U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-15-2017, 11:32 PM
 
Location: too far from the sea
19,821 posts, read 18,826,487 times
Reputation: 33710

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by galaxyhi View Post
I never could understand why someone NEEDS a 3 or 4k sqft house. Some retail stores are that.

And thise who have them do nothing but complain about property taxes being so high. Well, duh! You've got the equivalent of a Victorian sized mansion! Victorian mansions were either for 1) the very wealthy, or 2) muliple generations under one roof.

It's no wonder they will have trouble unloading it when they "downsize".

Give me 1k OR LESS ( our house is 896 sqft, bonus room included) any day.

Now, I don't have kids, but they don't all need their own br and bathroom. They can be bunked with a sibling, after all when they get married, they will share a room with a spouse......itll be good practice.

And if you need not one, but 2 or more "walk in closets", perhaps you have too many clothes, not just not enough closet space.

And WHY have " two (or more) of everything " in a single house? (Living room AND family room AND a bonus room; or dining room AND breakfast nook)? Two bathrooms WOULD BE NICE, but my OH deal with JUST one. I grew up with one bath shared by 4 people. It was a miracle to my parents to actually have indoor plumbing!!!

If they can't sell, or can't get what they consider a fair price, they got to enjoy it, and get what they deserve for being greedy.

The trend towards smaller or "tiny" houses fuels the smaller house generation, who doesn't want a "McMansion" to clean and keep up.

So I don't feel sorry for them, as I sit in my cozy "little house".
That's pretty much how I feel. Once you retire there is no need for a large house. Even 1000 sq ft would be fine for only two people. Most retirees want to downsize in their possessions and the size of their home. I don't see many millenials being able to afford a gigantic house with high taxes even if they wanted a big house. The trend seems to be toward fewer possessions and smaller houses anyway.

As for the article by the person in Unionville, CT, that's in a high priced area with sky high property taxes. So that needs to be taken into consideration also. With the problems the younger generation seems to be having with finances (often due to high cost of college) they'd want a smaller, more economical house. That part of CT is not exactly booming with great jobs either, unlike a place such as Boston.
__________________
my posts as moderator will be in red. Moderator: Health&Wellness~Genealogy. The Rules--read here>>> TOS. If someone attacks you, do not reply. Hit REPORT.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-16-2017, 05:30 AM
 
2,512 posts, read 1,328,722 times
Reputation: 4607
I think it's nice when Grandma and Grandpa keep their house for as long as possible. There's something special about going to visit the house where you grew up. Not quite as special having Thanksgiving in a new condo. I also like the idea of having room for people to come back and stay if they need a place to stay. It was never the same after my inlaws sold their house and they were never happy either.

Last edited by bookspage; 10-16-2017 at 05:48 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2017, 05:46 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia/South Jersey area
2,869 posts, read 1,399,615 times
Reputation: 10071
Quote:
Originally Posted by galaxyhi View Post
I never could understand why someone NEEDS a 3 or 4k sqft house. Some retail stores are that.

And thise who have them do nothing but complain about property taxes being so high. Well, duh! You've got the equivalent of a Victorian sized mansion! Victorian mansions were either for 1) the very wealthy, or 2) muliple generations under one roof.

It's no wonder they will have trouble unloading it when they "downsize".

Give me 1k OR LESS ( our house is 896 sqft, bonus room included) any day.

Now, I don't have kids, but they don't all need their own br and bathroom. They can be bunked with a sibling, after all when they get married, they will share a room with a spouse......itll be good practice.

And if you need not one, but 2 or more "walk in closets", perhaps you have too many clothes, not just not enough closet space.

And WHY have " two (or more) of everything " in a single house? (Living room AND family room AND a bonus room; or dining room AND breakfast nook)? Two bathrooms WOULD BE NICE, but my OH deal with JUST one. I grew up with one bath shared by 4 people. It was a miracle to my parents to actually have indoor plumbing!!!

If they can't sell, or can't get what they consider a fair price, they got to enjoy it, and get what they deserve for being greedy.

The trend towards smaller or "tiny" houses fuels the smaller house generation, who doesn't want a "McMansion" to clean and keep up.

So I don't feel sorry for them, as I sit in my cozy "little house".

Aah come on Galaxy, it's a preference thing. it really is. Sorry no I don't want to share my bathroom. Why is it being greedy? could I do it? of course, I did it when I was first out of college and had roommates in my first apartment and I hated it. why must every thing "only what we need"? No I don't have too many clothes, now I'm sure some people could get away with one or two outfits. lol, I can never understand the people who go to Europe for 10 days and only have 2 pair of shoes.

