The Starter Home Is No More, Even in Second Tier Markets

Starter Homes Long Past Affordability

Point2Home notes First-Time Buyers, Second Thoughts: Starter Homes Long Past Affordability, Even in Secondary Markets

With main markets no longer an option for first-time buyers, Point2 looked at the country’s 100 largest secondary cities for the median price of a starter home and renter households’ median income. Defined as large non-core cities within a metro, these cities used to be fruitful house-hunting grounds for first-time buyers exploring less-expensive options away from main cities. But as it turns out, unaffordability can put a dent in homeownership plans regardless of city type or size.

That’s because secondary cities — orbiting the principal cities within their respective metros — have seen increased competition from real estate investors, second-home buyers, and even downsizing Baby Boomers. As a result, this pushed the already scarce affordable options even further out of reach of those looking to get on the property ladder. Add sky-high prices and interest rates to the mix and you’ve got the recipe for postponing buying and renting until further notice — which is the case for the vast majority of Americans navigating today’s housing market.

Key Points

  • In 41 of the 100 largest secondary cities in the U.S., renters earn half or less than half of the income they would need to buy a median-priced starter home.
  • There are no non-core cities in which renters could comfortably make a move toward homeownership: In 10 cities, the necessary income is about triple what they earn.
  • Would-be buyers in Burbank and Glendale, CA have it worst: They lack 67% of the income they would need in order to make the move from renter to homeowner.
  • Renters in 9 California cities would need to earn about $100,000 more in order to afford a starter home. Based on the latest renter income figures, starter home prices, and mortgage rates, non-core cities in the LA and San Diego metros are the toughest for first-time homebuyers.
  • In 15 of the 100 largest secondary cities, renters would need less than 4 months’ worth of extra income to afford the transition to owning a starter home.
  • Homeownership is within reach in Independence, MO, and Broken Arrow, OK. Those who dream of owning here would need less than one month’s worth of extra income to afford a starter home.

California Tops the List of Worst Places to Look

California has the dubious distinction of having the top least affordable starter home cities. 

A starter home, according to the Census Department is priced in the bottom third of homes in the area.

Pomona, CA, is in fourteenth place. The average renter in Pomona makes $49,000 a year and needs to get to $121,000 a year. That’s nearly 2.5 times current salary. 

In Burbank, CA, the average renter makes $63,000 year an needs to get to $193,000. That’s over 3 times current salary.

Within Grasp

In no market can the average renter make the plunge. 

But in Independence, Missouri, or Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, the average renter is respectively just  2% and 5% short of the amount needed for a starter home

Not Shocking

None of this is shocking. It matches one one should expect looking at Case-Shiller home prices and mortgage rates.

The Fed wanted to produce inflation and it did. But for years the Fed did not even see the inflation because the manifestation of inflation was in asset prices, not the price of consumer goods.

Case-Shiller Top City Home Prices Decline From Year Ago for the First Time Since May 2012

On May 30, I noted Case-Shiller Top City Home Prices Decline From Year Ago for the First Time Since May 2012

However, the decline is but a drop in the bucket compared to price increases since 2011. 

Meanwhile, the average mortgage rate is 6.89 percent according to Mortgage News Daily.

Until the price of homes crash, or prices steady and mortgage rates crash, those looking to buy an affordable starter home will be out of luck.  

This has widespread implications for household formation and the economy. 

This post originated on MishTalk.Com.

Thanks for Tuning In!

Please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

45 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
trackback

[…] The Fed has made policy error after policy error, creating a big class of winners (those who owned a home and refinanced near three percent), and a big class of losers (Zoomers and Millennials) looking to buy their first home. Importantly, The Starter Home Is No More, Even in Second Tier Markets […]

