Comment by michaelochurch | Hacker News Reader

Comment by michaelochurch | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

If the housing prices are increasing, it would mean that demand is increasing. But if so many people are leaving, demand should be decreasing and prices should be soft.

Housing has a few problems. One is that it's price inelastic. If you destroyed 5% of the housing in Manhattan, prices and rents would at least double, and possibly go up 4-10x. We know this because of the 9/11 Boom (which was actually fueled by speculators anticipating future supply destruction-- which, thankfully, never came). It's counterintuitive, but something that objectively destroys value can (with inelasticity) increase the bulk value of what's out there. If 5% of housing was destroyed and prices doubled, most people would say that the housing market "improved by 90%". Well, no.

Increasing housing prices are, make no mistake, signs of something bad. Supply problems (mostly, rooted in NIMBY regulations) are a big part of what's going wrong. Another issue is that most localities are losing jobs, while a few "star cities" (SF, NYC) win.

The second problem with housing is that, because people are emotional about it, they don't sell when there is cause for prices to go down. They hoard. This negative correlation between price and volume means that housing prices barely drop when they're "supposed to", but drop cataclysmically when the real estate problem starts destroying real wealth (as in 2008) and jobs disappear and foreclosures happen.

Real estate is the blood-engorged cancer of the economy. It's a tax that goes nowhere and anyone who thinks high rents and property prices is good is just on the wrong side.

I've been looking to move in the near future, and I'm trying to find a city with a good nightlife and good job prospects that doesn't have insane housing costs if you live in the city and insane commute times if you live outside. I'm not making a ton of money where I am right now, but anywhere I'm looking at for tech jobs I'd be taking a pay cut even if my salary doubled because cost of living is so high. Housing in cities is just insane, and investment money slash NIMBY isn't helping.

Not to sound flippant, but so are you and everybody else. I have yet to read anywhere on the Internet that someone is looking for a boring town that's dedicated solely to cars with cheap housing and crap for jobs. What you seek is in very high demand, especially with the nascent trend of moving back into cities so it will be quite expensive relative to what you get.

NIMBYism accounts for a lot because people hate change and people moved somewhere for a specific aesthetic but simple market demand accomplishes a lot.

Three years ago we made a move against this trend. We moved from a large metropolitan tech-heavy area to a low-cost but rural and isolated area. It has lots of problem - no jobs, lots of poverty, etc, but if you are entrepreneurial and can figure out how to either travel for your work or make your location irrelevant, lots of places otherwise ignored suddenly become practical.

There are plenty of people looking for just that, and most sites I've seen dedicated to housing news focus around nice places to retire, places to raise kids, places to live cheaply but with no jobs (this house only costs $280,000 with an average city salary of $38,000!).

I live in a medium sized Midwestern city with a burgeoning job market and plenty of restaurants/breweries/nightlife. I have a two bedroom apartment for less than $700/mo and it takes me less than 10 minutes to get downtown at 5pm. Meals for two cost $30 at a local restaurant with local beer. What I make isn't a lot, but it's a good deal over $38,000. That has to exist somewhere else too. I love my city, but I'm looking for new people and cultures (and I'm tired of -25F winters).

America does many things well, but it does not do cities well. So many of our "cities" are little more than a glorified suburb ringed by an arbitrary boundary.

In far too many cases that boundary is simply insurmountable traffic.

If you're single, in tech, and not in NY or SF... you shouldn't have any trouble with housing costs.

Anyway, take a look at Chicago.

Have you checked out Portland, Oregon?

Austin, TX is worth considering. Lower cost of living, especially with a (less than insane) commute. The city even gave itself the moniker "Silicon Hills" in the '90's, and there's a thriving tech & startup industry in the area.

>especially with a (less than insane) commute

Worth noting that this is quickly going away. Traffic is projected to get far, far worse over the next few years at current growth rates and public transit is still very disappointing in comparison to other large cities.

That said I love this city.

Check out Charleson, South Carolina. Amazing quality of life and a heck of a tech scene. Search for Charleston Digital Corridor.

Pittsburgh, maybe?

It's a tax that goes nowhere

Much like Bitcoin and electricity! Your housing is cheap until someone else wants it; then the two of you bid to tie up wealth :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com