Hacker News Reader

Comment by torbTurret | Hacker News Reader

Such a simple analysis ignores e.g. the higher wages in the US offset by the lack of social nets

The bigger reason is you can buy a house with 20% down (or less) in the US, where that is nearly impossible just about anywhere else in the world

Edit: I should say anyone can buy a house for 20% down or less. In much of the world some can do this, but credit is not extended to nearly as many of the population as it is in the US

This would make me think houses should be even more expensive than they currently are

I just bought an apartment with 15% down. It's in the EU; 15% down is about the standard here with no special exceptions.

With government assistance programmes it can be even 5% down but you'd have to qualify for some protected category.

How long is the rate fixed for?

The rate is based on Euribor [1], fixed for 6 months in my case (and commonly most everyone) but anything between 3 to 24 months was possible.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euribor

Wow. What's going to happen your payment when rates go back above 0 to stop rampant inflation?

I wish you well but the way things look, you’re completely fucked. Your interest rates have been so unsustainably low for so long. And now things are going up fast and will likely continue to due to rapid inflation.

Good luck!

Forever? Here in Brazil we negotiate a yearly rate for the whole extension of the contract. Isn't this standard?

In the US, 15, 20, and 30 year fixed are boring standard mortgages, with various adjustable rate mortgages available from 1-10 years (and even some interest only products, where you’re essentially just renting the property from the bank and not building any equity).

Agreed except for your mischaracterization at the end. An I/O mortgage is a leveraged asset speculation you live in, without the “forced low interest savings” of traditional mortgages.

Historically, real estate has always appreciated at a health rate except during a handful of tail events. It’s less speculation and more allocating capital elsewhere versus dead capital in your home (and if the interest rate spread between the note and your other investment growth opportunities is significantly robust to make the effort worth while).

I'm surprised. I only know the US and the UK, but in the UK it can go down as far as a 5% deposit. Honestly US deposit requirements seem high.

20% down (80% loan-to-value (LTV)) is the standard minimum for avoiding mortgage insurance. If you're willing to pay a mortgage insurance premium, 5% down (95% LTV) is not uncommon AFAIU, especially for large, "jumbo" mortgages, at least in coastal California. (Elsewhere it's probably the case that jumbo mortgages require a greater equity stake, not lower. Coastal California is a little unique. While prices are nuts, the risk of a significant valuation crash is negligible compared to, say, Nevada or Florida, so issuing banks are more comfortable with the additional risk and seemingly more eager to have that asset in their portfolio.)

Also, in case there's some confusion, "deposit" and "down payment" are distinct. In American real estate parlance a deposit is earnest money (often 5% of the initial offer) to bind the seller into closing--the process of finalizing contracts among all involved parties, and transferring assets. A deposit might be forfeited if the buyer pulls out. A minimum down payment is the minimum equity a mortgagee (e.g. bank) requires the borrower to hold in the property as a condition of making the loan.

> that is nearly impossible just about anywhere else in the world

I don't know about "anywhere else in the world" but I can guarantee you that you can buy a property everywhere in EU with a 20%. Also, property taxes in EU are generally lower than US.

I keep saying that americans, pay lots of taxes, they are simply not aware of it.

Yeah it’s true. Property taxes are so low in the UK. With “free” healthcare and almost no property tax, it’s easy to retire young. But it’s harder to make retirement money.

By “less”, you can easily buy a house with 3.5% (FHA). The requirements aren’t that strict.

It also ignores the vast differences between densely populated and not very populated cities.

Even Manhattan is cheaper than most places according to the same metric.

Many apartments (condos in the rest of the country) in Manhattan are structured as co-ops with huge monthly obligations. The sales prices are lower because you can easily be committing to $2000 a month in payments to a co-op board. The total monthly outlays bring the numbers back in line.

Higher average wages, but not do much higher median wages. Unless those rich people who are driving up the average are giving their money away, the ones who are closer to the median are in a sore spot.

Average wage is always reported as median.

No...average is always average, median is always median. Newspapers often mislabel the numbers they are reporting, but the distinction is always made clear in the data. See:

> The average annual wage in 2019 in the US was $51,916.27, and the median annual wage was $34,248.45. The median wage is the wage “in the middle,” while average refers to the measure of central tendency for all the data.

https://policyadvice.net/insurance/insights/average-american...

I’m not disputing your citation. But I believe this is a lot clearer.

https://dqydj.com/household-income-percentile-calculator/

Not the OP, so I'm not sure what sources they used, but disposable income as measured by the OECD [0], for example, does takes this into account.

[0] https://data.oecd.org/hha/household-disposable-income.htm

But in exchange taxes are lower.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com