225
Study: Hopeful homebuyers need income of nearly $117,000 to afford typical home in U.S.
(www.bankrate.com)
"Afford" = go into debt for 30 years.
this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2025
225 points (99.6% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
11936 readers
978 users here now
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article
--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
And who doesn't feel at ease predicting stable employment for several decades for themselves? After all in a world of "at will" employment and executives that need to hit their numbers for that quarterly stock grant, barely any unions, deliberately anemic unemployment insurance benefits, who wouldn't jump at the chance?
debt? our mortgage costs the same as my sister's rent, but we're not pissing our money away to a landlord every month. when we sell the house, we'll be getting our value back and then some. even if we only stay a couple of years and merely break even, we're essentially living rent free during this time
That's a different topic, although I agree with you.
I'm pointing out the undeniable surface detail, you owe money to the bank for 30 years. It's debt. Pretty simple.
I hate giving away free money to a landlord every month also. But when you get a mortgage you're giving away free money to a bank, in the from of interest.
There could even be an argument that landlords provide more of a service, in the form of upkeep and repairs. The bank provides no service, other then fronting cash.
Tomato tomato. I hate landlords and the mortgage industry both. But generally you're right it's much better for the individual to own due to equity and ownership.
The shitty thing for me and many people though is owning is semi-permanent. More of a hassle to sell and move. Landlords suck when they have year leases which also makes things harder if moving is necessary, but can be easier than owning. I try to only live in places that are month to month.
Call me a commie, I'll accept that label with pride, I think all things housing should be socialized and regulated as a public good. No more profit for banks, wall street, hedge funds, etc. And yes, that includes small time landlords. I don't know or care how it would be organized or work (it never will), but I hate our current system. People with more wealth are able to exploit and take advantage of people with less wealth. Full stop.
The house will appreciate more than the mortgage interest. It's debt, but not bad debt.
That only matters if you ever plan on selling your home. Not everyone buys houses as a financial investment.
As a homeowner - I 100% agree with this.
I absolutely hate that I paid as much as I did simply because the generation before mine decided to turn the whole concept of home ownership into a financial investment vehicle.
I hate how it changes the thought processes around the decisions I make in regards to my home.
I hate how it impacts the relationships with my neighbors and how it morphs the very conversations we have. That it has drastically changed the type of people who would otherwise have wanted to live in the community and be a part of it instead of just trying to ride the wave investment dollars.
I hate that it means my own children, once grown, will likely be unable to afford to live in this neighborhood - even if they rent. And I hate that it's going to become their problem too.
right. yeah. we know. and how many Americans have a 6-digit salary? It's not "more than half".
also the average is going to lean cheap rural. cities are all going to be above this and major cities majorly more.
It would be nice to be able to review their methodology. Averages are often pointless metrics. They don't even hint at how they arrived at 'typical.'
Edit: My bad. They define typical as $418,489.
The median US salary is ~$62K.
keep in mind that a married couple can combine incomes.
it'd be damn hard to afford a mortgage on your own but two people can make it work quite comfortably
it's possible, with the GDP we have right now, for every single american to afford a home. Americans have been propagandized into thinking that we need a billionaire class, that they need bailouts and tax cuts and no oversight, that they should be able to get away with murder in the courts, more than they need a safe place to rest their heads at night. My heart is broken for them. I wish everyone were as angry as me.
And if you want to live anywhere close to a decent city… good fuckin’ luck lol
Do keep in mind how household income varies over time, a huge majority of the top third are going to be older couples with long established careers and empty nesters. You know, people who already have houses.
VHCOL area (San Francisco)
"middle class" usually means household income of 300k or so.
Is it more expensive or less when the neighborhood has a giant sticky note looming over it?
Yeah I don't know why it's relevant in this picture but the giant liminal cube in the background really grabbed me, the more I look at it the more I want to give my soul to Zorg, destroyer of worlds.
looks at pay statement
looks at $117,000 needed to "afford" a house
looks back at pay statement and realizes the income works out to very close to 10 times LESS
😐
I knew I was poor, but damn dude.
10X!!! thats like $5/hr full time. Thats illegal everywhere I know of.
Gross income (before taxes) for US federal minimum wage is $15,080 for full-time. So, close to 10x less.
my mistake. my states is like twice that and the region I am around near the city is higher. Did not realize the federal was still so low.
Federal minimum wage was last raised to $7.25 per hour effective July 24, 2009.
It's a good thing that was definitely a livable wage in 2009 and that there hasn't been any inflation since then.
There's also take home pay after taxes and expenses vs gross/net.
Im pretty sure the article is gross pay.
I wasn't clear.
The article calls out annual household income. Meaning that could be combined income.
A single person making 120k and couple making 60k x2 is not equivalent. Health insurance and living expenses creep up.
Oh I am definately aware of that. Im single income with a wife that has a lot of medical issues and while I make a good salary (when employed) we live modest as fuck to get by.
Try it here, you have to make over $200k a year.
Edit: and be confident you'll continue to make that much money
...for 30 years