Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Property Market 2019
Options
Comments
-
Current rents have a massive effect on when to buy too.
We're selling and buying again.
Ideally we'd sell, rent and buy.
We could even rent until prices peak and drop back.
We'd be paying min 1500 and more like 1800 where we're buying. 20k a year.
Prices would need to peak and drop back by more than that to make it a viable option .
We'd have all the hassle of at least 1 extra move, possible even schools too.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 30614
If buying your forever home
I nearly cry when I keep seeing this term.
The whole concept of a 'forever home' is a historic anachronism that few people in the modern world will have any reasonable hope of subscribing to.
It is increasingly the norm that you'll move several times throughout your life- as your circumstances change- and this whole concept of a 'forever home' really needs to be knocked on the head.
Erica Fleming has a lot to answer for.0 -
SirGerryAdams wrote: »Well just because it happened once doesn't mean it isn't likely to happen again.
I think if we have a loss of jobs a big drop isn't unlikely.
Historically Ireland hasn't had such a number of foreign nationals living here.
If we had a recession and jobs were lost a lot of foreigners would leave, foreign students wouldn't come here etc.
I'm waiting anyways. The risk of waiting is far lower than the risk of me buying in at the wrong time.
There is a risk to waiting. If you get a chance look at the cost of buying a 300,000 euro house in 2006 (lets say, probably not peak price) on a tracker versus buying the same house on 3 or 3.5% in 2012/2013. Lets say you had to pay rent between 2006 and 2013 and you got to buy the house for 180,000 (probably not the cheapest you could buy it for, but we didnt go for peak price either). You would think looking at this that there would be a huge difference eg 120,000.
However, first you have rent for 6-7 years, if your renting a 300,000 house for the 6-7 years mentioned it would probably cost on average 10,000 per year - thus 60,000 to 70,000. You would be lucky not to have had to move in that time too (additional cost). And all the problems in the house you cant fix as you are not the owner.
You could probably buy the 300,000 with limited deposit. Borrowing 300,000 over 30 years at 0.95% interest would currently cost you 958.04 euro per week. Total cost 344895.82 (this is very simplistic as it assumes interest rates stays the same, they wont)
Now when you buy the house for 180,000 you will already have spent 60,000 on rent plus 18,000 deposit. This means you need to borrow 162,000. Borrowing 162,000 over 30 years at 3.00% interest would currently cost 683 per month. Total cost is 245,879.47 (plus your still paying it off 6 years later). Total cost is 18,000 plus 60,000 plus 245,879.47= approx 323,000.
The advantage of the first situation is you own your own home for 6 years longer and have the mortgage paid down 6 years earlier. You could of course increase your payments in the second situation to match situation A and thus pay it down earlier.
But in 2012 how many people got mortgages and on what types of properties and what was job security like.
A complex situation - if one was to live in Dublin and wait for property prices to fall 10% eg 400,000 to 360,000 there is a reasonable chance you will have paid one year (24,000) or two year (48,000) rent in that time.0 -
The above post is on point. 10% drop is unlikely, and would probably not justify waiting for it to happen. \however at the same time, in certain areas of Dublin, seller valuations are a lagging indicator for the flatlined market. Meaning that there are currently overoptimistic asking prices which may well drop 10% as reality sets in, in fact this is already fairly apparent if you've been tracking on Daft over the last year. So, not worth putting your life on hold for, but I don't think it's wild speculation to infer that the second half of 2019 may bring some welcome surprises to potential buyers both in terms of sellers revising their bids, and a crisis of confidence in both EAs and sellers leading to lower bids being accepted, as sellers try to get out from under a property fearing a crash that will probably never come. The time for chancing your arm is now.0
-
Only for those who follow the mob mentality and/or cannot afford to.The_Conductor wrote: »I nearly cry when I keep seeing this term.
The whole concept of a 'forever home' is a historic anachronism that few people in the modern world will have any reasonable hope of subscribing to.
It is increasingly the norm that you'll move several times throughout your life- as your circumstances change- and this whole concept of a 'forever home' really needs to be knocked on the head.
Erica Fleming has a lot to answer for.
I'm currently on the lookout for my forever home, having purchased wisely 2 years ago an apartment which has appreciated in value. Following the general curve of GDA property.
