Ask HN: Is it the “worst” time to buy a house?

49 points by rootsudo ↗ HN
You can't go a day, without seeing worrying "news." From the Federal Reserve raising rates, making mortgages more "unaffordable" to this summer leading in the most decrease "mortgage applications" since 2006. https://www.mpamag.com/us/mortgage-industry/market-updates/m...

On the other hand, commercial real estate has their own problem, prime commercial space goes unleased, and majority of downtown cores are still empty, or heavily decreased occupancy.

I'm on the opinion of, if you need a house, buy a house - because you do need a place to live.

Yet, decreased supply, higher cost of loans and loan servicing seem to make it mirror 2006 - yet, mortgages are stronger than ever - but what about those covid mortgage forbearances?

What do all of you think?

171 comments

[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 224 ms ] thread
Definitely not the worst time. While rates are going up, they are still relatively low. Back in the early '80s rates were up around 16%... that's really bad. It can get much worse than it is right now. If it happens to get better, just refinance.

Home prices will also continue to rise over time. Not the at rate we saw over the last 1-2 years, but if someone is looking to buy today and decides to wait until prices come down, they will likely be kicking themselves in 5 years.

Home prices vary inversely with interest rates. Rates have been rising and are widely expected to continue rising. If that is the case then home prices will fall over the next few years.
not necessarily. A lot of demand many areas is due to people paying in cash , such as the Bay Area. Also, real estate did well in the 90s despite rising interest rates, same for 2007-2018.
The rate of price increase will slow, but I doubt we'll see them fall. 2008 was the only time that has ever happened.
> Home prices will also continue to rise over time.

Glad to hear I'll be priced out of home ownership for the rest of my life! Hopefully zoomers will be okay with living in tents and vans

Right, the hell is the plan for folks just being born?
How long did it take for you to understand that we are born into a world where all the land is already claimed and must be bought from previous generations? We are born as illegal aliens into this world with no automatic right to be allowed to exist on this planet. The only thing we have is the benevolence of our parents and grandparents. The latter seem to have run out of benevolence, intentional or not.

This is one of the reasons we aren't giving birth to the next generation. Because their parents have no basis to exist and therefore wouldn't want to force another generation to suffer the same fate.

There are super affordable places to live if you compromise a little.
My parents bought their first home in 1981 with a 30-year fixed rate mortgage of 16% interest. Imagine essentially putting a house on a credit card. They refinanced a few times and just kept plugging away at payments their entire working lives. Seemed fine to me, but I was also a kid and have no idea how much stress they actually went through. This was a $65,000 house with two incomes of about $6/hour each. Not sure how that compares to today's market.
$1 in 1981 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $3.22 today: https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/1981?amount=1

2 incomes * 6 dollars/hr * 3.22 = 38.64 dollars/hr household

65,000 * 3.22 = 209,300

It looks like that would mean about $4k/month after tax [0].

Putting 20% down to avoid PMI would lead to a payment of $1,192, using this calculator [1].

$1,192 / $4,024 = 29.6%

That comes in just under 30% of net pay. The standard rule of thumb is to be less than 33% of gross pay.

$1,192 / $5,417 = 22%

Personally, I prefer using net pay, since that's what you actually have to spend and it's always good to have more room in the budget.

These numbers don't seem unreasonable, and the median household income in 2020 was $67,521 [2], and nearly half the states have a median home price at this price or lower [3].

Here is median income by state as well [4], those in the middle are also around the $65k area to align with the homes in the middle around the $205k area... so it all kind of lines up if people aren't obsessed with leaving on a coast.

This makes it seem like things haven't changed as much as people keep saying.

[0] https://smartasset.com/taxes/paycheck-calculator#UIjlp8sv2w

[1] https://www.mortgagecalculator.org

[2] https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2021/demo/p60-27...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_median_...

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...

The 16 percent interest rate is not necessarily bad. Back then you could put money in savings account and get 15 percent interest from the bank.

Also the high interest rate means lower house prices, so you could buy a house in cash from savings alone.

> Back in the early '80s rates were up around 16%...

What does the current rate matter though. FED is going to bring the rates back down as soon as they can. America is hooked to cheap money.

Money can only be so cheap for so long, before the house of cards collapses. That's a bad middle to long-term strategy.

American's just need to stop living the high life on borrowed money. Living within one's means makes life much better.

