why is MA so expensive? (Boston, Newton: houses, buyer, public school)

[G-fused]

Originally Posted by darkone

You’re only thinking about yourself and not about the sustainability of the region - economy, traffic patterns etc.

I don't get it. Who thinks about anyone but themselves and their loved one's? Sustainability of the region? That's Charlie Bakers' job. Do you care about me? Or my wife? Of course not. I don't expect you to. I want my property to keep rising in value so I can pay for my kid's college, or help my retirement, or take care of my aging parents, etc. I'd rather be able to do that than have many people I don't know be able to live in Boston.

So now I feel like I am not missing anything.

[brainbree]

Originally Posted by G-fused

I don't get it. Who thinks about anyone but themselves and their loved one's? Sustainability of the region? That's Charlie Bakers' job. Do you care about me? Or my wife? Of course not. I don't expect you to. I want my property to keep rising in value so I can pay for my kid's college, or help my retirement, or take care of my aging parents, etc. I'd rather be able to do that than have many people I don't know be able to live in Boston.

So now I feel like I am not missing anything.

The main issue is suppose your property does increase, but now your own children won't be able to live near you. Wages generally haven't increased with property prices.

[G-fused]

Originally Posted by charolastra00

Because you already own.

I'd like to break into the market. Even with an income above the average, I'm looking at 2 bedroom/1 bath condos an hour and a half from work as a breaking in point. There's not a single single family home under $300K within an hour of my office - and that's in the suburbs!

It's a problem when a whole generation of buyers is effectively shut out of the market unless they are making well into the 6 figures.

It's not a problem for me, it is very much the opposite. Again, I am not sure what I am missing. Compassion for those I have zero affiliation with?

When I bought it was a terrifically large amount for me. Never in my wildest dreams did I think I would buy anything (especially a condo!) at the price I bought. I laughed at the real estate agent when he told me the price. But here I am, thrivin' and survivin'.

If you were my brother and needed help, I would do what I could. There are millions of people I am sure in your situation. Why should some sacrifice the value they worked so hard to get so that you can live in a place? I lived in a condo when I would have preferred a SFH, I gave up tons of things so I could afford my mortgage in that condo, and then was fortunate enough to grow my career where I did not have to give up as much. That was my risk and my reward and I deserve what I worked for.

It does not seem I am missing anything - it's a tough world. People are shut out of the most desirable places. Sounds right. I guess I can complain about not being able to afford my own island. Or...I'd really like to live in Hawaii but I can't get a job there that would allow me to get a place that is acceptable to me - Ok, so I won't live in Hawaii.

I don't know.

[G-fused]

Originally Posted by brainbree

The main issue is suppose your property does increase, but now your own children won't be able to live near you. Wages generally haven't increased with property prices.

I would have zero problem selling my place in a couple of days for (what I consider) a huge amount. I would have zero problem renting my place for (what I consider) a huge amount.

Tons of jobs have been created in Boston. High paying jobs. Those that earn more should have more convenience right? Regardless of if they deserve their success.

I have no tight ties to this area. My children can and should get out of here if they cannot afford to have a happy life here - I would absolutely encourage them to do so and would help them do so because of the value I collected from my own sacrifice...that is how this American model works. I think?

[bugelrex]

Originally Posted by brainbree

The main issue is suppose your property does increase, but now your own children won't be able to live near you. Wages generally haven't increased with property prices.

I think the issue is that YOUR wages dont support current prices. Clearly, many people do have the wages and savings to buy.. its not all family money.

These are folks that toiled and study like crazy in school, people who lived in s*holes when they got their first job but saved every penny. Folks who worked harder than their coworkers to get that promotion...

[brainbree]

Originally Posted by bugelrex

I think the issue is that YOUR wages dont support current prices. Clearly, many people do have the wages and savings to buy.. its not all family money.

These are folks that toiled and study like crazy in school, people who lived in s*holes when they got their first job but saved every penny. Folks who worked harder than their coworkers to get that promotion...

