[dionidium]

> When was having a partner a precondition for buying a home?

When you make an offer on a house you're bidding against two-earner households. For a lot of us in tech the salience of this fact is diminished by the industry's high salaries, but for most folks this is a really big deal.

[gonehome]

This is only an issue because of constrained supply driving prices up.

If there was more supply, prices would stabilize somewhere lower. Given enough supply that point would be somewhere one income could support.

It's the constrained supply paired with high demand that drives prices up and requires multiple high incomes to compete (especially in places where this has been taken to the extremes because of NIMBYism and entrenched anti-build regulation/incentives).

[formerly_proven]

Regardless of market conditions, DINK still offers a huge economic advantage because, well it's in the name: two incomes, ~half the living expenses compared to a single. It's popular because it's meta.

[gonehome]

Yeah, but it'll only drive prices up if supply is constrained.

Land is scarce so there will always be some constraints in highly desirable areas, but today we're way way below what the land can support because of bad policy.

[dionidium]

Sure, I'm all-in on YIMBYism, but some places will always be more desirable than others and those places will likely always cost more and all things being equal buyers with two incomes will be more likely to be able to afford those houses.

[dominotw]

> When you make an offer on a house you're bidding against two-earner households.

what does that matter aslong as your bank has approved the mortgage. I don't see why seller would care.

are you saying that ppl are bidding for mortgages that high that bank needs both of their incomes? wow.

[tonyedgecombe]

>are you saying that ppl are bidding for mortgages that high that bank needs both of their incomes? wow.

I don't know about the US but that has been the case in the UK for a long time now, especially for family sized houses.

We went from married women not being able to work to not being able to not work. I'm not sure it was an improvement.

[gruez]

It might not be a strict precondition, but it's still a pretty strong precondition. Maybe "precondition" isn't the best word here, but I think my original point still stands. Suppose someone claims that people are deciding not to have kids for whatever reason (eg. global warming, unaffordable healthcare, expensive houses)[1], and I retort by saying that people aren't bothering finding a partner[2], so they're not meeting their "precondition". Sure, you can theoretically raise a kid without a partner, but if you're not even bothering to find a partner, then maybe it's fair to say that's the main reason, rather than blaming global warming or whatever?

[1] analogous to your comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29473019

[2] analogous to my reply https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29473223

[atlantic]

When was the last time you asked for a mortgage? This is fairly standard nowadays, and has little to do with the size of your income. Banks prefer a mortgage in multiple names because it reduces their risk. If you're over 40, in my country it is all but impossible to get a mortgage on your own, regardless of income.

[dionidium]

I'm making a far more banal claim: buyers with two incomes have more money than buyers with one income (all things being equal and across large numbers of people) and the latter will always be at a relative disadvantage.