RonJ
RonJ
10 months ago
“Would-be buyers in Burbank and Glendale, CA have it worst: They lack 67%
of the income they would need in order to make the move from renter to
homeowner.”
There just isn’t any land left and the population keeps growing. A large new apartment building was just built near the Town Center Mall in Burbank, and it looks like another is going up right next to it, on former commercial property. Alongside other side of the freeway from them, a long apartment building is being constructed on what had been a strip of open land. Burbank has the largest IKEA store in the country and the old one near the mall has sat empty for years, with some wanting to turn the property into mixed use commercial/apartments. The state changed zoning laws, in order to pack even more people into the city. Home owners get ads to build ADU’s, additional dwelling units, in their back yard, to rent out. Huntington Beach tried to over rule the state, siting that their quality of life would decline from being forced to pack more people in, but failed to do so.
Directed Energy
Directed Energy
10 months ago
Reply to  RonJ
One of one thousand reasons California sucks.
whirlaway
whirlaway
10 months ago
Whaaaaaaat?!

Gee, if only the minimum wage was abolished, then everyone would be able to afford everything!

RonJ
RonJ
10 months ago
Reply to  whirlaway
The interesting thing is that “Fight for $15,” failed to create a living wage, due to the ramp up in inflation. The state legislature is looking to increase teacher salaries across the state by 50% by 2030. Lower paid school workers in L.A. just went on strike for 3 days and the school board caved to a 30% pay increase over the next contract. The city wants to raise hotel workers to get minimum $30 an hour by 2028.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
10 months ago
Reply to  RonJ
Those hotel workers are going to need $30/hour to afford the $50 Big Mac and $27 French fries.
JRM
JRM
10 months ago
Property prices are starting to go down in my area in Southern Oregon..
Getting a lot of “PENDING SALES NOTIFICATIONS” in the last month , but 99% of the time the property is back on the market within a week..
Call_Me
Call_Me
10 months ago
“In no market can the average renter make the plunge.”
Isn’t this the way that it should be? If one can own or rent one would be inclined to own in the overwhelming majority of cases. Even if it would be more advantageous to rent, I suspect most people would opt to own for non-financial reasons. Equilibrium is reached and those just short of having the means to afford to carry a mortgage will slightly overextend to get their piece of the ‘dream’ so you should not expect to see an average renter be able to afford to make the plunge.
(again, this is when equilibrium is reached and not during transitional periods or significant price moves.)
Call_Me_Al
Cabreado
Cabreado
10 months ago
If I were a builder/contractor, I’d be building small houses on ~.5+ acre lots…. as fast as I could.
MBA SOFA
MBA SOFA
10 months ago
There is a lot of land in EEUU or Canada. New materials and technology make construction cheaper.
Mad regulations and taxes are ruining citizens, erasing middle class. Bleak future.
billybobjr
billybobjr
10 months ago
There is a lag effect and Insurance, property taxes and general maintenance are going up .
These are baked into the cake and will be rising for the forseeable future . Cross currents are
people can work out side the cities and make tons of money in suburban and rural areas with new work remote options .
I know some who made moves out of NY and Denver ,and others and they love it . Family dollar and Dollar general
stores dot the country and are always close by in most rural areas and they carry a lot of neccesities you may need .
Walmart and general grocery stores dot the country postioned where most prople are close to them . People