How do you expect that to happen if there is no right to force savers to spend off their savings to eliminate debt?

Also, a 0% interest rate can potentially be stable eternally. An eternally positive interest rate must collapse at some point.

If you need a house, and you can reasonably afford one that you like at today's prices, and you can cope with potentially being "stuck" in it for several years, then buy a house.

It's impossible to know what will happen. Even after 2008, when it was obvious that the market had to fall because there were >1 million underwater homes that banks were sitting on with the fed letting them pretend they were still worth the old price, it was still impossible to know exactly where prices would end up or how long it would take.

Personally, I tend to think that prices will drift downward slightly, moreso in places that are seeing big outmigration, but it's hard to say. If we keep seeing 10% inflation, then prices staying flat is actually the same thing as housing getting cheaper.

Make good decisions based on the information you can have. You will always know more tomorrow.

This ^ with the caveat that we’re already seeing prices soften in some markets and sellers making price cuts. The peak was likely within the last 45-60 days. Also consider inflation continues to run hot (~8%), which will force the Fed to raise rates faster (50bps->75bps), and per the Taylor rule, I would expect to see mortgage rates between 8-10% within the next year (depressing asset prices; people buy a payment). If the Fed has to pull a Volcker (~10-20%) to quell inflation, RE prices are in for some pain.

https://fortune.com/2022/05/27/housing-market-correction-pea...

"The housing market has peaked…everything points to a rolling over of the housing market," Zandi says. "In terms of home sales, they're falling sharply. Housing demand is coming down fast. Home price growth [will] go flat here pretty quickly; we will see [home] price declines in a significant number of markets." —- Moody's Analytics chief economist Mark Zandi

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanponciano/2022/05/24/hou...

"In short, the party is over," Pantheon Macro chief economist Ian Shepherdson said in emailed comments after the report, pointing out the collapse in sales follows a "steep downward trend in mortgage applications" as mortgage rates start to rise on the heels of the Federal Reserve interest rate hikes that started in March.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_rule

https://www.cmegroup.com/trading/interest-rates/countdown-to...

I don't know. This question gets asked a lot. It depends on personal financial situation and other factors.
(comment deleted)
The federal government needs to decide if homes are an investment or the cornerstone of the American Dream - a personal shelter one owns and cares for, a foothold to grow a family, career, and wealth.

Housing can't be both.

Policies on taxation, lending, and subsidy can be used to push the balance one way or the other.

I'd place my bets on housing prices continuing to trend up and to the left, but (as a homeowner myself) I'd be pleasantly surprised if they didn't.

Federal government decided long time ago that homes are an investment.
> I'm on the opinion of, if you need a house, buy a house - because you do need a place to live.

If you have the luxury of being able to live anywhere (e.g. 100% remote work, or no need for work), there are some exceptionally affordable places to rent housing until the market cools and it's a better time to buy. I don't think it makes sense to buy high unless you have very limited options.

Plenty of room (and bbq) down here, we'd be happy to have y'all.
Where is “down here” - hopefully you don’t mean Australia because we’ve had a housing bubble bigger than the US and we are just (probably) slowly about to come down from it :)
Probably Texas.

There is... _so much Texas_ that isn't Austin or Houston or DFW or San Antonio.

A lot of it's really great, too. I miss Texas.

If in could live anywhere in Texas it would be Alpine. I was married in Marathon and I’ve always been drawn to that part of the state. I have roots and work in Dallas though so that’s where I am… for now.
(comment deleted)
> ….there are some exceptionally affordable places to rent housing until the market cools and it's a better time to buy.

Where?

> Where?

There's this thing, you may have heard of it, it indexes the World Wide Web and allows you to search that index free of charge. They call them search engines, a popular one is Google at https://google.com, but I presently prefer https://duckduckgo.com.

A cursory search using obvious keywords reveals that Cambodia is one such place, where one can apparently live in downtown Phnom Penh for less than $500/mo.

> There's this thing, you may have heard of it, it indexes the World Wide Web and allows you to search that index free of charge. They call them search engines, a popular one is Google at https://google.com, but I presently prefer https://duckduckgo.com.

Don't post this type of stuff here.