Now my current house in Philly is about 3000 sq feet. yep we all have our own bedrooms. I love it. the main problem is as I get older it's a townhome so every thing goes up. lol stairs and bad knees to do not mix. I love my big kitchen with the balcony of the side. It's heaven in the summer mornings, I sit on the balcony with the newspaper, tea and a sweet pastry.

LOL, . Do I "need" a big house to survive? of course not. Do I want to live my life simply "surviving"? nope. l'm striving toward "having life more abundantly".

It's all about what you like but certainly liking a big house doesn't make one "greedy".

so no, when I get my forever condo, it will not be less than two bedrooms (I have relatives that come) and 1,500 sq ft. I also want a house at the beach. It also will not be less than 2 bedrooms. lol of course I have to figure out a way to pay for this but hey, I dream large. I am not sacrificing to end up in a 500sq ft shoe box.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2017, 06:40 AM
 
29,764 posts, read 34,848,700 times
Reputation: 11675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neerwhal View Post
I think they are confounding many issues here. Inequality reduces the buying market for these homes especially in some areas that arenít seeing investment (economic liability). Also, there is a trend in the middle class, now more the working / professional class, to reduce risk and go for location and style over sheer square footage (size liability). Finally there is the location of some of these homes which is not commensurate with the square footage. Like you have these McMansions developed on main thoroughfares or behind a bus depot... who wants that?
Wow sounds like you read the article and the points made.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2017, 07:40 AM
 
Location: AZ
672 posts, read 393,682 times
Reputation: 2776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daisy Grey View Post
I've lived in CT since 1990. In the CT suburb we landed in new home construction was exclusively over priced inefficiently designed McMansions built on acre lots. I've been in some of those homes. They're sparsely furnished with second hand furniture. If you look closely at the landscaping, it's not being kept up and is going to pot.

The dirty little secret is that home ownership is highly overrated and is a money pit. What no one impresses upon wide eyed first time buyers is that affording to buy a home is one thing. Affording to maintain a home is another thing entirely.

You nailed it. And it is far worse when you have three feet of water and an alligator inside the place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2017, 08:15 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
23,541 posts, read 17,525,434 times
Reputation: 27573
Quote:
Originally Posted by volosong View Post
Absolutely. My old home has been on the MLS for one week now and we've received three offers. We rejected two of them and the third is still under consideration. It is from an investor who will be renting the place. We'd rather avoid that, (for the sake of my old neighbors. Yeah, why should I care? But, I do.).

In the Antelope Valley, aerospace is starting to ramp up again. One rejected offer came from someone relocating from Seattle for her aerospace job. Today, another young couple who works for the same aerospace company stopped by, asking if in was on "open house". "No. But come on in anyway and I'll show you around." I'm waiting a day or so to see if they want the place because I'd really like to see them have it instead of investors.

We'll see. But, 'yes'. It is very location dependent. And whatever the local economy is doing.
Real estate is almost completely local. I live in an area where homes are very slow to move, even in today's "seller's market." Most homes in my city sit on the market for about five months.

Unless something is at a great discount, offers the day of a property hitting the MLS are almost unheard of.

This home is just down the street from where I grew up and was the house of a kid I was friends with. It's listed at $175,000, but has a pool, outbuilding, and a large lot. It's a pretty good sized home in its own right. But the house needs a lotof updating. The kitchen looks completely original, the bathrooms are way out of date, the blue carpet is ugly, etc. You could easily be up to $200,000-$225,000 after you update the home.

https://www.trulia.com/property/5031...sport-TN-37664

With that said, even this dated, though fairly large, property, is going to be out of the price range of many local buyers. Median household income in my area is only in the mid $30k range. The high school has declined since I was there, and is now a troubling 5/10 on Great Schools.

I think this house is going to be a tough sell, given the local market. This is a standard suburban development from the 70s with fairly large homes on large lots. While the guy in the article from metro Atlanta can probably find a buyer, given the prosperity of the overall area, smaller towns with suburban style development are going to be tough sledding.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2017, 08:20 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
23,541 posts, read 17,525,434 times
Reputation: 27573
Quote:
Originally Posted by bookspage View Post
I think it's nice when Grandma and Grandpa keep their house for as long as possible. There's something special about going to visit the house where you grew up. Not quite as special having Thanksgiving in a new condo. I also like the idea of having room for people to come back and stay if they need a place to stay. It was never the same after my inlaws sold their house and they were never happy either.
Many seniors will rely on home equity to at least somewhat finance extended care if they need it. In my area, we're seeing a lot of houses come on the market that were built in the 60s/70s. Many of the original owners still lived in these homes. These folks are now either dying or going into extended care situations. A lot of these homes have hardly seen updates since they were built, and keeping a home fairly up to date is just not a big thing here.