can get good internet and TV in most all remote areas that was a drawback for a long time but no longer. I think
there is a transition going on
Directed Energy
Directed Energy
10 months ago
A California starter home is not average, as California is not a starter market. Successful people buy homes there, even in cities like Fontana and Riverside. It’s not a place for all.
worleyeoe
worleyeoe
10 months ago
Outside of the Fed ignoring reality, the biggest issue affecting housing right now is allowing investors to buy up large swaths of the housing market. That has to stop! It’s just total BS. Joe Consumer is never going to be able to compete with Blackrock or Affirmed Housing. American housing is slowing become owned by slumlords.
KidHorn
KidHorn
10 months ago
Reply to  worleyeoe
When there’s a housing crash, banks get stuck with a lot of homes. They aren’t in the landlord business, so they have to sell. It takes a long time to sell thousands of homes, so they rely on REITS and such to buy in bulk.
worleyeoe
worleyeoe
10 months ago
Reply to  KidHorn
The government isn’t going to allow a foreclosure-based crash. They’re going to trot out rent & mortgage relief again. AND, the big guys that I’m talking about are self-financing, so their properties wouldn’t be repossessed.
worleyeoe
worleyeoe
10 months ago
“But for years the Fed did not even see the inflation because the manifestation of inflation was in asset prices, not the price of consumer goods.”
This is absolutely BS. JPowell and everyone else at the Fed, from the little guy to the top, saw the housing price inflation in real-time from circa 2012 but simply didn’t do anything about it. And then in March 2020, the Fed flagrantly adopted a near ZIRP policy that was totally unwarranted. Almost EVERYTHING about COVID was a complete over-reaction, with the Fed’s QE policies leading the way.
Again, I call total BS! They just looked the other way, that’s all. At some point relatively soon, the Fed Chair has to stand up and TELL Congress to get it’s fiscal house in order. They’re the banker who has to tell the UniParty enough is enough. Who in their right mind thinks that at least $4T in deficit spending over the next two years isn’t going to keep core PCE inflation running much higher that the Fed’s outdated 2% target?
Hell, McCarthy didn’t even have the balls to stick with $1.5T that could have made the budget deficit a real issue going into the 2024 election. Why is that? Because he doesn’t give a d@mn! And who in their right mind thinks the Freedom Caucus is going to have any luck in cutting spending by acting like they’re going to abide by a NORMAL budgeting process going into FY2024?
NOBODY! They’re all frauds!
Intelligentyetidiot
Intelligentyetidiot
10 months ago
Reply to  worleyeoe
It was Bernank’s lunatic policy , remember the guy who said he can stop inflation in 15min on TV, his logic was that an increase in asset prices will generate a “wealth effect”. Sure it did, for some.
Salmo Trutta
Salmo Trutta
10 months ago
The remuneration of interbank demand deposits suppressed interest rates. Secular stagnation suppressed interest rates. Interest rate differentials between our trading partners, suppressed interest rates.
A decline in real interest rates forced saver-holders to reach for yield. They rebalanced by buying assets while supply was being curtailed. New home starts were insufficient.
Asset valuation prices are driven from the
appraisal of loan collateral
which depends upon Gresham’s law: “a statement of the least cost “principle of
substitution” as applied to money: that a commodity (or service) will be
devoted to those uses which are the most profitable (most widely viewed as
promising), that a statement of the principle of substitution: “the bad money
drives out good”.