Don't ask me a low-effort trivially-answered yourself question without expecting me to tell you where you can answer such questions yourself since you apparently don't know how.
(comment deleted)
Bless your heart.
Ok, wow, so it is not trivial and my one question was intended to be just an opening question in a larger conversation. It took some effort and multiple website searches to find affordable rentals in the USA that were not in high crime areas, near specialized healthcare that I need, with reasonable laws regarding certain things that matter to me, and that had the amenities I was searching for. If you had simply said “Cambodia” we could have had an interesting conversation about how useless Google is in this case.
This luxurious assumption only holds if the person has worked remotely prior to the pandemic.

The folks that got their life situation updated due to Covid19 should think and let it simmer for a while.

I have coworker that decided to move far, outside major tech city and now with RTO and recession, he's seeing less remote opportunity with the same high level of income as the major tech city.

Despite RTO, there’s literally more “remote opp” than ever before in human history
It is the best time to buy if you got a lot of cash.
Yes, it's the worst time to buy a house. We're at the peak of the bubble, and things are about to start heading down hill. I anticipate that people who bought within the last 6 months will probably end up under water within a year or two.
(comment deleted)
but what if the bubble bursts 4-5 years from now. Then this means that if may not ever go back to today's prices . As high as prices can seem, they can always go higher.
I mean, they can only go meaningfully higher if people can afford those higher prices. I'm not convinced they can go much higher without wages going up substantially.
The money came from the gov printing $2trillion for the pandemic from thin air. That got thrown into speculative investments like stocks, which had insane highs. Now the air wants it back. Everyone who had inflated net worth from stocks and other investments and leveraged from all those speculative assets will soon be in bad shape.
The reason why I think it will happen sooner than that is because of everything else going on. Inflation, increased food/gas prices, crashing stock market...we're already starting to see layoffs and hiring freezes in tech. Got companies who are reverting their WFH policies...how many tech people went and bought a house in Idaho or Montana thinking their WFH was permanent?
Buying a property is not a bad thing when there is inflation: It locks one in on a certain interest amount - and if that one further increases due to inflation in the next years it won't mattter. It also locks one in onto a certain buying price - so further price increases in the market also won't matter.
Wouldn't inflation keep the prices high?
House prices have already inflated quite a lot higher than 2% per year in many places. Now everything else is playing catch-up, which means people will have less money to spend on housing (mortgage repayments). What institiutions do, I don't know, but I assume the speculative ones will be a bit more careful.

So we may have high inflation even if housing prices don't participate. Given the changes in rates, it seems unlikely house prices will continue the way they have.

that didnt' apply to stocks.
There's a super wide spectrum between "prices then will only increase 2% YoY", "prices will stay flat for a while", and "prices will go down significantly".

And it will likely depend on the region which option will apply. For extremely supply constrained regions with high prices (like Vancouver), I don't expect a decrease. But my guess is as good as everyone elses.

Vancouver market is holding its fort at the moment.

There might be older unmaintained house in desirable hood that went higher in Feb-March but unable to fetch that price again today but good product is good product and will demand premium in this region where land is a scarcity.

How so?

The cost per square foot of the average American home has remained exactly the same, adjusted for inflation, since 1974.

In major metros, it's artificial supply constraints that have kept prices going up, and those aren't about to ease. In SF for instance, over certain periods, the city added only 10% of the houses needed to keep up with job growth. Even a massive shock to the industry wouldn't have much real effect.

I strongly suspect there won't be much to write home about on the housing front this time.

Folks seem to think 'expensive' means 'bubble' - but houses have always cost what folks can afford to pay, otherwise, you know, they'd be less expensive.

Now do wages, adjusted for inflation, since 1971.
They have also kept pace with inflation, why do you ask? [1]

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/07/for-most-us...

https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/106972802-163647496996...

from cnbc

the growth of real estate prices vs wage growth. wage growth has been flat since the '70s.

Nothing in that article contradicts anything I said, you've missed some nuance.

The BLS data shows that wages have kept pace with inflation.

The Census Bureau data shows that the price per square foot of the average American home has remained the same since the 1970s.

The spread is that the average new American home now has twice the square footage per person. [1] Of course in major metros, supply constraints keep prices high (and the gap between supply and demand is so large it would take something truly catastrophic to close the gap - SF barely had a 2008, for instance). Outside metros, houses have gotten enormous. In both places, families are smaller.

I'm just saying, I don't see a housing bubble looking at price alone.

[1] https://fee.org/articles/new-homes-today-have-twice-the-squa...

