oi.

Maryland residents broadly characterized as being homeowners rose from 67% to 74% then fell back to 68%. Ho hum.

Aside from the general skepticism about the validity of numbers used when I see ANY statistical report and even more the poorly phrased and and wholly subjective survey questions attempting to ferret out "why X is so"... even if they're all correct: so what?

People move because it makes sense on some level. Like illegal border crossing that sense is almost always about their personal economics to justify cutting ties to home and family.
---

As to the Q of nicer vs cheaper..
relative to what?

Aside from a few martyrs and masochists (they do exist!) people will generally choose to live in relatively close proximity to their work in as nice a situation as their earnings (presumably) from that work will allow them to do.

Whether in conscious compliance with these elemental truths or acting in extreme opposition to them... people will engage in all manner of er, rationalization when asked to justify why they made their specific (and even general) choices.

As the years grow between now and college, I find myself picking cheaper slightly less intensely. That said, I'm far from Mr. Rational's "relatively close proximity" to work plus "in as nice a situation" as earnings allow. I'm still significantly under budget because I found a very nice place that's inexpensive. And even as I consider buying a home, my personal price range is still below what the banks would give - though that's also because some of the pricier properties in the neighborhood still seem like money pits waiting to happen. I prefer to save more for retirement now than have a top-of-the-line living situation.

Since homeowners are probably far mor e liely to answer the Census, im guessing that rental figures are lower on paper then they are in reality .

Its not just a case of ilegal immigrants not answering the Census. Im guessing that there are thousands of people in Baltimore alone that are renting a room in someone's house and are "off the radar" as far as the Government and Census are concerned [a large portion of this City is working" off the books" on construction and restraunt jobs]

This might explain why the "average rent " for apartments that is publicised is often way higher then the ones that i see in the neighborhood. This figure includes the "average rent" of apartment complexes.But probably doesnt include the back bedroom that's being rented out by some old lady in Fells Point.

As to the original question, i would say that when i rented, i tried to find the cheapest place that i could find.But that was because i was on a fairly low income back then.Im guessing that the higher a person's income is, the more emphasis that they can put on comfort and quality of an apartment or house.

To Justine:

Aside from a few martyrs and masochists (they do exist!) people will generally choose to live in relatively close proximity to their work to keep their commute cost and time down to the largest extent possible, in as nice a situation as their earnings (presumably from that work) will allow them to do, and within the limits allowed by what other constraints they have or have had imposed on themselves.

I think that covers all the bases.
Better? ;)

And I absolutely applaud your focus on a retirement savings goal.

I don't think the future of living situations in the US is going to be about owning vs renting. The reality is about a) employment and b) energy costs.

If you don't have strong employment (not just % employed, but the types of incomes and steady jobs that promote a strong middle class) then you can't have rising housing prices or a healthy market for new buyers qualifying for mortgages. Something like 1/2 the people in the US earn under $500/wk. For the most part, that means they'd find it tough to save up a decent down payment. It also means they really do not have the cash flow to handle major repairs, fix the house up, and so forth. Even though they could probably stretch and do it, it won't be a comfortable situation when it comes to cash flow... they'll always be very tight on money. This is why jobs are important. More people will be able to buy homes when (if) there are stable, well paying jobs. In the housing bubble, we saw a lot of jobs go poof overnight, because they were built on lies. Meanwhile, a lot of good manufacturing and IT jobs went overseas... this is a problem for the housing market and the country at large.

Secondly, owning vs renting is overshadowed by energy prices. Gas and food prices may fluctuate a little in the short term, but in the long term, gas and food will only go UP. The earth has plenty of oil and fuel, but we've already extracted most of the "cheap" oil (near the earth's surface, in easily-reachable deposits). This affects food because producing food is energy intensive and because most fertilizers and pesticides are petroleum-based. Why does this matter to housing? More money on heating/cooling, higher prices at the gas pump, and higher prices at the food store mean less money for housing. It also means people less willing to buy a McMansion or to live in the exurbs and commute an hour to work. Whether people rent on buy is irrelevant... housing close to jobs will be the key. The city needs to do something to take advantage of this--it's one of the city's biggest advantages over Baltimore County/Howard/Harford/Carroll.