"Under 750K" (the price of a starter home in OC), and Millennials are not interested? (Bakersfield: sales, crime)

[Electrician4you]

Originally Posted by spoonman1

Don't forget about the $400/mo. HOA, the $400/mo. property taxes, the $350/mo. PMI (since most first time buyers don't have $90k to put down) and don't forget the insurance and repairs.

Give me a break with your prices. . I own a few HOA properties and my highest HOA payment is $270 a month. IF you're making 100k a year you should have enough saved up to save 20%. IF you want to buy a house you will save up and make the effort. Buying a house isn't easy. It's not supposed to be. It's supposed to take some sacrifice and desire to save and buy. If you buy a condo for 450 you would be looking at about 25/2600 a month Piti HOA and insurance. Or you can spend all that on renting and let someone else make the money.

Personally I prefer to buy.

[blam]

Originally Posted by Electrician4you

So a husband and wife each making 60k a year can't afford a 450k townhouse? Yeah they can't be deep in debt and can't go nuts spending but it's doable.

1. townhouse is not a house, its a condo.
2. according to this Millennial median wage map - Business Insider millennials make 22k on average in california.

[Big L]

Originally Posted by Electrician4you

So a husband and wife each making 60k a year can't afford a 450k townhouse? Yeah they can't be deep in debt and can't go nuts spending but it's doable.

They can probably afford to pay the mortgage and utilities, but how much will they have left over after that? On top of that, if they end up living check-to-check due to their housing costs, they probably won't have anything in savings to deal with occasional housing mishaps (AC goes out, water heater needs to be replaced, roof starts leaking, etc.). Home warranties can handle some of that, but a check-to-check millennial couple probably wouldn't even have enough money left to pay for those either.


The other major issue is what could potentially happen if one of those $60k/year salaries disappears from the household due to a layoff/termination or medical issues. That young couple could end up in financial ruin and would more than likely end up having to go back to renting, only this time in a less-desirable area than they were in before they bought their home.

[Finper]

Electrician is very optimistic on what people can afford. My HOA is 320.00. 20% of 450k is 90k!! How is a person making 100k supposed to have that in their sav acct when they have to pay 2000 00 a month in rent and then pay gas and utilities and everything else to live? I'm the only one of my friends that own a condo and it's because I bought in 02 and my dad paid my 10% down. Buying property shouldn't be easy ( remember the crash) ? But it shouldn't be impossible for middle income people either..

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by Finper

But it shouldn't be impossible for middle income people either..

Why should it be possible? Do "middle income" earners buy homes in Manhattan? Do they buy homes in the middle of North Beach in San Francisco?

There are places where middle income earners simply cannot afford to live, and it's no one's job to make it "more affordable" for those people. That's an entitlement issue, not an affordability one IMO.

[CaliRestoration]

I love how millennials in California think someone who earns $60k a year should be able to afford to live in South OC or the central Bay Area. That's a great fantasy to cling onto, but unfortunately not the most realistic.

[Finper]

and this is why Ca will only have rich people and union pensioners living here in 10, 20 years. Although that seems perfectly fine with you Calirestoration. Luckily it's different in other states.

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by Finper

and this is why Ca will only have rich people and union pensioners living here in 10, 20 years. Although that seems perfectly fine with you Calirestoration. Luckily it's different in other states.

Calm down cowboy. You don't know anything about me, but since you assumed, I'll inform you a bit.

My primary home isn't in California anymore, so I'm well aware of the problems middle-class people have in California. I relocated by my business 7 years ago out of state, and took 70 jobs with that move. Most of the jobs I took out of the state were higher earning jobs too (my company develops software for small to medium sized banking institutions, though Bank of the West is one of our larger clients).

The reason why guys like you can't afford a home in California is because democratic policies have effectively priced you out of ever owning a home here, and those politicians are perfectly fine with that. Middle class families or earners are not the primary voting block for democrats in California, so why would they have to satisfy you at all?

On the supply side, when you have an anti-development leftist mentality, you end up with less homes to buy. Developing condos, apartment buildings, single family homes, and anything with a roof in California comes with a lot of legislative fees and red tape. Since most property developers are in the business of making money, they pass those cost onto you. Building in California is extremely cost prohibitive, say compared to Montana. There's lots of land in California, but it takes years to get anything approved for construction and the amount of local fees will increase cost by 30-40%, and the legislative tape from OSHA, California Coastal Commission, etc will have you waiting years before a shovel ever digs any dirt. Take it from a guy who tried to develop a small 4 condo complex in Lafayette CA. It's a nightmare. When you finally do build something, and it's on the market, guess what? All that time and cost you accrued during construction? Yup, gets passed onto buyers like you.

So what you end up with is places like SF, or Silicon Valley, or South OC for existing supply, or competing for really expensive new construction. You're competing with senior tech engineers who make $150,000k, often dual income families. Guys who make $60,000 don't stand a chance. Sorry dude, but then again not really sorry, you voted these guys in.

The same thing is happening for rents as well (less supply, lower earners subsidized by the state, rent control policies, etc... you know the rest).

[Big L]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

Why should it be possible? Do "middle income" earners buy homes in Manhattan? Do they buy homes in the middle of North Beach in San Francisco?

There are places where middle income earners simply cannot afford to live, and it's no one's job to make it "more affordable" for those people. That's an entitlement issue, not an affordability one IMO.

I actually agree with this to a certain extent. That is one of the main reasons why I left California in my early-20's. SoCal will always be "home", but it is not a place where my wife and I could afford to buy a home.


My brother and his wife are looking at becoming homeowners. Unfortunately, they will more than likely end up in the Inland Empire. That wouldn't be bad if their jobs were there, but they both currently work in L.A. County.

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by Big L

I actually agree with this to a certain extent. That is one of the main reasons why I left California in my early-20's. SoCal will always be "home", but it is not a place where my wife and I could afford to buy a home.


My brother and his wife are looking at becoming homeowners. Unfortunately, they will more than likely end up in the Inland Empire. That wouldn't be bad if their jobs were there, but they both currently work in L.A. County.

Inland Empire would be okay if there were more jobs there, but unfortunately middle class jobs are disappearing from California and being replaced by either specialized tech jobs (which tend to be focused in LA or SF or SV), or low wage jobs. Again, decades of leftist democrat anti-business legislation is finally coming back to bite Californians in the butt.