Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_j4dousd wrote

Reply to comment by Accurate-Historian-7 in RI Real Estate by DIMINISHED_VALUE

Source from Jan of this year — Rhode Island the third most popular moving destination.

https://www.abc6.com/rhode-island-ranked-3-on-list-of-top-moving-destinations/

People who can’t afford a $750K bungalow in some forgettable Mass exurb are buying nicer $400K places here. And Providence is a downright urban living bargain compared to Boston.

If you have a Massachusetts salary, you’ll never afford a home of your own up there. So they all come here.

I was an early adopter.

17

Accurate-Historian-7 t1_j4dq859 wrote

Unfortunately 400k doesn’t get you much of anything anymore. Got to spend closer to 500k or be willing to put in some major sweat equity. However in comparison to Massachusetts it’s definitely an upgrade coming here.

4

[deleted] t1_j4dqjbh wrote

Gets a decent small home on the eastern shore, but yeah not a huge family home. It would still cost 40% more in Mass.

When I bought here, it was because a nice place I was looking at in Rockland, MA had tons of asbestos shingles. Remediation cost was over $100K.

In Bristol County RI, I found a larger place with a bigger yard, a 2 car garage and no asbestos for $150K less. It was a no brainer.

6

Wide_Television_7074 t1_j4eddmx wrote

there’s some real affordable homes on the south coast of mass and decent property taxes

3

PalatioEstateEsq t1_j4gy55a wrote

How the fuck is $500,000 affordable? What reality do you live in?

2

Wide_Television_7074 t1_j4iwyrs wrote

you can’t buy anything liveable for $400k — you can die on that hill but it won’t do any good

1

PalatioEstateEsq t1_j4ix8r0 wrote

We know that, that's why there is a housing crisis. $400k to $500k is not "affordable" just because it is the lowest option.

1

Wide_Television_7074 t1_j4jz6lu wrote

the government created the affordability crisis by stealing from us via inflation. this is the product of deficit spending. maybe if people voted for fiscally responsible leaders, this wouldn’t happen.

0

Unique-Public-8594 t1_j4dxyug wrote

That source used United Van Lines stats, I think someone smarter than me had pointed out earlier why that’s unreliable information.

3

[deleted] t1_j4dy3w1 wrote

A van line would be at the center of who is moving where and why. I know it disrupts the “RI is in permanent decline” narrative, but it’s valid info.

8

[deleted] t1_j4e0w4r wrote

That’s like saying if Bank of America sees major increases in credit card spending, it’s not useful because there are other banks. United is a major mover; it’s a significant data source.

The census happened three years ago. Everything that has happened since then has not been captured. Whereas United is a business that collects stats every year.

It also comports with the data we are seeing on housing. There’s little to no inventory because the demand is so high. That’s not what happens in shrinking dying places.

7

Unique-Public-8594 t1_j4e0nvk wrote

But United only counts who moved in using United. It doesn’t count how many moved out. They aren’t looking at those who moved using other companies and where they went.

1

Unique-Public-8594 t1_j4dz48l wrote

Census is more reliable. It ranks RI 32nd.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/fastest-growing-states

0

[deleted] t1_j4dza79 wrote

Census data is three years out of date now.

6

Unique-Public-8594 t1_j4g02ig wrote

Ok but these United Van Lines statistics have been discussed here before and ultimately determined to be useless numbers.

For Rhode Island to have magically jumped from 32nd to third since 2021 (when the trends show retiring Baby Boomers and wfh folks moving south and southwest), I doubt it.

1

[deleted] t1_j4hnbft wrote

You’re ignoring all the businesses in and around Boston in health care, where WFH isn’t an option. You’re also ignoring the continued influx of people into greater Boston, which our entire state is basically part of now.

1

Unique-Public-8594 t1_j4hod4u wrote

And the next census may prove that but this data from United Van Lines is not a reliable source.

1

[deleted] t1_j4hpj6e wrote

Again, it is a reliable source. Most projections are made from data of market participants, and unless you’re arguing that UVL is committing financial fraud, their trends data is valid.

The only way your narrative would make sense is if UVL is an outlier and every other hauling line has seen a collapse of 90% or more, which is highly unlikely.

The data is also substantiated by looking all around us. Regions that are in severe decline like Detroit, Toledo or Cleveland don’t have $500K 1,200 sq foot houses, new condo projects going up, demand for more building permits, construction of new schools, gentrification of old neighborhoods in decline, etc.

Our version of Toledo, Pawtucket, is booming.

One of the charming and annoying things about this state is its inability to accept change, and this data shows clear changes in the trajectory of the state.

1

Unique-Public-8594 t1_j4hqcud wrote

And maybe you are right.

Money Magazine sees it differently:

https://money.com/cities-with-the-most-new-homes/

1

[deleted] t1_j4hqou1 wrote

I just saw the headline and chuckled, because RI has almost no new homes, part of the thing driving up prices.

But the same is true of Chicago and Cleveland, and yet plenty of affordable housing exists in those places.

Why? Because people are moving here in droves, but not to Chicago or Cleveland.

RI definitely needs to build more homes. Providence mayor Smiley made that a centerpiece of his campaign. The reason we need more homes built? Demand. The reason there’s demand? People want to live here.

1