Local news says I and my fiancee to blame for families unable to afford

homes. Saying that we and other childfree couples buying four bedroom homes are causing the cost of homes to go up complete with a reporter talking with someone about how many "family" homes on her street are owned by people as she put it "ain't got no family and don't need to be on this street, in these homes." I can see it now, I guess there will be laws proposed to prevent those who haven't bred from buying anything over X square feet, or perhaps they will make us pay a surcharge, or more probable require real estate sales give a per child discount on homes with more than two bedrooms.

and here I thought it was all those investor/flippers that were driving the price up. I feel so guilty! :beer:

In this day and age, it suprises me that my mind can still be boggled by complete idiots....

You're going have to stop unless you get with the program. We will be watching.

Being a cab driver I encounter all sorts of stupidity. This women told me that because I wasn't a Christian and my wife was that our marriage doesn't hold up in the eyes of her God/Bible. She also told me that because we couldn't have children we shouldn't be married. I promptly put this women out on the side of the highway. I sure hope her God helped her find another ride home.

What a jerk. Maybe Jeebus gave her a ride. I, frankly, hope she's still there.

house on 2-1/2 acres. i guess we're part of the "problem"

exercise room, an office for the computer and my husband's files and a guest room. when my son was home we lived in a 2 bedroom apartment with a little terrace in new york. i like my space. we worked hard for it and damn we're enjoying it and the largest part of our real estate taxes goes for schools.

and yes we have a 3 car garage 2 for cars -- 1 for storage.

Young people with young kids, have always had to do with less space in houses they weren't crazy about , and as they amassed equity and made more money, they moved up gradually, until FINALLY they end up with a super-dooper house, but the kicker is that in most cases the kids are grown or nearly grown..and they rattle around the big house they really NEEDED when the kiddies were little..

Just like young families often have unreliable cars because it's all they can afford, and grandma & grandpa tool around in a new Lexus or caddy..

Today's young families are being conned into THINKING they can afford the dream house NOW...but if they are unlucky, that house will turn into a nightmare, and they will be back at square one..only with ruined credit this time around

are driving up the market and some of them said we have no business buying the houses built for famlies.

afford one before that especially in new york.

for families just starting out between 1950 and 1952. Families find these little four room places, one bathroom, no dining room, just a little too claustrophobic, so they're now being bought by singles and retirees.

And no, I don't feel a bit guilty for wanting to live in something better than a cramped apartment with no sound insulation. I don't feel gulity that pregnancy and childbirth were ruled out by doctors during my fertile years. I don't feel guilty that I'm fresh out of family members, my dad having died two months ago.

People like the piece of shit who wrote that garbage can kiss my flabby old ass.

:thumbsup:

I agree 100% ... but I'm one of those awful horrible childfree people.

in 1948. It was new and part of the building boom after WWII. It had two bedrooms and one bath, a living room a dining room, kitchen and service porch, which became a laundry room. We never felt cramped because my family didn't accumulate a lot of stuff, just what we needed. It had a very large yard and we spent most of our time out there, playing, gardening eating and entertaining with barbeques. Most of my friends grew up in similar houses.

I still have the same mentality today. I prefer a smaller homes to live in like my little apartment sized mobile trailer, with a really big yard. I have that now because I'd rather be outdoors. I use my "house" to sleep, eat, clean up and store my stuff. The rest of the time I go outdoors and garden, or read. I take my portable radio with me to listen to AAR.

On the other hand, my grown up stepchildren have this huge house for the two of them, two dogs and three cats. They have a barn, a large garage and a workshop. However, the only rooms they really use in the house are one bedroom, two bathrooms,a kitchen and a little office that they watch television in. The rest of the house, living room, dining room, family room, other bedrooms and bathrooms go unused.

The barn, garage and workshop are packed with stuff they have bought and then stored after using a few times. They own four cars between the two of them and yet mostly drive two of the cars. I don't say anything because it's none of my business, but their lifestyle strikes me as wasteful and materialistic.

However, I do agree with apartment living, it's too crowded even with walls between you and a tiny balcony just doesn't substitute for a yard.

