Considering that the previous generation benefitted greatly because of low interest rates (esp. e.g. being able to buy a second home at the same monthly payment due to rate halfings), and those low rates drive up the cost of housing, having the previous generation finance this generations house kinda makes sense, even if its not "fair" for everybody.
Interestingly, when you compare housing prices, interest rates, and inflation, current housing prices are very similar to what they were in the '80s if you're borrowing: https://matthewminer.name/data/median-mortgage-payments/
Yep it’s been very low since 2010, but looks like it’s been above 5% for possibly more than half the time since 1954, and there was a long stretch from around 1978-1991 where 6% was the minimum, and brief periods where it got to almost 20%. I feel for the poor people who bought houses with an 18% interest rate, I hope every single one refinanced quickly…
The previous generation? My recollection is that our first mortgage 30+ years ago was around 6%, ARM. That is somewhat lower than it is now, but not lower than the last several years.
(I will add that we got some money from my mother-in-law to get up to a 10% down payment. Less than $10K, I think.)
We bought within a year of the market peak, and it was ten or more years before the prices returned to what they had been. At one point early in those years, my sister-in-law, in for a visit, remarked that a lot of the for-sale signs looked familiar from her previous visit. (Around a year.)
> people should live in their tents and be happy. got it.
Again, hyperbole. Plenty of countries have housing models that preclude private ownership. They're still fulfilling their obligation to shelter.
Most Americans do not face a lack of shelter, certainly not those considering purchasing a house. Housing cost is a serious issue in our cities. But it's not at the level of violating human rights, not by a long shot.