"The median monthly payment of a 30-year mortgage is up 56% year-over-year"

And this number was calculated before rates went even higher last week.

Source: https://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2022/06/30-year-mortgage-...

Yeah but is that super relevant? Mortgage monthly payments overwhelmingly aren't up because, obviously, they're usually fixed for a 30 year period. This rate affects new buyers, and only temporarily as of course, they can refinance into lower rates in the future.

Mortgage rates may be up compared to 6 months ago, but they're back where they were in 2018 when I bought my condo. People were screaming 'housing bubble' back then too. Even that is misleading because...

Keep in mind that with an 8% inflation rate, a 5.85% interest rate on a 30-year fixed is a -2.15% real interest rate. Once you take into account mortgage interest tax deductions, the real interest rate is -4.5%.

This is dramatically lower than last time we saw 5.85% interest rates (2018) when we had a 1-2% inflation rate. That's a real interest rate of +3.85%. Once you take into account mortgage interest tax deductions, the real interest rate was +1.5%.

>Keep in mind that with an 8% inflation rate, a 5.85% interest rate on a 30-year fixed is a -2.15% real interest rate.

You are leaving out (as so many do): Taxes, Insurance and Maintenance. For example, where I live, those add up to a minimum of 3%. On top of all that, you need to factor in your personal stability - what's the risk that your career or partnership could intervene in your plans and force you to sell < 7-10 years out? If that happens, you are eating closing costs and potentially being forced to sell at a bottom out moment in house prices due to interest rate instability.

That’s fine but not relevant to my point. Those things also all existed last time nominal rates were at this level. My point is real rates are dramatically lower now than last time. This is going to keep demand high, maybe not from the same individual buyer as before but there’s a good reason we see institutional gobbling up all this real estate.

The market doesn’t differentiate between institutional and retail buyers when a house goes up for sale. However all those property taxes and HOA fees are tax deductible for institutional buyers.

I don’t think that’s good of course - and I’m not advocating people run out and buy a house either - I’m just saying, there’s a ton of factors that make “housing market collapse imminent” more of a pipe dream than a sure thing.

How much did housing go down in SF during COVID? Charts say zero, and that’s during the biggest exodus of people actually living there in recent memory.

You raise a very good point about institutional buyers. I haven't done enough research, but I wasn't able to find a good way to invest in a REIT that was focused at single family in the right areas. It would be great way to hedge against the risks they pose to the market for retail investors.
Huh, that's a really interesting idea. I hadn't thought about that!
Market prices are set at the margin by people who are buying and selling today, so yes, the monthly payments of new buyers absolutely matter.

2018 purchase prices were much lower than now, so your argument about rates isn’t convincing me. It’s the combination of obscene prices and moderate rates that is the issue. Obscene prices only made a bit of sense when rates were pushing under 3%.

I’m a homeowner, so it’s not in my interest to see prices fall, but I also don’t see why anybody would buy my house today given how high the payment would be. I would not be able to rent it out for anywhere near that number. So the situation appears very unstable to me.

I don’t expect 8% inflation to persist for 30 years. Do you? You’re right that if we average 8% inflation over the next 30 years, folks should buy the biggest house they can get approved for as long as rates are below 8%. But that’s taking a pretty big risk. Inflation has never run that hot for that long in the U.S. before. The Fed targets 2% inflation and has spent most of the last 14 years falling short of their target.

But we are in a new financial regime now, and nobody really knows what’s going to happen for sure.

I don’t expect inflation to remain high - but nor do I expect interest rates to remain high. The spread between the real dollar and nominal dollar rates right now is super negative and I suspect even if individuals don’t buy, institutional will. To your point, who knows what will happen?
If half of the commercial real estate is forced to convert to residential due to remote work then there's your new supply.
With respect, remote work is over.
I don’t see what SF has to do with anything? SF has made a number of incredibly poor anti-tech decisions that have pushed tech companies out of town. They kicked out Square, Stripe and PayPal (and I assume a myriad other payments companies, probably Airbnb) with Prop C. Of course people are leaving. Their jobs moved.

I wouldn’t confuse a particularly poorly managed city for a broader trend. The same is certainly not happening a few towns over in South San Francisco where Stripe is now located, or in Cupertino, or in Menlo Park. Or at Tesla. Or every financial business in New York. Anecdotally every early stage startup I know is starting in person.