I don't foresee an occurence that would force me to move out of the house I will buy next. Even if I was to be made redundant after moving in, the severance package would cover several years of the mortgage.0 -
Advertisement
-
There is a risk to waiting. If you get a chance look at the cost of buying a 300,000 euro house in 2006 (lets say, probably not peak price) on a tracker versus buying the same house on 3 or 3.5% in 2012/2013. Lets say you had to pay rent between 2006 and 2013 and you got to buy the house for 180,000 (probably not the cheapest you could buy it for, but we didnt go for peak price either). You would think looking at this that there would be a huge difference eg 120,000.
However, first you have rent for 6-7 years, if your renting a 300,000 house for the 6-7 years mentioned it would probably cost on average 10,000 per year - thus 60,000 to 70,000. You would be lucky not to have had to move in that time too (additional cost). And all the problems in the house you cant fix as you are not the owner.
You could probably buy the 300,000 with limited deposit. Borrowing 300,000 over 30 years at 0.95% interest would currently cost you 958.04 euro per week. Total cost 344895.82 (this is very simplistic as it assumes interest rates stays the same, they wont)
Now when you buy the house for 180,000 you will already have spent 60,000 on rent plus 18,000 deposit. This means you need to borrow 162,000. Borrowing 162,000 over 30 years at 3.00% interest would currently cost 683 per month. Total cost is 245,879.47 (plus your still paying it off 6 years later). Total cost is 18,000 plus 60,000 plus 245,879.47= approx 323,000.
The advantage of the first situation is you own your own home for 6 years longer and have the mortgage paid down 6 years earlier. You could of course increase your payments in the second situation to match situation A and thus pay it down earlier.
But in 2012 how many people got mortgages and on what types of properties and what was job security like.
A complex situation - if one was to live in Dublin and wait for property prices to fall 10% eg 400,000 to 360,000 there is a reasonable chance you will have paid one year (24,000) or two year (48,000) rent in that time.
Way too much logic in that post, you should be banished from boards.ie0 -
-
The_Conductor wrote: »I nearly cry when I keep seeing this term.
The whole concept of a 'forever home' is a historic anachronism that few people in the modern world will have any reasonable hope of subscribing to.
It is increasingly the norm that you'll move several times throughout your life- as your circumstances change- and this whole concept of a 'forever home' really needs to be knocked on the head.
Erica Fleming has a lot to answer for.
I hate it too.
I see people say price doesn't matter if it's your forever home, but if I knew prices would come down 20k next year why would I pay that?0 -
SirGerryAdams wrote: »I hate it too.
I see people say price doesn't matter if it's your forever home, but if I knew prices would come down 20k next year why would I pay that?
Nobody 'Knows'. Cost of waiting can exceed the potential fall.0 -
There is a risk to waiting. If you get a chance look at the cost of buying a 300,000 euro house in 2006 (lets say, probably not peak price) on a tracker versus buying the same house on 3 or 3.5% in 2012/2013. Lets say you had to pay rent between 2006 and 2013 and you got to buy the house for 180,000 (probably not the cheapest you could buy it for, but we didnt go for peak price either). You would think looking at this that there would be a huge difference eg 120,000.
However, first you have rent for 6-7 years, if your renting a 300,000 house for the 6-7 years mentioned it would probably cost on average 10,000 per year - thus 60,000 to 70,000. You would be lucky not to have had to move in that time too (additional cost). And all the problems in the house you cant fix as you are not the owner.
You could probably buy the 300,000 with limited deposit. Borrowing 300,000 over 30 years at 0.95% interest would currently cost you 958.04 euro per week. Total cost 344895.82 (this is very simplistic as it assumes interest rates stays the same, they wont)
Now when you buy the house for 180,000 you will already have spent 60,000 on rent plus 18,000 deposit. This means you need to borrow 162,000. Borrowing 162,000 over 30 years at 3.00% interest would currently cost 683 per month. Total cost is 245,879.47 (plus your still paying it off 6 years later). Total cost is 18,000 plus 60,000 plus 245,879.47= approx 323,000.
The advantage of the first situation is you own your own home for 6 years longer and have the mortgage paid down 6 years earlier. You could of course increase your payments in the second situation to match situation A and thus pay it down earlier.
But in 2012 how many people got mortgages and on what types of properties and what was job security like.
