So, being unable to afford a house, even with a 6-figure salary, and thus renting is a "choice" now? Hmmm. I'm sure many people choose to rent, but I feel like most renters, especially those with good salaries, do so because the cost of ownership is too damn high these days, and the tax incentives aren't what they used to be.
There should be a stipulation that if you see this line or one like it, you append "in high value areas where there are lots of high paying jobs". If the American Dream is defined as owning a home (and nothing more), then there are multiple affordable areas outside of the traditional hotbed areas like LA, DC, and NYC.
What will those places look like in 30 years? Because my experience is that while there might be one or two well-paying employers in such areas, they're bleeding talent and seem to be on the downturn compared to their heydays and competitors. I don't see a lot of those companies existing in a decade, much less 3.
If you dare live 30 minutes outside of DC in Maryland, you are literally in the middle of no where with farms to the east and forest to the west.
Virginia is more pricey and populated near DC. Housing in Arlington is in the 600s. But if you just live 40 minutes away in Prince Williams, you pay 400s.
Now this is all relative because hey even 600s is cheap compared to NYC and San Fran.
Let's put aside the massive government contractor industry. Even without it, DC's internet history includes MAE-East, UUNet, AOL, Equinix, Network Solutions, and Microstrategy. The Dulles Technology corridor is one of the largest single tech regions in the country. Nearly all the significant genomics and bioinformatics companies are here, as well as all financial regulation groups. FINRA is in DC. So is Capital One. Amazon is opening in DC, and not in New York: and Amazon Web Services has long been in DC. And all this has fueled three highest income counties in the country, all here in DC.
For some reason I always thought biotech was in the Carolinas and finance in NYC.
As for Amazon, I mean they’ve been around… but until they decided to stick their HQ heard about was the warehouse and data centers which aren’t really prestige divisions to the outside world.
There's a reason Amazon picked DC for HQ2.
^Better headline in my opinion.
It's pretty funny that journalists take the high school/undergrad approach of essay writing (paraphrased/reworded source material). Sorta explains how we end up with odd titles like this one.
Content farms do something like: “Why travelers are advised to take blank sheet of paper with them.”
Then they go on about some unrelated nonsense and never mention anything about any sheet of paper.
I congratulate renters in Seattle on jumping over the hurdles, but I suspect it required some doing.
Having said that, I think the current balance in some places can be harmful because there is a non-insignificant number of tenants who stopped paying rent simply because the eviction moratorium means they can enjoy the property for free. When questioned they say "investments have risks ". This leads a number of landlords to jack up credit requirements or let properties stay empty, exacerbating supply problems.
Which as I said elsewhere to downvotes, leads to heavy discrimination based on income/class and less supply for the neediest of folk
However, I've only ever met severe disagreement when I bring this up. I don't know if it's clear or not but for me (and probably most of everyone who frequents HN), keeping the status quo will continue to make us richer. I'm very clearly arguing against my own self-interests because I don't find low-efficiency renting to make the world a better place.
But the second is off a bit. LA is the cultural capitol of North America, and only rivaled in the anglosphere by London and New York City. It's where people go to "make it" (or break it) in film, music, art, comedy, (and to an extent, cuisine and theater). When I lived in there I was surrounded by interesting and beautiful people in every apartment building and there was always something going on, somewhere to go, a show to see, etc.
It has its ugly side too. In my experience the glamour is lifted after about three months living in the Valley. But I can see why people would stay there, despite the lower wages and high cost of living.
And fwiw I left LA for the Bay Area, and I would never live in the Bay Area again (to me the place is an abject dump and not worth the mental or physical toll of living there) but I still have fond memories of LA. It's dirty and loud but at least it has a soul.
Also I feel like renters are much less likely to get involved in local politics, but that's just anecdotal.
I lived in Paris a few times in my formative years. It's so bad there that, believe it or not, there were homeless who had jobs. Literally. homeless who had to go to work.
It was insane from the perspective of a young American.
EDIT: Changed some slang words to American english.
People living on the street or out of their vehicles in the US work, too. Exact numbers are hard to get, though.
If we go back past the 1900's, the only workers that consistently owned their own property were farmers. Mortgages didn't become a thing until after the 1860's, and it wasn't until the 1890's that they became common. Before mortgages, workers did not have the lump sum of money required to purchase a home.