If you own your home
From Sunday’s Chronicle Real Estate section, “If you own your home, you are happier and more satisfied with your life, your children are better educated and less likely to get into trouble, your daughters are less likely to become pregnant as teenagers, you vote more often and are more active in your community, you are more likely to recycle and less likely to get mugged. — From “The Social Consequences of Home Ownership,” a 2003 study by Robert Dietz
“Even after controlling for such variables as level of income, education, race, etc., studies conclude that homeowners, as a group, are physically and mentally healthier.”
“In the summary of his 2003 study, “The Social Consequences of Home Ownership,” Robert Dietz, professor of economics at Ohio State University, concluded that there are four major areas of social benefits to homeowners with respect to their families and communities: education of children, political activity, personal happiness and enhanced property values.”
“The Bay Area — and San Francisco in particular — is something of an anomaly,” said Michael Pottepan, professor of economics at San Francisco State University. “Many people who are renters here have many of the same attributes as homeowners.” That said, “It certainly strikes me as entirely plausible that if you can get people to become homeowners, you’re gonna get better social outcomes,” Pottepan said.
In my experience, Bay Area homeowners–especially those who bought recently–are more stressed out than renters because they’re being crushed by their mortgages!
Anonymous at January 30th, 2006 at 8:36 pm ( )I don’t think these coments reflect home ownership I think they reflect what economic category you are part of.
Anonymous at January 30th, 2006 at 11:08 pm ( )I tend to disagree with the last post. What I think this study does show is that people who take on the responsibility of homeownership also take on the responsibility of being good citizens, raising their children with care, etc. That’s not to say that all renters are lazy or that all homeowners are responsible, but that’s what the study says, and I do agree with the general concept.
If you have no ‘stake’ in your neighborhood, you’re more likely to leave trash on the sidewalk, ignore graffitti, or turn a blind eye to suspicious activities.
That said, some of the most responsible people in my neighborhood are renters that are making huge contributions in our neighborhood association, as well as all over San Francisco…
Matt Lanning at January 31st, 2006 at 12:01 am ( )“‘The Bay Area — and San Francisco in particular — is something of an anomaly,’ said Michael Pottepan, professor of economics at San Francisco State University. ‘Many people who are renters here have many of the same attributes as homeowners.’ That said, ‘It certainly strikes me as entirely plausible that if you can get people to become homeowners, you’re gonna get better social outcomes,’ Pottepan said.”
***********
Does this surprise anyone? Renters act like owners here in a lot of ways because it’s too expensive to become a homeowner. They are “for life” renters.
Which is why, compared to other major US cities, the rental stock here is 2/3 of residences. The inverse of most other places.
I won’t get into crazy SF city politics that encourage “for life” renting.
sf jack at February 2nd, 2006 at 9:13 pm ( )