Couple years from now, work from home will once again be the exception.

It barely has begun. Climate change and high gasoline prices are making remote work an absolute necessity. Travelling on a daily basis, just to look at another screen, will soon be seen as obscene. Like switching your rare real fur coats daily.
Housing may have a bubble on top, but fundamentally it’s also supply-constrained. It may not pop as much as you’re hoping.
demand can drop as people lose their jobs and the companies buying up residential real estate on speculation see their portfolio values drop and their cash positions get squeezed by a recession.

forced selling can also increase supply.

Demand for housing doesn't really drop when people lose their jobs. They still want shelter! And the demographic process which causes household formation was locked in by decisions made many years ago.
but rents are also soaring in many major metros…
It highly depends on location. Not everybody lives in the US, I find it odd that Americans rarely post their country, and just assume the location of others.
OP likely made a very natural assumption that talking about the Federal Reserve and linking to an article discussing the Mortgage Bankers Association in the post would be enough hints to imply they were coming from the U.S.

Indeed, it seems you did come to that conclusion, but still commented about it being unclear?

The parent comment is really directed at the title being unclear and making assumptions. Both paragraphs of your reply are concerned using the content of the post to clarify that uncertainly. That seems to be beside the point, it would simply be better if the title specified the location.
He didn't simply ask for a country in the title, though, did he?

He has to put in his 2 cents about a whole class of people behaving oddly. Indeed, the whole post seems to be a setup to complain about Americans being America centric.

I had exactly the same thought. It would have been within the title limit to say:

> "Ask HN: Is it the “worst” time to buy a house in the US?

I can't help but think it is simply implicit American exceptionalism. It's an assumption, commonly made by Americans, that on the web we assume everything refers to the US unless otherwise specified. I'm not suggesting any bad faith on OP's part, it's an unconscious bias.

I especially hate when people refer to events happening in season X... as if the earth consists solely of the northern hemisphere!
(comment deleted)
This site is hosted in America, and largely populated by Americans, so it's odd you find it odd. If you run a site in India for Indians, for example, would you find it odd if users assumed everyone lived in India unless otherwise stated?
> and largely populated by Americans

that's an assumption. There's likely no stats on it, but I wouldn't be suprised if there's a large userbase outside the US (I'm not there, I know lots of users also not being in the US).

> If you run a site in India for Indians, for example, would you find it odd if users assumed everyone lived in India unless otherwise stated?

That's not really comparable. We are talking about one of the most well-known tech exchanges worldwide - so it is also of interest to many people outside the US. If silicon valley would be in India it wouldn't be odd if the site would be hosted there, and if international users would visit it.

I'm going to assume that you're making this argument in good faith. But it's a bad argument in its structure. In particular you're misrepresenting what I'm saying, and implying I'm saying that no one other than Americans uses the site. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that most of the users are American. As such it makes practical sense to assume users are American unless they state otherwise. That's it. That's my point.

I'm not saying that non-americans don't use the site. I'm not saying they're not welcome. Both of those statements are obviously false.

Speculative outrage that defies common sense is a big component of the troubles liberal culture is experiencing today. It is always possible to take everything personally, so demonstrating that you can take things personally is profoundly uninteresting. And worse it distracts from the best thing about discussion: all the cool ideas we can share with each other.

I don’t think where a site is hosted gives any weight to its audience these days. That said, can you share where you got “largely populated by Americans” from? I can’t find any stats, or is it just anecdotal? With threads like these I assume the same too, but it might just be the loudest voices.
Strictly speaking you're right, the geography in which a site is hosted doesn't mean much. But take that as a proxy regarding who started and operates the site, who are all Americans.
> it's odd you find it odd

No, ‘it’s’ not odd, you find it odd. Your opinion/feeling is not fact, despite you labelling it as such.

I want to invite you to consider an important question: are you making this an argument in good faith?
I am, but I come a cross as aggressive because I am. I think there’s some fairly valid points in the thread also.

Interestingly the vote count went up during American off peak and dropped substantially during the American day. I don’t care about vote count, but I think it’s relevant here.

>largely populated by Americans

Where should you draw the line? Surely not at "more Americans than non-Americans". In your postulated example, I suspect the number of people in India would well exceed 50%.

I think the simple proposition is this: this site has a sufficiently high non-US audience that it can reasonably be expected you specify your post only concerns the US.