Bernanke: “Lower mortgage rates will make
housing more affordable and allow more homeowners to refinance. Lower corporate
bond rates will encourage investment. And higher stock prices will boost
consumer wealth and help increase confidence, which can also spur
spending,”

The FED must change its definition of inflation to include asset prices.

Salmo Trutta
Salmo Trutta
10 months ago
Reply to  worleyeoe
There are two storm clouds, no longer small and no longer on the horizon, that have the potential at some indeterminate future date to “wash” the U.S. and the Foreign-dollar “down the drain”. They go by the name of “foreign trade deficit” and “domestic federal deficit”.
These twin deficits have an insidious, if not an incestuous, relationship. Positive interest rate differentials are significantly responsible for the dollar’s exchange rate support. And an “overvalued” dollar in turn is the principal contributor to our burgeoning trade deficits.
The viability of the U.S. and Foreign-dollar as international units of account is threatened by the huge trade deficits. Given the present and prospective trade deficits, this situation is not likely to continue for long. Foreigners will simply be saturated with excess dollars.
The volume of dollar-denominated liquid assets held by foreigners is extremely large. Any significant repatriation of these funds, by reducing the supply of loan-funds, will force interest rates up – thus increasing the federal deficit and the burden of all new debt.
These events alone could trigger a downswing in the economy resulting in more unemployment, more unemployment compensation, less tax revenues and larger federal deficits. Truly a vicious cycle.
SHOfan
SHOfan
10 months ago
Reply to  worleyeoe
The UniParty. Yes, did you see how please McCarthy and Schumer both were at removing any spending limits until 2025?
Both parties are spendaholics and they keep the public divided with issues like wokeness and abortion.
We need and end to lobbying or there will never be an honest government. We need term limits and maybe even a third party that is concerned with the plight of the average American. These will be tough to achieve in a Corporatocracy.
Mac Timred
Mac Timred
10 months ago
Nice article as far as it goes but I see some things missing (spoiler alert all the glass half empty folks)
1) The stats here look at average or median. What matters is distribution.
**So maybe the upper 1/3 of renter household incomes could afford an average priced starter home.
**So maybe the average renter household income could a afford a low priced starter home. Low priced because needs work (sweat equity any of you starters?) or in a not-so-chi chi part of town (starter means starter not you’ve made it).
2) People move and with remote work now being a thing, they are more and more able to do so. The household in Pomona can move to Spring Valley NV and buy a home. Etc etc Etc.
shamrock
shamrock
10 months ago
The home ownership rate in the United States is 65.5%. In the 3 least affordable cities according to this article it’s Burbank 42.8%, Glendale 34%, and Escondido 51.3%.
Zardoz
Zardoz
10 months ago
Mortgage slavery and kids have always been things that kept peoples’ heads down. They may not like what’s going on, but they have too much at stake to stand up for themselves.
Take those away, and you have a bunch of angry people with nothing to lose. We could see some upheaval over the next couple decades.
klausmkl
klausmkl
10 months ago
Reply to  Zardoz
Of course violence will come. We have been bashing each others heads in since Cain smashed in Abels head. Why would we stop now?
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
10 months ago
Reply to  Zardoz
44% of US households have one or more firearms.
RunnerDan
RunnerDan
10 months ago

