COST OF HOUSING LESS OF A BITE?
The NY Times has an article which points out that despite the high cost of real estate, families in most of the US can buy a house "for a smaller share of their income than they could have a generation ago."
What seems to get left out of the discussion is that more families need to have two wage-earners to buy and maintain a home. Sure it is a smaller share of the family income but that's because family incomes are now generated by two full-time wage-earners. A generation ago that wasn't as often the case. If the average family today relied on a single wage-earner (as was the case a generation or two ago) I suspect the percentage of that person's income needed for housing would be significantly higher.
1 comment:
I think that Brad's comments are "right on." As a single wage family, we could not afford to purchase a home in CA. An approximately $2,100.00 mortgage payment ($450,000.00 house with a 20% downpayment - assuming we would have $89,000.00 to put down - and a 6% 30 year mortgage) would consume half of my $4,200.00 monthly salary (before taxes, insurance, and expenses). The NY Times article indicated that home ownership in the Modesto area could be had for a 25% share of family income. I wonder what kind of a house I could buy for a $1,050.00 mortgage in Turlock??
I'm painting with a broad brush in this illustration, but I don't think that my estimate is too far off. So much for single wage-earner home ownership!
Post a Comment