Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

liquorcabinetkid t1_jdi55cb wrote

To understand the housing crisis we should keep in mind that while we need 30-40k homes to be added to inventory to meet the demand, people who need housing can't afford what the market is building.

Check the median price for a house in your county; in CC it is now over 500k.

This isn't really an accident. It's more like making undesirable people move into the flood plain and then acting surprised when a flood washes them away.

32

Vtjeannieb t1_jdiohtg wrote

Longtime Vermonter here, and someone who was involved in the housing business. Builders have always built for the top of the market because it’s easier to make a profit. Those who built for entry-level properties generally had a larger parcel of land they could subdivide and build multiple units.

But as much as we’d like to see more affordable housing, the more expensive homes do have the function of allowing people to move out of their starter homes into something that better fits their needs. I’m an example of this. When I bought my first home, I couldn’t afford to live in the area I wanted. But after a few years, I saved some bucks and developed more equity , and was able to sell my little starter home to someone who was just thrilled, and moved to a larger home in my preferred area.

This cycle worked for many years, at least in Northern VT. It’s been disrupted lately by more nonVermonters moving in, more corporate investors, and homes converted into short term rentals.

18

columbo928s4 t1_jdje1uw wrote

> the more expensive homes do have the function of allowing people to move out of their starter homes into something that better fits their needs.

another way to look at this is that unlike the working class, if upper-income people want to buy a house, they are going to buy a house. so if there is no new-build luxury housing available, they're instead going to purchase homes that otherwise would have gone to lower-market buyers. this has happened in a lot of desirable cities that have underbuilt for decades; houses and apartments that at first look would seem to be part of the market for the working class and first-time buyers have instead been bid up on and purchased by upper-class buyers because there is so little higher-end housing available. so while luxury housing might not be what we want to see built, allowing those units to go up takes a lot of pressure off of the lower end of the market

9

SnooMaps1313 t1_jdkmlam wrote

Someone (from Rhode Island if their license plate is an indication) in my NNE neighborhood recently bought a little house identical to ours, which was at the bottom of market pricing in late 2020. Then they built onto it this past year and essentially doubled its size and amenities. That starter home has been converted and removed from the starter home market forever.

8

GrittyPrettySitty t1_jdmytny wrote

>This cycle worked for many years, at least in Northern VT

That cycle worked because of the population boom from the boomers.

Also, normalizing changing locations to get to a "better place" or a more desirable place seems to be an acceptance that we are not trying to make every place better overall.

2

No-Ganache7168 t1_jdkjnwc wrote

When I got married my husband and I bought a $150,000 home that was 1000 square feet with three small bedrooms one upstairs bathroom and a half bath in the basement. It was on a 100X150 lot. Would first time homebuyers purchase such a home if more were built? It seems everyone wants a 2,000 SFT home on a few acres. Of course, those homes are going to be more expensive

4

you_give_me_coupon t1_jdi72dw wrote

Thanks for pointing this out. New housing will just be bought by hedge funds, AirBnb speculators, 3rd-home types, and out-of-state WFH yuppies, just like now. We need rules that incentivize housing going to people who need it and actually live here.

2

landodk t1_jdictj2 wrote

OP already pointed out that “out of state WFH yuppies” are not the problem. They add to the price pressure a bit, but they also pay taxes and live in our communities. They actually live here too

23

Twombls t1_jdijva3 wrote

Also how many "wfh yuppies" actually moved here. My anctedoctal experience is a lot of them left after the lockdowns subsided a bit.

Also who is a WFH yuppie. I work from home for a VT based company. I used to commute into the office but gave up when it became a sickfest. Most of my direct coworkers left the state due to housing and affordability. Vt isn't as desirable to everyone as this sub makes it out to be sometimes.

13

you_give_me_coupon t1_jdjbsh7 wrote

> Also how many "wfh yuppies" actually moved here.

Just on my street in southern VT? 8 households. At least 5 of those (the only ones I know for sure) paid cash for their houses. 4 bought sight-unseen. They haven't left, unfortunately. Meanwhile my working-class friends can't even come close to affording to buy a house, and are living in dumpy rentals, in one case without working heat.

1