Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Animats 1904 days ago
Why? After the current bubble collapses, this will no longer be a problem.
5 comments

What collapse? In all but the most deplorable areas houses will have multiple offers within days of listing, starting even before any marketing effort. In many cases we're talking cash over the asking price. This isn't coming mainly/only from the tech sector. The number of people with FAANG salaries simply isn't sufficient to support the large number of multi-million dollar homes here. A lot of it is absentee (foreign) investors (for example, just under 20% of purchases in San Mateo as recently as 2019).

At best we might see a slight cooling in the rise in already absurd prices for property out here.

I've been reading about the "imminent" collapse of the SF housing bubble for essentially my entire adult life. Even the actual housing bubble implosion in '07 barely put a dent in it.
People have been complaining about SF real estate prices since at least 1846. [1]

[1] - https://books.google.com/books?id=GiAa8pLrSTIC&lpg=PA45&lr&p...

I guess the prices could collapse a fair bit and still be overpriced.
Yeah, especially when you consider that prices just 30 minutes away from SF in any direction are anywhere from 20-60% lower than in SF.
Where? 30 mins is still in Napa to the North, Oakland to the East and San Mateo to the South.

20%? Maybe in a few pockets. 60%? Never seen it. Even the crummy parts of Daly City the homes are $1M now.

Current median home price in SF is $1.3M. 60% of that is $780k. You can definitely buy for that in Albany, Richmond, or El Cerrito. The nice neighborhoods in Richmond are basically in the south part of the city, anyway, which cuts down the distance. Unless you're talking about 30 minutes out in hardcore rush hour traffic, these cities will definitely fit the bill.

Daly City fits, since $1M is 77% of $1.3M -- not that I'd particularly like living in Daly City, but it is 23% less than buying in SF.

San Mateo median price is the same as SF, so, obviously, you don't look there for home bargains.

Seriously, just troll Redfin or Realtor.com sometime.

Edit: my bad re: 60%. I should be looking at $520k homes. There are definitely places in worthwhile neighborhoods in that range in Richmond. I've seen them. But, if you revise that number down to 40%, a lot of stuff opens up. So, 20-40% is a better range than 20-60%.

A more extreme example: 1/5 of all housing stock in China are vacant concrete boxes, and people are still complaining about apartment prices reaching to the sky.

Imagine cities both 20 times the size of SF, and being one fifth vacant.

Imagine there being 59 empty homes for each homeless person in the country. That's the US, not China, BTW: https://www.self.inc/info/empty-homes/
I wonder what percentage of the vacant California homes are held up waiting for permitting. It’s definitely non-zero.

(Similarly, I wonder how many are off market because it’s so difficult to evict problem tenants.)

To be fair, housing in China is used as a savings vehicle. They have few, if any, social safety nets available to them, and don't trust the stock market.

Housing in the US doesn't have nearly the same speculative force behind it.

Very much true, and this is what I wanted to show — what is a case of a real speculative runaway.

Still, the fact stands as mindboggling as it is — China has few Californias of empty housing, and a ridiculous housing price runaway at the same time.

Vacant != on the market. I know a few people living in china, all of whom own more apartments than they can use (in the same neighborhoods no less, so it's not even vacation homes).

They do it because it's the best way to invest their savings, so new apartments are usually spoken for before they're even built and often unoccupied until they're sold again.

Is it legal for private citizens to rent out vacant housing units in China? If so, that doesn't surprise me very much. Every landlord has more housing units than they can use.
Yes it's legal but the people I've talked to don't do it. There's a stigma of renting over buying so the rent/home value ratio is way off compared to the US. Renting out the homes wouldn't really net much profit overall and they don't want to deal with being a landlord anyway, so they let the apartments sit empty.
It is impossible to get married in China if the bride doesn't own property. The family won't allow it.
SF homes dropped 30% in 2008.

Edit: Actually 44% to be precise.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/SFXRSA

It won't collapse (over the long term [0]) because the underlying reason is a savings glut. There are dozens of factors that contribute to the savings glut and I don't see any signs of them going away for the next 15 years. Of those dozen factors at least one third would have to go away all at once for there to be a sustained housing crash.

[0] The 2008 recovery happened within 3 quarters...

What bubble? People will never leave San Francisco en masse. The "exodus" during the pandemic will be the greatest outflow of people from the city for the next decade.

San Francisco can build more housing to accommodate a higher population or let its poorest citizens get priced out. Either way people will not stop coming.

Never leave? SF lost 20%+ of its population in the 50-70’s.
thats what they said when the dotcoms busted in 02 though