That, I don't get.

and not buying the 2 bedrooms or townhomes, and the cost of the 4 and 5's are going up while the smaller homes are not being built as much and the ones on the market aren't being sold.

and if they have a little extra money around, saved from not burdening the world with more kids, hey, more power to them.

Blaming the childless is TOTALLY idiotic -- they pay school taxes, property taxes, just like us schmucks with kids, but don't use up resources or clog traffic with their minivans going back and forth to soccer practice...

Anyway, when the bubble pops, it's gonna pop for everyone... the whining on the part of real estate folks has only just begun.

We didn't "need" all 3600 sq. ft., but we have utilized most of it. Although its just the two of us + the cats, we don't feel like its a huge, empty mansion or anything. We bought it from the builder (it was his personal home), and we got it for a great price - that's all.

mikey_the_rat

"Why, land is the only thing in the world worth workin' for, worth fightin' for, worth dyin' for, because it's the only thing that lasts." (Maybe minerals/precious metals/gold, too?)

Careers don't; specialized education don't; savings don't; love is uncertain!

American democracy?????

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

I'm already taking their advice, I live in Manhattan.

payment.

Two incomes, no kids = disposable income

Besides, I think you actually get a tax credit for having kids, so you are already penalized for being childless.

Something else: to cover my spouse and I is more expensive than to cover myself and a child (health insurance). Our health insurance went up this year, and I was talking to a co-worker of mine. I'm paying more per month to cover me and my husband than for him to cover himself and his child. Glad to have health insurance, but that's another subject altogether.

so there's another way they are paying.

I live with my husband and two dogs in about 2500sq ft. We just bought it last year and ironically we wouldn't be able to afford it if we had kids. It's great for both of us individually and our marriage to have so much space. We each have our own offices and the way the house is set up we each have a "wing" a bedroom and bathroom. He works at night and I work during the day and the different schedules was really tough on us. But of course if we haven't or won't have kids we are just supposed to suffer with no privacy or space because it's not "fair"? Puh-leeze we all make our choices and sacrifices. People need to feel more responsible for their lives.

Incidentally the house next to us is split into two (though it looks just like one big house) and one half of it is a couple with 4 small children. They smoke on their porch and face our house and we imagine they resent us. They've only been hostile.

I pay taxes for schools and I don't have children. This bothers you when I bring it up? I didn't even state an opinion whether this even bothers me. It's rude to just say to someone "Don't say..." this or that and then to not even explain why?

A better educated society is better for all of us.

I don't agree with the story the OP posted - who cares who's buying what - but alleging that you shouldn't pay taxes for schools because you don't have children is silly. Should people who don't drive not pay for road taxes? Should people who don't vote not pay their elected leaders' salaries? (No one would vote if that were the case).

Seriously, think it through. Your argument is simple-minded.

She merely stated that she pays them.

was complaining.

Apologies for misunderstanding, but it did sound a bit like sour grapes in the context of the thread.

That's exactly what I was saying. I do see the benefits of the taxes for all and I looked but I don't see where I said that I didn't. I mentioned it in the context that our presence in a "family" home has a net positive overlooked by those with the sentiment that we shouldn't be living in one.

with my husband, two kids and two dogs. Do I qualify for a 3000 sq ft house, or do I need to either downsize to 2500 or have a third child? My neighbor is retired. Do we kick them out of their house because their children are grown? I mean they really don't need the space anymore, and shouldn't they be opening up the real estate for some deserving family, even though they dearly love the house and have been there for 40 years? My neighbor on the other side got divorced, and his ex has primary custody. He really doesn't need all that space for one kid every other weekend does he? We should force him to live in a condo so a real family can have his house. :sarcasm:

I mean the whole argument is really dumb. When I had kids, I knew that there would be sacrifices involved and that some of them would be financial. To minimize the money woes, we waited until we were well into our 30's to even have kids, after we were both established in our careers and had flipped the starter home for a profit so we could afford the larger home we now reside in. To complain about people who have made other choices is just sour grapes.

Um, actually, some legislator here in Mass has suggested just that. I can't find a link for it but remember a couple of months back hearing about someone who wanted to "encourage" empty nesters to move out of their old homes to make room for baby.

