Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Per Cleveland Brown, you really need to go back and look at the graphs from the first link. Nearly ALL of your numbers have been changed, some dramatically, from what the graphs said 2 days ago. The numbers above no longer match what was in the first link. https://www.bankingstrategist.com/ho...oincome-ratios
Even if you’re not changing addresses it’s cool to see how areas you have lived in or have friends/family in compare.
Only small trouble is that retirees don’t feel these differences in the same way. They might have a lower IRS income but have a paid off home so no mortgage interest payments. They can sometimes tolerate living in a red zone. On the other hand with no paid off home usually the green zone is needed.
You make some really interesting points.
If I grow up in Massachusetts and live there my whole life, I'd already be in a good position to buy a house there because I'd be making a local salary. Same would be true with Miami.
However, With money I've made in Mass, it would be far easier for me to move south to Miami and someone from Miami to move north to Boston.
If I grow up in Massachusetts and live there my whole life, I'd already be in a good position to buy a house there because I'd be making a local salary. Same would be true with Miami.
However, With money I've made in Mass, it would be far easier for me to move south to Miami and someone from Miami to move north to Boston.
That is why I see the metros at the top of this affordability list being magnets for Gen Z, who are entering the stage where they are looking toward accumulating equity. Even if it's a "let me get in and build the cashflow needed to get to where I want to settle."
Sure, the Zs who have high paying jobs lined up right out of college, or the ones who have parents with a lot of money to help them, probably can buy right into some of these high-priced areas. But the vast majority are going to have to face the decision of whether to start their careers off in a place where it wouldn't be there first choice, but is the most economical.
But for the big city amenity, low cost areas (Cleveland/Pittsburgh/St. Louis/Detroit, etc.), outside of stigma, a lot of people will find out they really weren't missing out on much if they had to "start" or "settle" there. ... and outside of winter weather, still offer more amentities than almost all the Sun Belt metros.
To me, it appears that people want the big city legacy amenities with the (10-20-30 year ago) Sun Belt costs. Well, there is your middle ground.
That is why I see the metros at the top of this affordability list being magnets for Gen Z, who are entering the stage where they are looking toward accumulating equity. Even if it's a "let me get in and build the cashflow needed to get to where I want to settle."
Sure, the Zs who have high paying jobs lined up right out of college, or the ones who have parents with a lot of money to help them, probably can buy right into some of these high-priced areas. But the vast majority are going to have to face the decision of whether to start their careers off in a place where it wouldn't be there first choice, but is the most economical.
But for the big city amenity, low cost areas (Cleveland/Pittsburgh/St. Louis/Detroit, etc.), outside of stigma, a lot of people will find out they really weren't missing out on much if they had to "start" or "settle" there. ... and outside of winter weather, still offer more amentities than almost all the Sun Belt metros.
To me, it appears that people want the big city legacy amenities with the (10-20-30 year ago) Sun Belt costs. Well, there is your middle ground.
I live overseas now in a country where I make fair amount less than I would if I were living in the US (depending on the state). If I moved back to the US, my wife and I would have to find a somewhat more affordable location, despite us being in our 40s. Of the cities you mentioned, the Pittsburgh area is the one I would probably find most appealing. (I've been to Cleveland, Pittsburgh and St. Louis, but not Detroit).
But I'm also a New England native, and seeing how well the Hartford area does on these graphs makes it more appealing to me as well, even thought I've never been a particular fan of the city.
These type of rankings aren't really all that useful. When it comes to affordability the only scenario that matters is your own. You aren't moving to a place and get handed an average income job, so there's no real use in knowing that a small city in NY is pretty 'affordable' by that metric.
A lot of the places that are 'unaffordable' are dynamic markets with a high level of demand which drives up real estate prices and which leads to growth that often outpaces the job markets in those areas. A lot of the 'affordable' places are stagnant, mature markets more likely to lose people than to gain them. Northern cities benefit there from the fact that a larger % of people there now are working well-paid jobs in the public sector, providing essential services such as healthcare or what remains of legacy union jobs. But that is only of use if you can get one of those jobs, which probably isn't the case for the majority of people - hence why the 'unlucky' folks who don't tend to then move away. It's a simple equation: If you are qualified and able to work a job that would make you 70k in Upstate New York, but you can't find such a job and your choice is between going to a market where the same job makes you 50k in the South vs working a low-skill job making 35k in Upstate NY then you're going to move South.
Some observations:
1. Most of West Coast are indeed way overprice. Not surprisingly, it is the region where housing prices had been dropping the most recently.
2. NE is actually not that bad outside of NYC. DC Metro and "Greater Boston" are expensive, but the wage does compensate for it somewhat.
3. Houston is VERY affordable indeed. Especially compare to DFW and Austin.
4. Meanwhile, Florida is getting very expensive. And the number doesn't count the sky high home insurance.
5. Pittsburgh is cheap...
Why Houston more affordable than Dallas and Austin ? I see that Upstate New York have some cheapest real estate in the county places like Buffalo, Rochester metro areas for example.
Top 35 US Metropolitan Areas over 500,000 in population with the best income to home price ratio
1) Lansing
2) Rochester
3) Pittsburgh
4) Toledo
5) Akron
6) Cleveland
7) Scranton
8) Youngstown
9) Harrisburg
10) Dayton
11) St. Louis
12) Detroit
13) Buffalo
14) Syracuse, NY
15) Cincinnati
16) Birmingham
17) Albany
18) Indianapolis
19) Milwaukee
20) Hartford
21) Oklahoma City
22) Chicago
23) Wichita
24) Baltimore
25) Tulsa
26) Louisville
27) Columbia
28) Minneapolis
29) Grand Rapids
30) Kansas City
31) Lancaster
32) Philadelphia
33) Allentown
34) Springfield Massachusetts
35) Columbus
Birming ham and Oklahoma City - what areas are actually included in this statistic? If it is city proper - you get what you pay for.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