A complex situation - if one was to live in Dublin and wait for property prices to fall 10% eg 400,000 to 360,000 there is a reasonable chance you will have paid one year (24,000) or two year (48,000) rent in that time.
I was speaking personally as someone who's paying 8% gross income on rent.
By the way you haven't included the difference in running costs, insurance, property tax, maybe management fees etc, maintenance costs. For example the house I rent needs new couches, blinds, whole thing painting etc.
Of course if I was paying the normal massive rents I'd say buy. People paying 10k a year should buy now.0 -
Advertisement
-
SirGerryAdams wrote: »I was speaking personally as someone who's paying 8% gross income on rent.
By the way you haven't included the difference in running costs, insurance, property tax, maybe management fees etc, maintenance costs. For example the house I rent needs new couches, blinds, whole thing painting etc.
Of course if I was paying the normal massive rents I'd say buy. People paying 10k a year should buy now.
I didnt include maintenance costs or management fees
I also didnt include the cost of moving house and the uncertainty of tenure in rental accommodation. As you say the house you rent needs x y and z but is it going to get any of those? And you cant remedy these issues yourself realistically. You may also have to live with people in your rented property. You may not like that. In your own home you can rent a room up to 14,000 year tax free and kick out your paying guest whenever suits you. Its more likely that you would rent a room out in 2006 aged x- 6 years (although at the height of boom) than in 2012 aged x years. Your more likely to be young free and single in 2006 than 6 years later based on trends in the population,
If you saw a nice kitchen table that you wanted to buy it would be difficult as where would you store the one thats currently in your rented property. How do you insure your contents in a rented property. It costs about 50% of the cost of insuring a house if memory serves me correctly. Property tax only became a thing in circ 2012? So it would apply to both properties (the one bought in 2006 and 2012/2013) from its introduction I suspect0 -
SirGerryAdams wrote: »I hate it too.
I see people say price doesn't matter if it's your forever home, but if I knew prices would come down 20k next year why would I pay that?
If you or I knew that for certain we would be minted
0 -
Join Date:Posts: 30614
SirGerryAdams wrote: »Of course if I was paying the normal massive rents I'd say buy. People paying 10k a year should buy now.
It depends entirely on the cost of ownership- versus the cost of renting.
Very often there are costs of ownership that people fail to enumerate.
E.g. a 2 bed apartment in Galway city.
Gross rent of 10k per annum.
Current valuation 220k
Cost of ownership:
Mortgage interest: 200k @ 3.5% = 7,000
Management Charges: 1,250
Insurance: 400
General upkeep: 750
Depreciation of furniture, fixtures and fittings: 1,000
Those are reasonable (even quite conservative) assumptions.
Yet- the cost of ownership- still exceeds the rent (not by a massive amount- but it exceeds it nonetheless).
It all depends. People pretty much always underestimate the costs of ownership- when comparing it with the headline rent they are paying.0 -
The_Conductor wrote: »I nearly cry when I keep seeing this term.
The whole concept of a 'forever home' is a historic anachronism that few people in the modern world will have any reasonable hope of subscribing to.
It is increasingly the norm that you'll move several times throughout your life- as your circumstances change- and this whole concept of a 'forever home' really needs to be knocked on the head.
Erica Fleming has a lot to answer for.
Do you have stats on this?
There are plenty of people who are looking for their forever home. Maybe they've already moved before and this is their second home. Maybe they're buying a big 4 bed house as their first purchase knowing it'll accommodate the family they want to have.
Yea, some people will have unexpected changes in circumstance that dictate a house move, but dismissing the idea of a "forever home" out of hand just seems overly dramatic.0 -
The_Conductor wrote: »It depends entirely on the cost of ownership- versus the cost of renting.
Very often there are costs of ownership that people fail to enumerate.
E.g. a 2 bed apartment in Galway city.
Gross rent of 10k per annum.
Current valuation 220k
Cost of ownership:
Mortgage interest: 200k @ 3.5% = 7,000
Management Charges: 1,250
Insurance: 400
General upkeep: 750
Depreciation of furniture, fixtures and fittings: 1,000
Those are reasonable (even quite conservative) assumptions.
Yet- the cost of ownership- still exceeds the rent (not by a massive amount- but it exceeds it nonetheless).