It was obviously laughable enough for me not to take it too seriously at the time...

that said the Governor's mansion deserved to have the "pitter patter of little feet."

like I hear there is in Mass, you could give tax bene's to empty nesters for moving on, just like you get a tax break for having kids. But I don't think it is immoral for the empty nesters, childless couples or singles to live wherever they care to and can afford.

People with kids and limited incomes can also try to move to areas that are not experiencing real estate shortages. My neighborhood here in Charlotte is full of NJ transplants, all thrilled to be able to afford such a nice house in town. I come from DC, and my home is a mansion compared to the rathole we would be able to afford there.

god-awful expensive. The closer you are to Boston, the more expensive it is. There's lots of room out west in the state but there's no work... Kind of a catch 22.

I agree, offering "incentives" is fine but one has to be very careful in their selection of words to address this. Let's just say the person who proposed this wasn't particularly diplomatic. I don't think it's finished yet, but it didn't go over well.

pretty ridiculous to have two people rattling around in 5000 sq. ft. homes. It's the part-Marxist in me; I think of urban families living in one-bedroom apartments and homeless people sleeping on cardboard or in shelters every time I drive by a McMansion development. I also know that if those people moved out of those McMansions tomorrow, it would have absolutely no impact on those urban families and the homeless. Doesn't stop me thinking about it, though.

I'm childfree also, and I'm against anyone legislating what childfree people (singles or couples) may or may not do, but I still don't see the sanity in taking up that much Home Space. YMMV.

From pure logic, a two-income couple without children can afford to pay more for a home than a similarly situated two-income couple with children, so Yes, the childfree couple will, whether they intend to or not, drive up the prices of family-sized homes.

Everyone's got their own choices to make; mine was to live in a space no larger than I actually need. Doesn't mean I'm better than anyone else, or that my choice would work for anyone else. It's just my choice; I judge no one. I merely point out that if your choice is to live on a larger scale (and you're certainly free to do that) you cannot at the same time be unrealistic about the fact that your choice does have impact on others, and on the market.

And put me down for buying only what you need.

I have a small house no one with kids should try to live in. I have no yard to speak of, live on a busy street, the stairs to the basement are rickety, the stairs to the upstairs have a handrail that any little kid could easily slip under and fall to the floor below.

It's a perfect example of an adults only home. I get nervous when I invite friends over and they bring their kids. The kids are welcome, but I make sure they're watched carefully so they don't play on the stairs. And no one other than me and repair people go downstairs.

What single person living alone can deal with a huge McMansion? How would you ever find the time to clean all the square footage? I struggle with the house I've got. And I don't have any yardwork.

:)

Other than that, it sounds Just like my place. :)

No way would I pass laws preventing someone from buying what they felt they needed and could afford, but my progressive conscious would want me to also do what was most helpful for the community.

When you consider the resources used for building, maintaining, heating and cooling etc. most, (but not all) of the time, living in a house that is larger than your needs promotes more consumerism than needed for life and a bit of fun and is not a lot different than driving a Hummer. A personal choice that I would not interfer with as I don't want someone deciding what I can do with my body or home.

I've told this story before but it has been a while so skip over if you are familiar....

But back in the late '80s/or 1990 (hard to remember the year for sure now except it was before '91) Maxus Energy had taken over an energy concession that Texaco had had in South America. The pressure environmental groups I was part of (Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network primarily) got Texaco to back off so we turned our attention to Maxus. The rainforest they wanted to explore was home to a tribe that, while small, still lived traditionally - as they always had and depended on the forest for food, medicine and shelter. Exploration, no mater how the company inteneded to be as non-intrusive as possible, would change everything, even if no oil or gas resources were found. Once the roads are made to bring in trucks and equipment, people follow to sell things to the company workers. Another indeginous community would be destroyed.

So we bought stock in Maxus Energy so we could get a spokesman from the tribe into the stockholders meeting with a translator and we had other volunteers outside to hand stockholders arriving material Greenpeace helped us create that demonstrated that time and time again, the mere act of exploration had desimated native communities. That day that man pleaded for his people and the stockholders still voted to explore.

