Comment by bradlys | Hacker News Reader

Comment by bradlys | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Since you're getting flak. I'll add on - I'm in the same boat. Just turned 31. Make about ~$400k/yr. I have about ~$1.5m in stock (will be sold in the next year - so - maybe $1m cash). I've sold my soul to FAANG and an ultra toxic startup to get here.

Can't or will not buy a home here in SF. If I wanted to stretch - I could afford a $1.6-2m home but it'd be unpleasant. Depending on the neighborhood - that's just a starter home. I'm not even talking like a nice starter home either. My neighbors just bought the house nextdoor for $2m and spent a year renovating/fixing. Would they have bought this place if they knew all the issues? Probably not but couldn't do anything about it since you have to buy without inspection. Even when you buy at these crazy prices: Usually still requires a few hundred K in cash to renovate to put up to modern standards. We're talking all the electrical, plumbing, insulation, roof, some structural issues that went unaddressed, kitchen and bath updates, etc. Add on that you can't even live in the damn thing while that's happening. People underestimate how much places here cost and how much work they take.

Only way you're getting a nice modern turnkey house in a decent neighborhood is if you go $3m+. And unfortunately that's still wildly out of reach for many of us at the threshold of 1% individual incomes. (~$350-450k - depending on the study)

If you are only 31, making $400k, and have 1.5m in liquid assets, the answer is that you can afford to spend a lot more than 1.6-2.0m on a home. Whether or not you’d want to is a different question.

I’m in my early 40s, and was in the same boat as you in my early thirties but in a different large American city.

First, you can absolutely afford a $2m home, let’s not pretend otherwise.

Second, I bought at 31, and 10 years later I pay far less for my mortgage than it would cost to rent a similar place AND my hone went up in value despite buying at the peak of the last bubble!

Here’s the advice I’d give, but if you want to live in your are for the next 15 years or more. If you don’t want to be there for the long run then it’s more complicated.

If I was married - it would be much simpler. Unfortunately - in all likelihood - I will either never marry or be married around 40. Buying a house to set down some roots when you're single, changing jobs every 1-2 years, and have friends spread apart in a sizable geographical area... well, not the best idea or easiest decision to make. Especially when none of the houses I can afford are the ones I want.

So you don't have a family and you want a house? Go find a sweet apartment or townhouse and let the equity build until you've got a family going. That may be a bit judge-y but come on, not everyone can/should live in a detached home.

EDIT: I'm assuming that's an option. Does the Bay Area have condos or is that one of the dumb zoning things y'all got going on?

Apartments and townhouses don’t take kindly to woodworking, music, working on sports cars and motorcycles, etc. At least not in the bay. Personally, I’m not ever going back to sharing walls or floors ever again.

And for the cost - you really don’t get much for your dollar.

So you’re very picky, but can totally afford a place where you live.

I don’t think having a bar where you’d like to not hear your neighbors at 3am anytime they open or close a door is a high bar.

But sure - keep moving the goal posts in your mind.

I’ve read all of your comments, you’re being very picky all while you can totally afford to buy a house where you live. You won’t consider a townhouse, want a woodworking shop, a music studio, and a motorcycle shop.

They have condos and townhouses.

Totally makes sense. I think people are reacting to the idea that someone making that much can’t afford a house.

It really only takes about 5 years of living in the same place to make buying worth it in the vast majority of cases, and 3 years is roughly the 50/50 point where it makes sense financially to rent because you haven't recouped the costs of buying.

SF housing prices are out of control, because faang can pay 400k per year (plus stock). If you are open to moving away from the bay that 1mil will buy an amazing property outright in most parts of the country, or a really nice home and a big amount towards retirement... Alternatively you can stick in the Bay Area and adjust to your high wage being in line with a high cost of living (and consider the million dollars as a sizable down payment).

Here's the getting started guide to buying a house and living like a commoner in someplace that isn't SF:

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1944-Kitty-Hawk-Dr-Waterl...

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/41290-Rock-Creek-Dr-Mitch...

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/745-Woodmont-Cir-Batesvil...

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/E6516-867th-Ave-Colfax-WI...

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1521-White-Rd-Somerset-KY...

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/928-County-Road-329-Doubl...

You cannot purchase a home in one of the most competitive areas in the entire country. To me, the solution is obvious.

Make more money? Yeah, I agree. That's what I always end up doing.

They say money can't buy happiness, but in your case it can't even buy you the material goods you want. Just move! Even with the current housing crisis you could afford a small mansion in the midwest with half your income. Your investments alone are enough to pay it in cash. And I'm not talking about middle-of-nowhere midwest; I'm talking about suburbs for metropolitan areas.

This guy is just entitled, and a whiny entitled at that. “Why can’t I buy a 10 acre farm with avocado trees and chickens in the middle of the city!!!”

He was just trolling and drew some people in. Downvote and move on.

He’s an energy vampire

Yes but then I'd have to live in the midwest - wouldn't I? I'm not one to be taking on that level of social suicide.

I lived in poor rural communities for the first 18 years of my life. I've paid my dues to my poor working class roots and I'm more than glad to say goodbye forever. And you can tell me, "But Omaha isn't that bad!" but I'm not buying it. I know people in the midwest and there's a reason so many want to leave. Only reason they stay is because they can't afford somewhere else - not because they like it.

To each their own I guess. I live in the midwest and I'm perfectly happy here. No social problems whatsoever. I've spent enough time in some of the biggest US cities to know I'm not missing anything.

I'm not sure what sort of mass exodus you're talking about either. The midwest city I live in is among the top 10 fastest growing cities in the US.

If selling your soul to FAANG in exchange for a lousy appartment is your recipe for happiness then I guess have fun with that.

You could also move to the east coast, or the south, or even the somewhere else on the west coast that isn't the bay area.

Your options are not Bay Area or Omaha.

And would I have a $400K+ TC if I left? No. (Mind you - I'm at $400K now but I expect $500-700K in the next few years)

People act like these jobs and high earnings just follow you wherever you move - they don't.

Maybe. Sounds to me like you'd be happier without that and all its baggage.

Changing my answer to therapy

Reply on news.ycombinator.com