Also, what if grandma and grandpa insist on staying in the home for far longer than is practical, and it requires basically a team of family or even hired help to keep them there? My 82 year old grandmother is pretty insistent to stay in the family home she's lived in for 52 years, but is unable to maintain the yard, clean the home, or even get her own groceries. It is basically up to my aunt and myself to keep her there. It is a difficult road to walk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland View Post
That's pretty much how I feel. Once you retire there is no need for a large house. Even 1000 sq ft would be fine for only two people. Most retirees want to downsize in their possessions and the size of their home. I don't see many millenials being able to afford a gigantic house with high taxes even if they wanted a big house. The trend seems to be toward fewer possessions and smaller houses anyway.

As for the article by the person in Unionville, CT, that's in a high priced area with sky high property taxes. So that needs to be taken into consideration also. With the problems the younger generation seems to be having with finances (often due to high cost of college) they'd want a smaller, more economical house. That part of CT is not exactly booming with great jobs either, unlike a place such as Boston.
Unfortunately, it is rare to find newer SFHs around that size. In my town, we basically have three categories of homes.

1) 1930s-1950s small homes (mostly in the city) with most <1200 sq. ft. Many of these homes have not been maintained and require significant updating. The city is not a desirable place to live. Many of these homes are very inexpensive, but the smell from the heavy industry, crime, and lack of updated inventory make these not desirable.

2) 60s-90s suburban style development. Many of these homes are well over 2,500 sq. ft. Again, many have not been updated well. These are often overpriced for what they are, and with the weakened local economy, they are unaffordable for many average workers.

3) Anything built since the 2000s and the high end. These homes are generally kept up well, but command a significant premium. Often large homes. There are relatively few of these due to the trend of newer construction being much more expensive.

What is needed are more homes like the below. Nothing fancy, but still tasteful, newer, and kept up well. I would much rather have a home like this than the one I linked to above that is more expensive, on a huge lot, and needs significant updating. Sadly, few homes like the below are being built.

https://www.trulia.com/property/3058...sboro-NC-27405
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2017, 08:30 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
23,541 posts, read 17,525,434 times
Reputation: 27573
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neerwhal View Post
I think they are confounding many issues here. Inequality reduces the buying market for these homes especially in some areas that arenít seeing investment (economic liability). Also, there is a trend in the middle class, now more the working / professional class, to reduce risk and go for location and style over sheer square footage (size liability). Finally there is the location of some of these homes which is not commensurate with the square footage. Like you have these McMansions developed on main thoroughfares or behind a bus depot... who wants that?
Exactly. There are many small to medium sized areas that prospered decades ago with manufacturing or other blue collar type jobs. Suburban homes were built, but now that those areas have declined economically, selling large homes on large lots is going to be a tough market.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2017, 09:14 AM
 
2,952 posts, read 1,634,675 times
Reputation: 5292
I think capital gains taxes would be the least of their worries.

At least it was for us, Its not like the taxes take all your profit. You lived in the house and it went up in value. You didn't work for that money. Just pay the taxes and be glad you are not still dealing with a house sucking about $100,000 a year to live in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2017, 09:59 AM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
10,761 posts, read 10,173,268 times
Reputation: 14281
I'm not a boomer or anywhere close to retirement, but I really don't think selling our home for at least what we paid will be an issue. The area is established and in a good location. the homes are well built and the lots are large. barring anything catastrophic, there will always be a family seeking a larger house on a large wooded lot near amenities. I doubt that it will ever be a $300k house. For reference, our home is 3700 sq ft 4/3.5/2, 28 years old, on a half acre lot. Our property taxes are over $10k, and maintenance costs for the landscaped lot are substantial, which is fine when you're working.

Frankly, though, I'd continue living in our home if it wasn't a two story and I didn't have arthritis in the knees. It's a lovely home, well laid out so that it isn't a gargantuan box, and meets all of our needs and then some. Some may think that we don't "need" 3700 sq ft, but that's one's personal opinion. We do need every square foot and use most of the rooms. There is no need for our kids to share bathrooms and have a coat closet for a master bath for us if we can pay the bills. Same goes for any prospective family, despite the alarmists worrying about millennial buying patterns, many families still choose larger homes and probably will in the future. When we no longer want to pay the bills, then we'll sell and downsize. Not worried about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top