In the parking garage, as I walked to my car, carrying a box full of flyers stockholders didn't want, I saw this proud Navtive American (yes, indigenous people in South America are still Native Americans), man listening to his translator as attorneys for Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network explained what had happened to him. I saw the tears flow down his face. And I could barely imagine the pain he must have been feeling. Wondering how he would return home to tell his community what was to come. And understanding that US citizens still believe in Manifest Destiny and getting rid of Native Americans.

As a litigation legal assistant I had been involved in litigation over the city's waste water treatment facility and had realized then, how disconnected I was from how the residue from medicines I took and then peed into the system, and everything else I poured down a drain or flushed down the toilet impacted my community. I decided at that moment to see what I could do to begin lessening my impact where I did not have to see the changes that resulted from my actions.

The last five years I lived in the city, I made a little over $100,000.00 a year and had a decent 2300 square foot home with 3 bedrooms and two baths for me and my two kids and pets. When the son was old enough to move out, we used the extra space to let other single moms or folks having a hard time have a place where they could stay rent free for a while to get out of debt and save up to get a place of their own. Managed to help five single moms that way.

When I decided to leave the city and learn how to live a bit more sustainably, I chose to build a single room straw bale house. I did live without electricity, phones or running water for 8 years. Now, I don't have running water, but do use grid electricity because I can't yet afford enough solar panels to take care of all my needs and the gas it took to get blocks of ice or shop frequently were greater than the electricity I use. I acknowledge that my use of grid electricity contributes to those train loads of coal I see when I drive through Nebraska, and contributed to the death of those miners.

I also have small propane tanks I haul in and out so I can fuel a cook stove inside. There are not many jobs where I live, so I try to earn the $800.00 to $900.00 I need each month from the working over the Internet. That way I only have to drive every 10 days or so to get groceries and the mail. I plant a large garden each year and have quasi root cellar system that lets me store some vegetables through a good part of the winter. I get beef from a friend who raises cattle but I don't eat a lot of meat and more of it is chicken, canned tuna and salmon. I just can't seem to go completely vegetarian.

It feels next to impossible to be completely self sustainable anymore, but I really do believe that we all need to do our best to "live simply so all may simply live."

I live in one of the poorest counties of our country and the people here, who were once proud and "wealthy" with natural resources, continue to pay for what they gave up so others could have their land, water and gold. I just hope more and more of us evolve to wanting to lessen our own impact as part of a caring and community conciousness - not from laws passed. Everything is connected. All of our actions ripple out and touch the lives of others.

break for having kids. They want tax breaks, coverage for their living expenses, etc. Screw them!

They can take a way the few thousand per kid and it wouldn't affect me on iota. It's a drop in the bucket to our finances.

So, go screw someone else, please. Please.

... but in Texas, schools and a lot of other city/country services are supported through real estate taxes. These taxes are based on the value of the real estate, not how many kids are living there.

A childless couple living on my block is subsidizing my kids' education. No outrage here :)

Because other people's kids are going to be the ones who will be providing my future health care. I want them to have the best education they can get.

:toast:

Of course, when my own kids are grown, we'll all be paying taxes to help fund education for kids at that time. It all works out very nicely, I think.

Oh yeah... and we have the biggest house ... *tee hee....

MZr7

Good to know you'll be a burden on my kids.

So people that are childfree are going to somehow burden your children? Care to explain that?

The OP pays property taxes on that home which support the local community, including the education of children. That's support for the future provided, not a burden created.

:mad:








:D






Actually, I like it here. 1250 sq. ft. for a 1BR...this place is HUGH!!!


:D

not going up the street, but just the homes right around me. person behind, a couple. across there way, a single old male and bought two other homes on that street. across the other side another old trustee man and next to him a single gal. across street a couple. directly across a single old woman and next door an older couple. these are big homes, lots of sq feet

ya

so

????

That seniors in parts of Mass. were "over housed".( Repuke, I think).
Family Values, anyone?
I worked hard, lived in a tiny house, that was barely adequate, only because it had land, my life was out doors, Now, I am enjoying my brand new home with 3 car garage.

... who is now running for Governor of MA and can never seem to get her foot out of her mouth.

The Duggar family. Where momma weans each baby and hands it off to a sibling (even those still under the age of 10) to raise. She's too busy, making more "blessings."

