Do Austinites support the gentrification of the I-35 corridor? (home, to live)

[sojourner77]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

There are dangers to reverse mortgages that people who just flippantly say things like you do cheerfully ignore as long as it's someone else they want to do it. And in this case, so they can justify doing what they want with property that has long belonged to someone else.

There are other options for paid-off properties they are "priced out" of -


1. they can turn them into rentals and milk them for $2000-$3000 month in places like Barton Hills.


2. They can use that rent money to fund their lifestyle, and buy a ranch in a place like Jarrell if they wanted to.


3. When they no longer have use for the house in Barton Hills, they can sell it for $750,000 and move to the Bahamas and live the rest of their lives there if they wanted to,






THL, you know anyone in a situation like this?

[machupichu12]

Originally Posted by sojourner77

Only in Austin can people complain about $6000 in taxes on a house that is gaining $20,000 in value every year.


It's called a "Reverse mortgage", people. Use it to pay your taxes.

A lot of the gentrification happens with renters though right? Valuations and property taxes go up, rents get raised, renters can no longer afford said rent and are forced to move.

[sojourner77]

Originally Posted by sojourner77

There are other options for paid-off properties they are "priced out" of -


1. they can turn them into rentals and milk them for $2000-$3000 month in places like Barton Hills.


2. They can use that rent money to fund their lifestyle, and buy a ranch in a place like Jarrell if they wanted to.


3. When they no longer have use for the house in Barton Hills, they can sell it for $750,000 and move to the Bahamas and live the rest of their lives there if they wanted to,






THL, you know anyone in a situation like this?

I also forgot to mention the realtors who are making money hand-over-fist from the ballooning property values in Austin.


THL, you don't know any realtors making money in Austin RE do you???

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Like I said: "All so you can gentrify. Do it if you will but don't pretend that there's not a price to be paid by someone else for your pleasure."

change is *always* bad for someone. There is always a price for change.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by machupichu12

A lot of the gentrification happens with renters though right? Valuations and property taxes go up, rents get raised, renters can no longer afford said rent and are forced to move.

Another option is the area gets more and more seedy, crime goes up, rent goes down, and they are forced to move because it is no longer safe. The most unlikely scenario is everything stays the same.

There is always change and tragedy in life.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by sojourner77

There are other options for paid-off properties they are "priced out" of -


1. they can turn them into rentals and milk them for $2000-$3000 month in places like Barton Hills.


2. They can use that rent money to fund their lifestyle, and buy a ranch in a place like Jarrell if they wanted to.


3. When they no longer have use for the house in Barton Hills, they can sell it for $750,000 and move to the Bahamas and live the rest of their lives there if they wanted to,






THL, you know anyone in a situation like this?

No, not really. There are a lot of assumptions in your post that do not apply.

[wheatpenny]

Originally Posted by sojourner77

There are other options for paid-off properties they are "priced out" of -


1. they can turn them into rentals and milk them for $2000-$3000 month in places like Barton Hills.


2. They can use that rent money to fund their lifestyle, and buy a ranch in a place like Jarrell if they wanted to.


3. When they no longer have use for the house in Barton Hills, they can sell it for $750,000 and move to the Bahamas and live the rest of their lives there if they wanted to,






THL, you know anyone in a situation like this?

Those are some mighty BIG assumptions that you're making about the person wishes to do with their home. If you've lived in a home for so many years, you would probably have "roots" in your friendships, acquaintances, etc. maybe they wouldn't WANT to move with all of that? Previous generations did not move around as much as the present ones do. A raise in home price values doesn't mean much if you have no intention to leave your home.

[sojourner77]

Originally Posted by wheatpenny

Those are some mighty BIG assumptions that you're making about the person wishes to do with their home. If you've lived in a home for so many years, you would probably have "roots" in your friendships, acquaintances, etc. maybe they wouldn't WANT to move with all of that? Previous generations did not move around as much as the present ones do. A raise in home price values doesn't mean much if you have no intention to leave your home.

Wheatpenny, you're new to the forum, so I'll explain:


My post was referring toa specific individual on this forum who crusades against gentrification incessantly, yet uses that gentrification to fund their livelihood (and eventual retirement) from it.


I have no problem with people who stick their hands in the cookie jar, and are HONEST about it, but some like to bite the hand that feeds them, and that is pure hypocrasy.

[Aquitaine]

I think the point THL is making (and has made over and over again going back years) is that it's easy to be detached and perhaps even cavalier about the effect of gentrification on older folks who have invested in a neighborhood an amount of time on a scale a 30-something doesn't even have a frame of reference for -- right up until you find that you are one of them, or one of your parents is.

From the "attention must be paid" department, I'm right on board with her. We DO have to think of these folks when we're taking our new bike lane to our new artisanal cheese shops.

But I part ways here because this is the least bad of all possible outcomes. Nobody (certainly not THL) is proposing that stagnation or depreciation is a superior alternative, even if individual symptoms of those things are not going to cause the same kinds of problems...you certainly won't be forced to move. But you also won't be ALLOWED to move because your property has barely kept pace with inflation. There are people for whom this is better, but I'd wager it isn't anywhere near most of them.

I have trouble with the straw man that "flippantly" or exclusively celebrates gentrification while disregarding any negative side effects. I've never seen this person, on these forums or in real life. It's as though our choice is to join in the hand-wringing over something none of us can control (even if control were desirable) or else be written off as rude young whippersnappers. There is a bit of hypocrisy in the mix as well as realtors profit far more regularly from gentrification than the rest of us do!

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by Aquitaine

I think the point THL is making (and has made over and over again going back years) is that it's easy to be detached and perhaps even cavalier about the effect of gentrification on older folks who have invested in a neighborhood an amount of time on a scale a 30-something doesn't even have a frame of reference for -- right up until you find that you are one of them, or one of your parents is.

From the "attention must be paid" department, I'm right on board with her. We DO have to think of these folks when we're taking our new bike lane to our new artisanal cheese shops.

But I part ways here because this is the least bad of all possible outcomes. Nobody (certainly not THL) is proposing that stagnation or depreciation is a superior alternative, even if individual symptoms of those things are not going to cause the same kinds of problems...you certainly won't be forced to move. But you also won't be ALLOWED to move because your property has barely kept pace with inflation. There are people for whom this is better, but I'd wager it isn't anywhere near most of them.

I have trouble with the straw man that "flippantly" or exclusively celebrates gentrification while disregarding any negative side effects. I've never seen this person, on these forums or in real life. It's as though our choice is to join in the hand-wringing over something none of us can control (even if control were desirable) or else be written off as rude young whippersnappers. There is a bit of hypocrisy in the mix as well as realtors profit far more regularly from gentrification than the rest of us do!

You pretty much nailed it. Other than, this Realtor doesn't, quite intentionally. (Yeah, I know, BAD Realtor!) A Realtor is not a Realtor is not a Realtor. We all have different niches and even opinions! For example, I see a lot of destroying of the goose that laid the golden egg, if you're one that benefits from hordes moving to Austin, in the destruction of the very things and attitudes that made Austin a desirable place to move to - I take a more long term view while some (Realtors or otherwise) just see immediate dollar signs. Destroy or allow the destruction of the very things that made Austin an "in" place to move and those hordes will, indeed, move on to the next place to repeat the process, leaving Austin holding the bag. Maybe seeing that, too, is part of growing older and getting more perspective.