What are you even talking about? I own a multi in the South End and currently live in Braintree, not that it even matters. I have no problem with the current arrangement, but it's not really sustainable. What's amusing is that people thinking their property appreciating because of forces outside of their control somehow means they worked hard or something. All it means is that you got lucky. Straight of out college I bought not one or two 3 families in the South End because they were dirt cheap. Literally worth almost 8 million now. It could've easily become like Detroit. Cheaper property is better for most. Funny enough a similar thing has happened with people with respect to Beijing just 30 years ago to now.

The only reason Massachusetts is expensive is due to restrictive zoning laws. The biggest irony though is that the best properties in this state are in the densest areas. Those calling for less housing are playing themselves. Regret not moving to Manhattan and buying when it was cheap in the early 2000s, ugh.

[bugelrex]

Originally Posted by brainbree

The only reason Massachusetts is expensive is due to restrictive zoning laws. The biggest irony though is that the best properties in this state are in the densest areas. Those calling for less housing are playing themselves.

Its expensive because their are people who can pay these outrageous prices, not because of zoning. For sure, folks in 2008 were buying to 'flip' with easy loans.. but now, it appears the majority of buyers in the "inner suburbs" are buying to live, raise a family and be close to work. There will always be someone richer than you outbidding and raising the prices over time...

BTW, congrats on the early purchases..

[brainbree]

Originally Posted by bugelrex

Its expensive because their are people who can pay these outrageous prices, not because of zoning. For sure, folks in 2008 were buying to 'flip' with easy loans.. but now, it appears the majority of buyers in the "inner suburbs" are buying to live, raise a family and be close to work. There will always be someone richer than you outbidding and raising the prices over time...

BTW, congrats on the early purchases..

It's expensive because zoning prevents more housing from being built, temporarily reducing prices. The increased demand from more people will raise rises in the long run. This is what has happened in literally every major city in the past 30 years.

Just look up 40B lawsuits in Massachusetts using your favorite search engine and you'll see.

By the way, if you buy in Worcester now and hold for 25 years I guarantee you you'll get at least 15% YoY.

[mdovell]

Eh. I can't afford to buy my parents house. Let's be honest here for a moment. You have less people that can buy the higher a price gets.my $50 watch is affordable but a 10k Rolex has far fewer buyers.

I was in some dead end jobs but banked cash. I thought about buying a house but it was impossible. So I went back to higher ed. Now I get job offers from headhunters! If I stayed and struggled I'd be making half of what I do now at most. Some say maybe I should have taken out loans and graduated earlier... Yet those saddled with debt are stuck. Like housing debts are fixed but assets are variable.

To be frank when I inherit my parents place I'll either sell or rent it. Despite it bring 425-450k in value there's no real point in living there. Much of suburbia is boring. No diversity, no independent shops or restaurants, no festivals, no events, no parks etc.

I live in Springfield. I just attended the Jazz and Roots festival. It's the 5th largest jazz concert in the country. I have access to a train to NYC/hartford/New Haven. Can walk to a juice bar, have yoga on a rooftop, rock concerts at mgm, german/indian/Puerto Rican/Italian/Cajon/chinese/lebanese etc food in walking distance. Can I even get a Bánh mì in a suburb�� my point being is that high prices don't really bring access like it or not volume can matter more than income.

Brainbee you also have to understand that net worth is more then just a wage. At the same point a house isn't an investment.

There's really only three ways to make money in housing

One, be a buyer or sellers agent
Two rent out property
Three Sell property you own already.

The best long term way to make more is to rent out. Otherwise it's just a one time gain and that's it. Investments don't give a damn about promotions. If you buy stock it doesn't matter what your income is. The performance is the same for shareholders. The price is the same for someone with one share of Microsoft vs bill gates.

The cost of upkeep on a house, especially in the 128 range can be high. It just makes much more sense to make a portfolio of property rather than one big one.

Eventually what happens with high prices is the population ages out and shrinks. Otherwise prices then drop

[matrix5k]

Another reason why prices are high is because many old people do not move out to downsize. They supposedly don't have a place to downsize to close to home, or pass on their house to their hiers. I read that the majority of houses are owned by baby boomers. I went to many open houses in Bedford and many of the prospective buyers were retired. There weren't many young couples looking because it was above their price range. Why does a retired couple need a house all to themselves?