Single bedroom house that is supposed to be a lot cheaper than the “family homes,” that would be in the same area. A 2 BR home may qualify as well. The issue is that they haven’t built any of these type of houses in over 60 years, and the prices are jacked sky high.
In this particular case a starter home is specifically an average of the bottom third of the housing market. Zillow recently reported that, using that as the metric, 242 American cities now have starter homes costing one million dollars.
The nationwide average for a starter home is about $200k, which is still a lot, but not the huge figure that’s been making the news this week.
Well you say that’s the norm, but the map clearly shows this is predominantly a New York and California situation, and otherwise a relatively isolated scenario for one or two cities in some states.
That would seem to frame 48 states as low cost of living areas in general. It’s understandable to see why the figures would not be relatable to most folks.
I had a job prospect in the Bay area of California and the cost of living pretty much nixed it for me, that the relatively huge pay increase was more than erased by the housing costs alone.
A smaller/older/cheaper home, specifically in a country where it is expected to be sellable for a profit later to “climb the housing ladder” with a more expensive house (and repeat until maybe downsizing after retirement).
What does starter home mean?
Single bedroom house that is supposed to be a lot cheaper than the “family homes,” that would be in the same area. A 2 BR home may qualify as well. The issue is that they haven’t built any of these type of houses in over 60 years, and the prices are jacked sky high.
Think it was a rhetorical question, that $800k figure is crazy even by modern standards for a “starter” home.
In my state, $800k is 3,000 square foot, 4 bedrooms, rooftop balcony, in the capital downtown.
$400k gets you about the same, just like 5 miles from that downtown with more yard.
$200k gets you a thousand square foot townhouse built in 2004…
$75k gets you a thousand square foot mobile home built in 2020 on the outskirts of the capital…
No that was a genuine question, I don’t think I‘ve ever heard that term before.
In this particular case a starter home is specifically an average of the bottom third of the housing market. Zillow recently reported that, using that as the metric, 242 American cities now have starter homes costing one million dollars.
The nationwide average for a starter home is about $200k, which is still a lot, but not the huge figure that’s been making the news this week.
Sadly, that’s not the norm - LCOL areas perhaps, but 800k isn’t a wild number for a starter home these days.
Ironic as they’re part of the reason they’re so costly now, but: https://www.zillow.com/news/242-cities-now-have-starter-homes-that-cost-1-million/
Well you say that’s the norm, but the map clearly shows this is predominantly a New York and California situation, and otherwise a relatively isolated scenario for one or two cities in some states.
That would seem to frame 48 states as low cost of living areas in general. It’s understandable to see why the figures would not be relatable to most folks.
I had a job prospect in the Bay area of California and the cost of living pretty much nixed it for me, that the relatively huge pay increase was more than erased by the housing costs alone.
A smaller/older/cheaper home, specifically in a country where it is expected to be sellable for a profit later to “climb the housing ladder” with a more expensive house (and repeat until maybe downsizing after retirement).