Could it be because this website is owned and run by an American company, and the largest just nationality is American?
I see similar trends in many places. For whatever reason inflation and rising interest rates seems to be happening in sync. And housing is at a peak of unaffordablity in lots of the worlds major cities.
No one knows. The fed could give up trying to contain inflation and buying now could be a good move. Reversion to the mean is more likely though, and if that happens it would make now and the near future an absolutely terrible time to buy.

Owning a home is a complex decision. No one can tell you without knowing more about your desired market, your career and life trajectory, your financial situation and your life goals.

One thing you should not do though is to let FOMO drive your decision making process. Old folks like me remember 2006 and how strong FOMO was at the time. It seemed like most folks were going to be permanently priced out of the market.

Right now looks nothing like 2006-08. There aren't a lot of ARM loans at risk and the risk from mortgage backed derivatives is much less. That said, we face an equally serious, if not more so(!!!) set of risks that could see the US GDP decline for a while. Generally, market corrections overshoot, and given the miscalculations of the Fed over the last few years I see no reason this time will be different.

I am personally looking to buy a home and start a family but I am waiting despite being able to finally afford (barely) a house in my desired market. I think the market I'm looking at will correct at least 10% in the next 6 months. I may still delay the purchase even then just because of poor financial conditions overall. I may be wrong. I think probabilities are in line with my view, however.

(comment deleted)
> Reversion to the mean is more likely though, and if that happens it would make now and the near future an absolutely terrible time to buy.

Why? Couldn't you refinance in this situation?

In this situation, interest rates will be higher so you wouldn’t want to refinance. You also will have negative equity in the home, due to values falling, so may have trouble writing the loan.
The total amount of loan will differ though. Why pay 1mil when you could pay 900k instead in 6 months?
> No one knows. The fed could give up trying to contain inflation

One thing that we know absolutely will not happen is that the Fed will give up trying to fight inflation.

The Fed has a duel mandate to stabilize prices and keep unemployment low, but really more important than either of those is that it’s predictable and does what it says it will do. Expectations play a really large role in monetary policy. Pretty much the whole reason they waited so long to start raising rates was because they said they weren’t going to raise rates for a long time.

> duel mandate

I wish.

I keep seeing people make the assumption that the inflation that the world is currently experiencing is something that supply side monetary policy can stop.

I'm skeptical of that assumption.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the fed control the demand side by (indirectly?) controlling the money supply? If I understand correctly, the fed is currently trying to reduce demand to match the limited supply by pulling money out of the economy.
In my view, the money supply has very little to do with inflation for modern fiat currencies - especially USD. Dollars are not backed by tangible goods which can be valued, like gold. They are backed by "confidence", which can be roughly seen as something like the proportion of trade conducted using them. In this view, inflation would be caused by slowing economic activity, loss of USD trade dominance, and geopolitical shifts toward multipolarity. Nobody knows or cares about the number of dollars in the world, but we all see new economic currents flowing in Asia and the "global south".
It's also kind of a sham, "reducing demand" basically means reducing the amount of cash people have to spend, since it currently exceeds the amount of goods we can supply. The nominal prices of things might go down but the average American won't be able to afford any more, since the whole point was to reduce demand.

Even worse, higher rates tend to strengthen currency value, which makes imports cheaper but hurts domestic exports. It's already very hard to devalue the USD due to its status as a reserve currency and this exacerbates that problem. We run the risk of triggering a manufacturing recession, which will helpfully "reduce demand" with layoffs but not make anyone better off.

Or you could miss that window. If you barely qualify now why risk it over 10% which will mean nothing when you own the home.
Because, even as a tech worker at a major tech company, I do not feel confident in my job security. I want to maintain a true 6 month safety net. Last year, over half my income came from equity compensation. If equities continue to slide, and I think that is very likely, that compensation will drop dramatically, potentially to zero for a while if I feel that holding the stock will be a better long-term move.

I'm not thinking of the next year or two. I'm thinking longer term and want to secure my financial future and not gamble it away.

The last few months was evident that hi-tech stocks got boosted heavily by pandemic-money-printing machine.

I wouldn't bet my mortgage on hi-tech stock. My mortgage limit must be from my regular paycheck using the commonly accepted debt:income ratio. I excluded stock out of the calculation.

Stock is a mean to pay more on annual prepayment.

