In other news (apolitical thread)...

[ELA]

https://twitter.com/Rivals/status/1939073267601461631

[bayareabadger]

Having said all that, Austin is crazy expensive, nobody can afford to buy, and nobody should ever move here.

Thank You For Your Support

I saw a report that a bunch of comedians followed Rogan to Austin in 2020 and many left or were just plain bagging on the place on the way out. 

So some famous people are helping your cause! (Every please let this not spiral into politics)  

[FearlessF]

https://www.unitedrealestatesolutions.com/p/2125-Villa-Ave-Sioux-City-IA-51103/dmgid_180255880?fbclid=IwY2xjawL52O5leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHkdUqgJvE579-0EB3K0_hemGAJJFwk1KaYY200jLUUR32_vljk63At5YJLFY_aem_oUfA1O3MZ_8sqQppHAkvxg

$115,000

[utee94]

I saw a report that a bunch of comedians followed Rogan to Austin in 2020 and many left or were just plain bagging on the place on the way out.

So some famous people are helping your cause! (Every please let this not spiral into politics) 

Yeah I saw that some dipshit comedian who followed that other dipshit Joe Rogan, moved here for like a few months, moved out in 2020, and was making disparaging remarks recently.  

Not sure what prompted it five years later but I applaud his decision and appreciate his efforts. 

I am thankful for his support.

[Mdot21]

I saw a report that a bunch of comedians followed Rogan to Austin in 2020 and many left or were just plain bagging on the place on the way out.

So some famous people are helping your cause! (Every please let this not spiral into politics) 

well Austin is a pretty liberal city so I think if a bunch of liberal comics from LA moved to Austin and didn’t like it- it’s probably for other reasons than political leanings of residents. 

I’ve only been to Austin twice and I loved it. But I can’t live anywhere other than South Florida. I like the palm trees and beaches too much. But it’s getting way too overcrowded. 10 years ago it was like the perfect amount of people. Now it’s just too damn many. 

I think if money was no object I’d live in Manhattan- but that’s only if I could be flown around in helicopters and driven in limousines and I had a 8,000 sq Ft penthouse which would probably cost $100 million. Otherwise fuck living in New York. Way too much traffic congestion. And why pay $8,000 a month for a 1,000 sq ft 2/2 shoebox apartment and then another $1,000 a month for a parking spot? New York is a city that only makes any sense to live in at all if you’re massively wealthy imo. Otherwise you’re basically just another cockroach squirming around in the shithole. No thanks.

[Cincydawg]

Were I Uber Wealthy, I'd likely pick California, probably SF, maybe even LA.  There are parts of both cities that are prime, I've seen more upscale places in LA than SF.  And yeah, I'm talking billionaire wealth.  Helo to take me to John Wayne to fly to Zurich or Geneva on a lark.  If we open the options to outside the US, the question gets tougher.

Sonoma county might work.

It wouldn't be Paris or London, for me.  Monaco?  Maybe, a lot of tourists.  Singapore?  Maybe, kinda hot.  Sydney?  Never been.  Buenos Aires?  They have good air.

Rio?  Been there, didn't like it at all.

[FearlessF]

talking billionaire wealth???

Tiburon, CA north side of San Fran bay would be good for me.  Maybe Monterey, CA

[Mdot21]

Were I Uber Wealthy, I'd likely pick California, probably SF, maybe even LA.  There are parts of both cities that are prime, I've seen more upscale places in LA than SF.  And yeah, I'm talking billionaire wealth.  Helo to take me to John Wayne to fly to Zurich or Geneva on a lark.  If we open the options to outside the US, the question gets tougher.

Sonoma county might work.

It wouldn't be Paris or London, for me.  Monaco?  Maybe, a lot of tourists.  Singapore?  Maybe, kinda hot.  Sydney?  Never been.  Buenos Aires?  They have good air.

Rio?  Been there, didn't like it at all.

Man I’ve been to London once for 5 days- but to me it was the most MEH place in Europe that I’ve ever been, and I’ve been to a few places. Not a fan of London at all.

Paris is awesome but there are better places in France to live imo.

If we’re talking Europe, I’m probably living in Spain or Italy. Question is where- cause there are lots of places in both countries I’ve been that I’d love to live in lol.

[utee94]

Unlimited wealth?  South of France for me, no doubt.

[FearlessF]

Europe sounds like a long flight to Lincoln NE for a Husker gameday

SFO would be better

[Cincydawg]

Yeah, I was first thinking about larger cities, but if we can go country, Provence would dot every t and cross every i.

A question would then be where, the places I've stayed other than Marseille all checked a lot of boxes, but Avignon would be too touristy for me.  Aix was nice downtown, but touristy.  The countryside around Aix would work.  St. Remy is a nice small town, the only tourists are pretty much van Gogh lovers.  I enjoyed Lyon a lot, not sure about living there.  Geneva might work, my wife is not a fan for some reason.  Somewhere over outside Bordeaux?  Not Provence, but still nice.

In some quasi real world, I might stay here actually because I know the place, that counts for something.  I would probably get one of those estates up in Buckhead.

3800 Northside Dr NW, Atlanta, GA 30305 | For Sale ($18,000,000) | MLS# 7611425 | Redfin

I might need a larger wine room though.

[jgvol]

Switzerland for me, probably.  Lucerne perhaps.

[Cincydawg]

The Scandanvian countries would merit a thought, the southern parts don't get all that cold, and one could travel at will of course.  Folks might say "but taxes", but if your wealth is post-tax, it wouldn't matter.  Or if in Berkshire, you can borrow whatever you need.

[bayareabadger]

OK but that's a different discussion.  If you're talking about financially sound young people making financially sound decisions, that's fine, I agree with you and I fully support it.  But that's not what I'm getting at.

I'm addressing this idea-- this complaint-- that I consistently hear, that young people today simply can't afford to buy a house.  That it's practically impossible for them.  And the complaint is often accompanied by the accusation that people in my generation, and my parents' generation, just don't understand, because we had it so much easier.

I'm not denying that home prices seem to have outstripped inflation and that it's harder.

But I am challenging the idea that it's impossible.  The evidence cited for the plight of the young, tends to be those average home prices in any given metropolitan area, like I pulled up.  But even in the Austin metro which is considered expensive nationally (though nothing like California of course), I gave an example of a home that is affordable and is perfectly reasonable and acceptable as a starter home.  That was just the first one I pulled up, but in the same neighborhood there were several other houses in the $190K-$220K range.  None were huge or glamorous.  But all were the exact same distance from downtown Austin, that MY first house was.  Around 15 miles.

So even for young people that don't want to challenge themselves or stretch, they can still invest in a starter home rather than renting.  It might not be in the most desirable location-- my first home wasn't either-- but it's still possible.

I think that makes sense. It's harder, surely not impossible. Nothing is. 

I wonder if some factors beyond price are making it less common, including later marriages, more revitalized downtowns, people being more mobile in general, etc.  

This is all reminding me that I should probably start looking after football season this year. Not that I have a ton of interest in what comes with home ownership, but it's probably about time.