It all depends. People pretty much always underestimate the costs of ownership- when comparing it with the headline rent they are paying.
Firstly I'd say that using an apartment is also a bad example, since the majority buy houses
Secondly you now own a home.
It's yours. You can do whatever you want with it.
Your piece of land. Your own garden.
You're not beholden to a landlord.
You're not counting rental depreciation because no one buys furniture for a rental. You just use whatever's there, no matter how for or bad.
Financially you're better off in the short term, but not in the long.
Your mortgage is inflation proof.
The value of your house will go up in time, with inflation and demand. Your rent will creep up over time, and you'll be evicted eventually.0 -
The_Conductor wrote: »It depends entirely on the cost of ownership- versus the cost of renting.
Very often there are costs of ownership that people fail to enumerate.
E.g. a 2 bed apartment in Galway city.
Gross rent of 10k per annum.
Current valuation 220k
Cost of ownership:
Mortgage interest: 200k @ 3.5% = 7,000
Management Charges: 1,250
Insurance: 400
General upkeep: 750
Depreciation of furniture, fixtures and fittings: 1,000
Those are reasonable (even quite conservative) assumptions.
Yet- the cost of ownership- still exceeds the rent (not by a massive amount- but it exceeds it nonetheless).
It all depends. People pretty much always underestimate the costs of ownership- when comparing it with the headline rent they are paying.
A 2 bed apartment in Galway city.
Gross rent of 10k per annum. (minimum in galway city is 14k at market value circ 1200 a month
Current valuation 220k
Cost of ownership:
Mortgage interest: 200k @ 3.5% = 7,000 tax deductible plus 3800 for principal
Management Charges: 1,250 tax deductible
Insurance: 400 tax deductible
Property Tax: 350? (not going to look it up) not tax deductible
General upkeep: 750 tax deductible
Depreciation of furniture, fixtures and fittings: 1,000 tax deductible
At 14k rent you will needing to put about 1000 of your money into to service mortgage or bills or tax (depending on the tax you need to pay)
but if you buy 2 bed and rent out a room... your quids in
Edit: i think 750 and 1000 are generous for upkeep and depreciation0 -
A 2 bed apartment in Galway city.
Gross rent of 10k per annum. (minimum in galway city is 14k at market value circ 1200 a month
Current valuation 220k
Cost of ownership:
Mortgage interest: 200k @ 3.5% = 7,000 tax deductible plus 3800 for principal
Management Charges: 1,250 tax deductible
Insurance: 400 tax deductible
Property Tax: 350? (not going to look it up) not tax deductible
General upkeep: 750 tax deductible
Depreciation of furniture, fixtures and fittings: 1,000 tax deductible
At 14k rent you will needing to put about 1000 of your money into to service mortgage or bills or tax (depending on the tax you need to pay)
but if you buy 2 bed and rent out a room... your quids in
Edit: i think 750 and 1000 are generous for upkeep and depreciation
Is this not a comparison between renting to live in and owning to live in? If you own a property I don't think any of those are tax deductable.
Two big difference between the two first is inflation, over the course of your mortgage the repayment amount will stay the same (interest rates may well rise but it is still not going to change that much) where as rent will inflate.
Second in 30 years you own the property, you still have certain expenses (upkeep, property tax, etc.) but nothing compared to having to pay for rent for another 20 years (most people get mortgage around 30, paid off by 60, live to 80.)0 -
cruizer101 wrote: »Is this not a comparison between renting to live in and owning to live in? If you own a property I don't think any of those are tax deductable.
Two big difference between the two first is inflation, over the course of your mortgage the repayment amount will stay the same (interest rates may well rise but it is still not going to change that much) where as rent will inflate.
Second in 30 years you own the property, you still have certain expenses (upkeep, property tax, etc.) but nothing compared to having to pay for rent for another 20 years (most people get mortgage around 30, paid off by 60, live to 80.)
Apologies your right - misread the comment I replied to0 -
There are lots of people out there looking for a 'forever home'. I'm not a big fan of the term but its the reality.
Granted peoples circumstances may change in life but generally you have people who settle down, have kids and get on with life. These people tend to want a property that will suit their needs, enough to expand into, green space, near schools etc etc.
There simply isn't enough stability in the rental market for people to want to remain renting with a family, if they can avoid it, and the costs and potential pitfalls of multiple 'property ladder' acquisitions over your life time as situations change don't appeal to many.
