to much of a business incentive from renting, even if it takes decades to make it back. Worst that can happen is that it can sell it back to a market that criminalizes homelessness instead of treating it or its causes.
That's cheap as hell compared to California. And I work remote from anywhere I want. Thanks for the tip!
It’s the same in Kansas City. I just checked a random house in my city and it’s up almost $100k in 4 years.
3bd, 1bath 976 sqft
Yep, that's on track! My house has almost tripled in price since I bought it 12 years ago. Denver metro. No way I could afford it if I had to buy it today.
My lucky ass bought a house in late 2019. I'm happy I'm making money on it but this doesn't seem healthy
You're only making money if you downsize, move somewhere cheaper, or switch back to renting. If you move and all the other houses have gone up, then you just end up having to sink any gained equity into affording your new place. Rising prices really only help developers, realtors, and REIT's.
Also here in Europe this is the type of construction we use for a garden shed, not a house.
Even when we do modern timber frame, it's generally still brick or block at the bottom. How long do these houses last in the US? I imagine a lot of the continent is pretty humid
It’s a good thing you aren’t a building engineer.
My parents' timber house is from the 1780s and is still solid. So, 240 years at least, give or take. I'm aware of plenty of timber houses from the 1600s that are still standing and functional as well.
Timber frames are sheathed in treated plywood and then wrapped in siding. Rain doesn't reach the wood of a barely-maintained house, exterior humidity won't do damage in any hurry, and wood is rarely making ground contact. These houses last at least a hundred years given that this style is approaching 100 years. It's usually storm damage through the roof that causes the rotted wood you're imagining, not normal wear and tear.
When wood is properly sealed up in walls, it lasts a very long time. We don't really have buildings on an old world timescale, but we do still have colonial wood frame buildings.