How much is your cash roughly? Can you survive on only that if you bought the house?
Can you afford it?

Do you need it?

The only two questions you should be asking yourself.

If anybody could consistently give you an answer that’s better than a guess they would be billionaire investment bankers already.
> if you need a house, buy a house - because you do need a place to live.

what??

if you need a house, buy a house - because you do need a place to live.
Who knows? Nobody. We can guess, but even then location location location is important. As is your personal future.

Buying a house is a long term commitment, if you can't live there for seven years then it is probably wrong for you.

(comment deleted)
There isn’t much bubble in the housing market. The supply simply can’t keep up with the demand. This is not the best time to buy, but not the worst either.
If I were looking at buying in the next 0-36 months, I would wait at least 6 months. It’s entirely possible that economic conditions continue to slide, interest rates get to 7%+ and a deep recession reduces housing demand. The opposite of all these things could also be true.

If conditions improve faster than expected, you can always quickly enter the housing search/market. Housing isn’t like most other markets that can move 20% in a day. You should be able to wait 6-12 months and closely follow the consensus on interest rates and housing market sentiment.

Wait six months, if prices are going to crash, they will by then
If the reason you’re buying is because you need to upgrade your current living situation and you can afford the monthly payment then I don’t see what the issue is.

If rates go back down you can always refinance.

Given sales volume has dramatically slowed I personally wouldn’t engage in a transaction with a seller who thinks they have total leverage and force buyers to do things like waive inspection which many people do to win a house. It’s just not worth it.

Something you may know, but I didn't before going through the home buying process: waiving inspection doesn't mean you can't get an inspection it means you don't get to do an inspection after making your offer and then use it to negotiate. It generally isn't a problem to get an inspection before making your offer and using that to inform whether you want to make an offer.
I think noone knows, really. In 2008 it was a single cause driving the prices up and then sharply down. This time around it seems to be an equation with a few unknowns: when will the war end - and how. When will china end their zero covid policy (or how will it end). What will the policymakers do if supply-driven inflation eases? Very hard to predict.

Just closed on a house in the Netherlands. I expect the prices to stagnate but not fall like they did in 2008. There is a limited supply, the demand is strong even at todays prices.

Looking at the housing market from Sweden I feel your conclusion on stagnation will hold true until the floodgates of new construction supported by policy open, that won't happen soon...

I can only envision a real fall in prices when I look at projects such as the miljonprogram from the 60-70s here in Sweden, mass building of shelters, left to its own devices the private sector will only try to game regulations to extract as much as possible from the land they own. A very visible gaming device is to constrain supply to always sell new units on or above current market prices even if you could potentially build faster, there is no incentive to sell cheaper.

Yup. And for small, dense countries like the Netherlands there are also physical constraints. The Dutch try to protect their landscapes, and new development happens in areas that dont encroach on the farmland. And also, the building code makes new developments relatively expensive, often significantly more so than existing buildings. There are also political and cultural issues at stake. The Dutch are a nation of proud homeowners, and the passing of accumulated wealth from one generation to the next allowed for the prices to keep growing.
It mostly comes down to the fed, and their response to inflation.

If you think their response will reign inflation in check, we'll probably see the market 'crash' and a recession like the late 80s.

If you think their response will be soft, and persistent inflation is the new norm, we'll probably see the market act more like the 70s.

Maybe they walk the line, but I don't see how that's possible. Monetary policy is just so of-the-mark right now.

Another screwball is WFH. That could sap demand for large cities and push demand in suburbs and smaller towns.

It's really really hard to say. Not only are prices really high but I think the potential variance in outcomes that I would personally project is at an all time high. There are forces pulling the market in polar opposite directions and it's going to be a relative matter of how those forces play out.

Overall, I would buy right now if it really makes sense to you from a life perspective. I'd stay far away if your goals are speculative.

The best time to buy a house, especially your house, is when you are ready. The worst time is when you are not.
It’s not a bad time if you get a good deal. I bought when rates were at 3.25 but I just saw a place on Zillow that probably would have met my needs for more than a hundred thousand less than I paid for my place. Compare your total cost to renting. If you can own for about the same price as renting, do it. Even if it’s not optimal every dollar you spend on rent is gone. With a mortgage at least some of that is principal.

Do we think housing prices will crash? Probably not. There’s a housing shortage.