There's others people here looking for a 10 percent drop in prices as they stand. Properties were 10 percent cheaper 3 odd years ago. That was probably the time to buy. Maybe they weren't in a position to buy then, fair enough. What happens if this ten percent correction doesn't come?
Everyone's circumstances are different but once you have gotten through the will I won't I buy, then go through the actual process, you'll most likely never want to go through it again.0 -
That's a key point. You can't directly compare renting versus buying, renting gives you flexibility which is worth a lot to many people - easy to move to a new job, easy to get up and leave to a new area.SirGerryAdams wrote: »Of course if I was paying the normal massive rents I'd say buy. People paying 10k a year should buy now.
However the current dysfunctional rental market has changed all the calculations because rents are so high and supply so limited. If you are reasonably settled, renting doesn't make much sense at the moment compared to buying.
Re waiting for a 10% drop - is it really worth the stress? The 2008 crisis was extraordinary, I doubt we'll ever see anything like that again. There are some potential dangers on the horizon, e.g. Brexit, government spending like drunken monkeys, but these will always be hanging over us - there's a saying in equities that the market climbs a wall of worry, i.e. there will always be things hanging over us, but in reality everything just muddles along. I certainly wouldn't be buying thinking I was going to get property price appreciation, but if you can lock yourself into a comfortable mortgage for a property in an area you like there doesn't seem to be a huge downside.0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 30614
Do you have stats on this?
There are plenty of people who are looking for their forever home. Maybe they've already moved before and this is their second home. Maybe they're buying a big 4 bed house as their first purchase knowing it'll accommodate the family they want to have.
Yea, some people will have unexpected changes in circumstance that dictate a house move, but dismissing the idea of a "forever home" out of hand just seems overly dramatic.
I don't have Irish stats- I do have US stats (from their census questionaire).
In 1980 the average US citizen moved home 6.3 times in their lifetime.
In 1990 the average US citizen moved home 6.8 times in their lifetime.
In 2000 the average US citizen moved home 7.2 times in their lifetime.
In 2010 the average US citizen moved home 11.7 times in their lifetime.
The average US citizen under the age of 18 has moved with their family 2.6 times during their childhood, and can expect to move their household as an adult 9.7 times on average.
It would seem that there was a slow but steady increase in the number of times a US citizen moved their household up to 20 years ago- when it sped up and almost doubled in frequency.
We don't collect commensurate statistics in Ireland- however, I've no reason not to believe that were similar statistics available, they would show a similar trend.
Note- the above figures- are just the 'average' person- there will be people who never ever move- and similarly- there will be people who move incredibly frequently.
It would be an interesting statistic- if there was a commensurate question added to the Irish census- and indeed- it'll be very interesting what the census next year in the States throws up- there is already partisan battles over some of the questions they intend to ask participants.0 -
That's the number of times someone has moved in their lifetime though, which I think is a misleading statistic in this context. That would include childhood, student digs, rentals etc.
I mean, if it's that wide, then I guess I've moved home 9 times. But I've only ever bought 1 house.
I would imagine the average Irish person would buy 2 properties in their life. For many I'd imagine they only ever buy 1.0 -
The_Conductor wrote: »I don't have Irish stats- I do have US stats (from their census questionaire).
In 1980 the average US citizen moved home 6.3 times in their lifetime.
In 1990 the average US citizen moved home 6.8 times in their lifetime.
In 2000 the average US citizen moved home 7.2 times in their lifetime.
In 2010 the average US citizen moved home 11.7 times in their lifetime.
The average US citizen under the age of 18 has moved with their family 2.6 times during their childhood, and can expect to move their household as an adult 9.7 times on average.
It would seem that there was a slow but steady increase in the number of times a US citizen moved their household up to 20 years ago- when it sped up and almost doubled in frequency.
We don't collect commensurate statistics in Ireland- however, I've no reason not to believe that were similar statistics available, they would show a similar trend.
Note- the above figures- are just the 'average' person- there will be people who never ever move- and similarly- there will be people who move incredibly frequently.
It would be an interesting statistic- if there was a commensurate question added to the Irish census- and indeed- it'll be very interesting what the census next year in the States throws up- there is already partisan battles over some of the questions they intend to ask participants.