“The housing market must be kept inflated at all cost!” -Fed Reserve policy of last 23 years

TexasTim65
TexasTim65
10 months ago
Mish, you’ve got a mistake in your wording:
“Pomona, CA, is in fourteenth place. The average renter in Pomona would
need to increase their income by 59 percent to buy a home in the bottom
third price range.”
Actually Renters there need to more than DOUBLE their income (49K vs 121K needed) which is vastly harder than increasing it by 59% (which would take them from 49K to ~75K). For some reason the article you quoted shows percent difference backwards (negatively) to how most of us would state things. For example Burbank (63) vs 193 needed shows -67% when it should really be stated that renters have only 33% of the required income and would need to TRIPLE their income to reach what’s required, not increase it by 67%.
Mish
Mish
10 months ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Yes Thanks
Mish
Mish
10 months ago
Reply to  Mish

Pomona, CA, is in fourteenth place. The average renter in Pomona makes $49,000 a year and needs to get to $121,000 a year. That’s nearly 2.5 times current salary.

In Burbank, CA, the average renter makes $63,000 year an needs to get to $193,000. That’s over 3 times current salary.

MPO45v2
MPO45v2
10 months ago
It’s unclear if the income required is just for the home mortgage or total costs but I suspect it’s only for the mortgage. What will truly kill real estate are all the other costs that keep going up: repair & maintenance, insurance, property taxes, HOA fees. In some places, insurance companies are bailing out because they know they can’t afford to rebuild entire communities of million dollar homes in the event of hurricanes or earthquakes. Flood insurance has become really expensive for many as well due to frequent 500 year floods happening every few years now. But hey, climate change is a hoax and there is nothing to see here /snark.
I know quite a few people that bought 400k homes 15 years ago that are now worth double that and the property taxes and insurance is killing them. This begs a big question: What is the breaking point for the average homeowner with all the expenses before they bail?
And don’t get me started in places like Phoenix where there are no new build permits being issues because the water is running out.
RunnerDan
RunnerDan
10 months ago
Reply to  MPO45v2
“They bail”? Well, the question will be at what point do the rule makers step in to bail out those considering bailing and the policy will be “you pay if you have the means!”
Intelligentyetidiot
Intelligentyetidiot
10 months ago
Reply to  RunnerDan
the are already working on it.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
10 months ago
Reply to  MPO45v2
Presumably the number being quoted as required is based on the max percentage of income going towards mortgage that banks/lenders allow. So for Burbank at 193K if that max percent is 40% (no idea what it is) it means 77.2K a year in mortgage payments is what’s needed for a started home (again I am presuming with the min 5% down and buying mortgage insurance as part of that 77.2K).
As for insurance and taxes, you are bang on the money. That’s happening all over in Florida including to my own home. Not sure what the breaking point exactly is because it likely depends on the city, the rise in prices and the final costs. But eventually tax payers will need to revolt against their cities to force down the tax costs (mostly paying pensions these days) and at the state level for insurance rates (Florida has state insurance and California is headed that way now too).
MPO45v2
MPO45v2
10 months ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Well repair & maintenance is poised to get a whole lot more expensive in Florida. So bad that republican are begging the immigrants they hate to stay….
worleyeoe
worleyeoe
10 months ago
Reply to  MPO45v2
I for one want ALL of the insurers to move out of Florida. Let that state run program turn into the model for them. FL needs to self insure in terms of hurricane related damage. The hurricane that hit FL in late summer was THE REASON why Allstate used a BIG FREAKING LOOPHOLE here in GA to ram a 25% rate increase down everyone’s throats. It literally was to make up for losses from the hurricane. So, I agree. FL is rapidly affecting everyone’s insurance rates, especially those who live in border states to FL. If you live in FL and want hurricane insurance, then you buy that from the state and then let Allstate et al sell you the other part of hazard insurance for fire and non-hurricane related damages.
KidHorn
KidHorn
10 months ago
Reply to  worleyeoe
Terrible idea. Politicians are going to run on reducing insurance costs and then when a big one hits, there won’t be enough in reserves.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
10 months ago
Reply to  worleyeoe
Actually hurricanes are hitting a lot of other states than Florida these days. Plenty are going into Georgia and the Carolina’s and even all the way up to NY. Don’t forget the gulf coast states all the way to Texas. So it’s not Florida that’s driving up the costs, it’s ALL the states (at least 8) that are being hit.
Florida is probably one the best prepared states these days because the building codes have been hurricane rated since Andrew in 95. My guess is most of the other states aren’t close to requiring that because they used to get so few storms.
Also how much can your insurance costs be if you aren’t getting hurricane insurance? On my home here I was quoted something like 2500 a year on an 800K home if I didn’t want hurricane coverage.
billybobjr
billybobjr
10 months ago
Reply to  worleyeoe
Yea I live in Coastal Carolina and have been in 10 plus Hurricanes . Most damage is always on barrier islands and
have rarely seen a home with wind damage 1 mile or so inland other than trailers or very old structure. The codes in
these area are strict and it takes a lot to damage those places from a wind perpective . Trees are the number one
cause of damge from inland places . As more people self insure the ones that are left will pay more as
the pool shrinks . The insurance market is going to be interesting going forward and if California was to get hit
with a big earthquake in the right area who knows what the cost of that would be but premiums are going up fast .
FDR
FDR
10 months ago
Reply to  billybobjr
In California State Farm has pulled out for “new customers” for home insurance.
What were the cause of the fires? The state didn’t listen to Native Americans regarding removing underbrush and starting fires that would build firebreaks, Pacific Gas & Electric not investing in new transformers and clearing brush in fire prone areas where their poles were transmitting electricity, CA residents wanting to reside in scenic treelined areas and changing weather patterns such as high winds and temperatures.
David C
David C
9 months ago
Reply to  TexasTim65

Stop Living in Flood Areas and Hurricane Zones and you won’t pay as much for insurance. Miami has floods on a Sunny Day. If you’re not significantly above Sea Level, you’re going to be in trouble in the next decade or two.

klausmkl
klausmkl
10 months ago
Used RV’s are starter homes now. It’s all good though. We the people still here.
Bam_Man
Bam_Man
10 months ago
“You will own nothing and be happy. Or else.”
Call_Me
Call_Me
10 months ago
Reply to  Bam_Man
That’s nice, even in such a dystopian world the individual still has a choice!
Call_Me_Al
Mjs357
Mjs357
10 months ago
BlackRock, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, BofA, etc. licking their chops in anticipation of profit from forever renters.
RunnerDan
RunnerDan
10 months ago
Reply to  Mjs357
The vampire squid tentacles are everywhere!!!

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.