[Dirty Martini]

I thought this was relevant to threads in the past... In today's WSJ...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116052332205488648.html

Quote:

Moving to an area with lower housing costs often doesn't pay off for low-income Americans, according to a study to be released today by the Center for Housing Policy, a nonprofit research group based in Washington.

The study, which looks at families with low to moderate incomes in 28 metropolitan areas, found that transportation costs in places with cheaper housing are often so high that they wipe out the savings from lower rent or mortgage payments. Such places tend to be farther from employers or short on public transportation, which makes commuting costlier.

...

The findings contradict the common notion that many people would be better off financially if they moved from areas with high housing costs, such as California, to states like Texas or Georgia, where housing is much cheaper.

...

The study also found that moving to an inexpensive outer suburb, but continuing to work near a city center, often backfires. Typically, a move that adds more than about 12 miles to a one-way commute will result in a rise in transport costs that outweighs the savings on housing, the researchers found.

 

[IamJen]

Link to a non-registration site:

http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbc...NEWS/610110343

Hm. The part about the city vs. 'burbs just seems like common sense to me. You not only have to commute to work/school most times, but it's unlikely that you're able to walk to the grocery store, dentist, library, etc. as well...all more time (and expense) in the car.

I wonder though about moving from someplace like suburban California to say suburban St. Louis. The housing cost could be a lot less, but transportation costs would be about the same (maybe even a bit less).

 

[karenlovessnow]

Interesting since Sabrina and Dave are planning on moving an hour away from where they work because they can get more house for the money. I told her I didn't think it was a good idea. Plus the highway they will have to travel to get to work is always backed up with problems. That will extend their commuting time to an hour and a half easy and more on bad weather days. And once the kids come it will add to the dilemma.

 

[IamJen]

Are they moving only because of housing costs?

 

[Gnome Chomsky]

Not my experience in Eugene vs. the Bay area.

In both cases, I've been below the federal poverty level, so I count.

...doesn't mean much, though. just one datum here.

ebola

 

[Skylark]

Do people not think about their additional transportation costs when they move to a less expensive place to save money? It seems like a "duh!" to me.

 

[Thalia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by skylark

Do people not think about their additional transportation costs when they move to a less expensive place to save money? It seems like a "duh!" to me.

Yeah, I actually do the opposite, I constantly think about moving slightly closer to work and think of the money I will save on work parking permits versus increased rent. Right now I walk about 6 months out of the year. If I moved a little closer I could maybe walk all 12 months. What's also nice is that I called my insurance and let them know I drive less than 5,000 miles/year. That decreased my rate significantly. I also save on oil changes and wear and tear on the car. Plus I get exercise built into my day, possibly reducing health care costs. (Ironically, I've been out sick all week due to a bad infection-- the walking outside probably didn't help!!)

 

[Skylark]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thalia

Yeah, I actually do the opposite, I constantly think about moving slightly closer to work and think of the money I will save on work parking permits versus increased rent. Right now I walk about 6 months out of the year. If I moved a little closer I could maybe walk all 12 months. What's also nice is that I called my insurance and let them know I drive less than 5,000 miles/year. That decreased my rate significantly. I also save on oil changes and wear and tear on the car. Plus I get exercise built into my day, possibly reducing health care costs. (Ironically, I've been out sick all week due to a bad infection-- the walking outside probably didn't help!!)

I wish I could drive less than 5,000 miles in a year. Unfortunately, my job itself requires a lot of driving, though I live just 1.5 miles away from the office.

I end up driving to my hometown, about 40 miles away, nearly every weekend. If people would just come visit me, I could reduce that...

 

[Medesha]

My husband and I used to move frequently for work. We'd always live right downtown, close to the office. Housing was more expensive there, but we didn't need a car, Jason could walk to work, and all the places we wanted to visit were usually in a 20-block radius. Saved on costs tremendously for us, but it wouldn't work for everyone.

 

[bstutzma]

People think we're nuts for wanting to buy a house in the city. But living in the sprawling burbs just isn't an option for us. We only have one car, my husband commutes via subway. Its awesome, we never want to have two cars. We'll wait for the market to slide a bit more and then bite.

 

[Chrysalis]

Yeah I'm not surprised with those findings at all. For me to move into a super-cheap apartment, I would have to move further from downtown, where bus-service sucks ass and I would need a car, which costs so much in terms of insurance, gas etc etc. One of my friends actually moved outside the city bounderies to get free rent at his parents, but now all his money (and time!)goes towards transportation instead of rent.

 

[remilard]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bstutzma

People think we're nuts for wanting to buy a house in the city. But living in the sprawling burbs just isn't an option for us. We only have one car, my husband commutes via subway. Its awesome, we never want to have two cars. We'll wait for the market to slide a bit more and then bite.

Depending on who you ask, you might be done waiting.

Quote:

While various studies generally agree that some of the biggest risks of declines are in California and Florida, there are striking differences, reflecting different forecasting methods. For instance, a recent "risk index" study published by PMI Mortgage Insurance Co. ranks the Boston metro area as the seventh-riskiest in the nation in terms of the likelihood of price declines over the next two years. But Economy.com says that home prices in Boston likely bottomed out in this year's third quarter after a modest 2.2% decline.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1160...N=wsjie/6month