Oh, yeah, I want them for neighbors. You betcha.

:eyes:

(usings terms like 'bred') make me glad I am not living in the U.S. right now.

How did you make that jump? What comment did you think it made?

it's a thinly veiled disguise for the word "breeder" which is used, disrepectfully I think, to describe people who've had children. People breed dogs, people don't "breed." You know? Or maybe not.

I find it offensive. I don't care what other people decide to do - remain childfree, but I care about disrespecting others using words meant to be disrespectful.

So, maybe you didn't mean it that way, but that's my perception. Maybe it was JCMach1's perception as well?

Kinda reduces me to the level of a farm animal or domesticated pet, but that's OK. People think what they want to think.

I made a choice to **bear** children. Others, I understand, have made a different choice. I can respect that. I merely ask the same degree of respect in turn.

But when I read comments like that -- and it's not new here -- I do feel somewhat diminished.

are the cause of a housing affordability gap. Breeder/bred may be vulgar ways to describe parenthood, but humans do breed just like any other animal. Consider the term 'well-bred.' That means refined or possessing good manners when it's applied to humans. It means good gene pool when it's applied to dogs.

When I first heard 'breeder' it was from my gay friends and I thought it was pretty offensive until I realized that it was not inaccurate and was being applied to a majority group, so for me it was not worth taking issue. Now I'm even willing to use it in situations like this where parents are trying to call out couples who aren't parents as bad people.

Frankly, the term 'childfree' is loaded too. For some people the label is simply more palatable than childless which is perceived as negative rather than simply descriptive. For others 'childfree' is perceived as meaning 'superior to those dumb people who've saddled themselves with kids.'

We live in a era of linguistic minefields where too often coarseness in language is the way to garner attention. Just my perspective, to give you a different point of view.

how about "childless" or maybe "barren"?
ya can't win.

Minefields everywhere. Ya can't win.;)

There are people who use 'childfree' as a badge of honor and that rankles people who think we are all required to at least try to reproduce.
Google 'childfree by choice'

as long as you're feeling guilty... we'll be bringing the dog, too.

:)

:rofl:

are the SUV you live in.

At 1809 square feet, it's 1000 square feet more than my previous cottage. For the first time in my nearly 46 years, I have 2 bathrooms. I love it.

Of course, teaming up with other family members as "roommates" necessitated something larger than 800 square feet. My little cottage was fine for just me. It was not large enough for me and my books. They take more space than I do, lol.

Why is it that the "family values" people are so obsessed with reproduction?

and the "aryan" types seem themselves as being outnumbered.. They see a Palestinian style future, where the "newcomers" take over because they can eventually become a majority..

The funny thing is that these same people are so INSISTENT on everyone taking personal responsibility, that they miss the facts..

Responsible people take care of their families, so a Mom & Dad who are barely getting by with ONE kid, are not likely to go and have 5 or 6 more..:)

the newsperson's intent.

"To each according to his need."

I was part of the problem! We just bought a three-story, four-bedroom house. My husband and I are blissfully child-free and staying that way!

When more people want a certain commodity that bids the price up. Period. More people want gold now than 5 years ago thus the price is up.

While housing is not a true commodity it market functions in the same way.

Folks complain about McMansion and the waste of heating and cooling all that space. I guess everyone has to get right in their head how they feel about bidding up the price of energy (fossil fuel or nuclear (or geo-thermal since it seems you got plenty of room for that)) while owning that much square footage.

I used to own a big house, got an offer I really couldn't rightly refuse and live in an apartment right now. I will buy again soon.

People demand more space than they used to. Children, especially in affluent areas, no longer share rooms as a rule. Also there are more divorces which create the need for 2 residences that used to have 1 residence. Retirees are living longer and healthier. Old folks used to live with their families now they live in their own homes longer, then senior living communities. There are more people in this country than ever before.
The upshot? More demand for larger houses. That is the market for you.

Besides, you need the extra bedrooms-- one to put the "dungeon," and one will someday other become a guest room for draft-dodgers escaping along the underground railroad to Canada.

"ain't got no family and don't need to be on this street, in these homes" :banghead:

She lives in a 2400 foot old Victorian by herself and I have a 400-foot apartment. 2800 feet between the 2 of us, and no kids.

Do I feel bad? No, I do NOT.

Sounds more like "Them people don't have to spend all their money feedin' and schoolin' young-uns, so they can afford more house than we can with 12 kids! It ain't FAIR!"

I'm going back and forth on adding rooms to my house when I can afford to which will be only about five years down the road which will be after my kids move out. I'd like to replace and enlarge the kitchen, it needed redone when we moved in 20 years ago. I'd like a green house room, and a craft room. The kids want us to add a couple of bed rooms for holidays so they can have their own rooms when they visit. At the same time, I'm pulled by my responsibility not to use up too many resources and I look around and a lot of my neighbors are living in trailers. Adding on to my house feels greedy. Welcome to the world of Catholic guilt!

With four growing kids (two who have their own rooms and two who are still sharing one), space is getting tight. When you can't really afford to pick up stakes and move (as is our situation), you have to make what you have work, both from a practical as well as an aestetic point of view.

If people want to live in a McMansion, it's none of my business. I just wish there were more options for affordable housing in the inner city, where most of the people who truly need housing live. Plenty of million-dollar penthouses in my city, but precious little simple apartments that go for less than $500 a month.

Would it help if I said that we have very small rooms with three girls sharing one room (It's a wierd old house, so it's a room with an alcove), two boys in another, and another girl in a very small room? And the kitchem really is too small, honest.

excuses for doing so. It's no ones business. My husband and I live in a four bedroom/2 bath house in a neighborhood of mostly retirees. I think we have the only four bedroom, although a lot of the houses are slightly larger than ours. We have two kids, one was at home when we bought this house, he just moved out only recently. We drive a Chevy Tahoe, which we share. My husband's commute is 8 miles round trip and I bank online and the grocery store is maybe a mile away. Which means we probably drive, on average, 42 miles a week. So we aren't gobbling up the oil reserves, by our vehicle choice. I refused to be quilt tripped because of our housing or driving preferences.

I grew up in a 1700 square foot house with four people and 1-1/2 bathrooms. Soon after my sister and I finished college, the house sprouted a renovated kitchen, extra bathroom and family room.

It feels huge to us because of the number of rooms, but the rooms are smaller than modern standard. For example, the one bedroom holds a twin bed and is jusr about five foot wider than that. The other missing item is closets.

They added some in the master when they did the second bathroom.

The finished house is really nice. We enjoy visiting, and they have worked hard, so why shouldn't they enjoy their money as they see fit? Besides, the house has appreciated well over the last few years, they will be compensated for any work they did when they do finally sell.

Yeah, that's the ticket. We are a family that gathers on holidays, although I don't foresee any grandchildren any time soon, like not for another 10 years at least.

this is actually a regular beef with quite a few DUers including rants against McMansions and the associated energy costs/environamental impact etc vs living more simply.

I drove around the Syracuse area for years in a 1976 Chevette with no problems from the snow.

:evilgrin:

Oh, yeah, well I drive a roller skate! :rofl:

Chevette = roller skate, except most roller skates have better brakes. By the way, since I've stopped driving the Chevette, I've stopped having those dream of not being able to stop the car. Hmmm....

drive long distances to work and back and burn as much gas as a SUV owner who drives less miles taking the kiddies to soccer and school.

If we can afford to buy a house that's more than a shotgun shack, you better believe we're going to do it. What crapola article.

That said, I have no reason to begrudge you the quantity you have. We all make choices and live with the outcomes of those choices.

We're one up on you... five bedroom home, with four freaking baths. It's still the smallest available model in the neighborhood.

The neighbors look at us like, "Oh those poor infertile souls..." Whatever!

Society hates that not all of us are following the script and popping out kids on demand.

To each his own and it all works out. Some like to have a lot of kids, some like a few, some prefer none at all. It's just as bad to force children on people who don't want any as to take them away from those that do. Despite the fears of many every time a large family hits the news, the birth rate in this counntry is actually below replacement level. World wide it seems that whenever women gain control of their fertility, the birth rate drops.

This thread has degenerated into a flame-fest.