You can’t compare America with Ireland in the slightest. They have hundreds of cities and towns worth living in. Ireland has Dublin, apologies to the rest of the country lol0 -
coolshannagh28 wrote: »This is particularly true outside of Dublin , prices are reducing and fear is setting in again .
It's not the case in Limerick city which is now every bit as expensive as Galway to rent and not a whole lot cheaper to buy
Plenty of different markets doing their own thing.0 -
It's not the case in Limerick city which is now every bit as expensive as Galway to rent and not a whole lot cheaper to buy
Plenty of different markets doing their own thing.
Decent houses are easily going 10-15% above asking in Limerick. We were looking at a house at 230k, went for 259k. Another at 220 went for 255k.
Meanwhile, the city centre and much of the north of the city is not covered by RPZ. Our rent has gone from 700 to 1050 in 3 years. Some apartments in our block now going for 1300/month.
With so many companies going into the city centre, rents will only be going one direction for the foreseeable future.0 -
Bigmac1euro wrote: »You can’t compare America with Ireland in the slightest. They have hundreds of cities and towns worth living in. Ireland has Dublin, apologies to the rest of the country lol
You live in Europe. Europe has 'hundreds of cities and towns worth living in". You should really compare Ireland to maybe one of the states.0 -
The_Conductor wrote: »I nearly cry when I keep seeing this term.
The whole concept of a 'forever home' is a historic anachronism that few people in the modern world will have any reasonable hope of subscribing to.
It is increasingly the norm that you'll move several times throughout your life- as your circumstances change- and this whole concept of a 'forever home' really needs to be knocked on the head.
Erica Fleming has a lot to answer for.
It depends on interpretation, for me, the phrase means you're not buying requiring appreciation in order to trade up to a home that will actually suit your needs. Maybe "the home I could cope with being stuck in forever" would be more apt, but possibly not as marketable!!0 -
Decent houses are easily going 10-15% above asking in Limerick. We were looking at a house at 230k, went for 259k. Another at 220 went for 255k.
Meanwhile, the city centre and much of the north of the city is not covered by RPZ. Our rent has gone from 700 to 1050 in 3 years. Some apartments in our block now going for 1300/month.
With so many companies going into the city centre, rents will only be going one direction for the foreseeable future.
Limerick was irrationally cheap for far too long, even the estate agents were playing it down, I bought a two bed apartment in a very desirable development in 2015 for 120 k and three different auctioneers ( who I was in talks with about different property) told me I paid mad money, now I know you can't trust an auctioneer to tell you the time of day but for me it was a reflection of pessimism overkill
People in Limerick find it hard to be comfortable with a culture of affluence0 -
The_Conductor wrote: »I don't have Irish stats- I do have US stats (from their census questionaire).
In 1980 the average US citizen moved home 6.3 times in their lifetime.
In 1990 the average US citizen moved home 6.8 times in their lifetime.
In 2000 the average US citizen moved home 7.2 times in their lifetime.
In 2010 the average US citizen moved home 11.7 times in their lifetime.
The average US citizen under the age of 18 has moved with their family 2.6 times during their childhood, and can expect to move their household as an adult 9.7 times on average.
It would seem that there was a slow but steady increase in the number of times a US citizen moved their household up to 20 years ago- when it sped up and almost doubled in frequency.
We don't collect commensurate statistics in Ireland- however, I've no reason not to believe that were similar statistics available, they would show a similar trend.
Note- the above figures- are just the 'average' person- there will be people who never ever move- and similarly- there will be people who move incredibly frequently.
It would be an interesting statistic- if there was a commensurate question added to the Irish census- and indeed- it'll be very interesting what the census next year in the States throws up- there is already partisan battles over some of the questions they intend to ask participants.
I think you'd need to cross reference that with the age at which people bought their first property. For example, many people these days are renting for a number of years before they get married, have kids etc and buy a place.
So while the number of times people have moved has increased, its because theres more renting happening, for longer periods.
I've moved about 10 times in the last 15 years, and am buying my first house now. My Dad on the other hand moved from his family home to his first purchased home at the age of 25 or so.
In short, peoples lives these days have a drastically different trajectory.0 -
Advertisement
-
I'd assume people are more likely to move for work now I assume. Since it's easier to get around0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement