Buy a second home is common in your country?

[Corinthians]

Hello, I live in São Paulo and always questioned me about the dream that "paulistanos" - who was born in the city - of buying a second home.

To "escape" from the megacity there is a region of mountains, beaches and cities in the interior of state that forming a small piece of "first world" in Brazil with very high social indices and quality of life.

But I have no idea even if that is so common in other countries I think those who live in big cities do not have the chance to buy a house in a beach paradise just two hours drive as in São Paulo. I do not know

[Corinthians]

The city of Guarujá has waterfront residences almost entirely of vacationers













The nearby town is also busy almost by vacationers from Sao Paulo who has a second home there







Overall it until common to find people who have a "sitio", or a beach house, even the poorest middle class can buy something.. but of course there most exclusive and luxurious as Ilhabela.

[Pinion]

In Vancouver, buying a first home is a dream for anyone who did not purchase before the end of the 20th century. Although it is a common second home location for many wealthy Chinese and feels like a resort city (empties out in winter).

[10023]

I think people in most big cities buy a second home if they can afford to. It's an important factor for many in whether they stay in the city. People that can't afford a second home are more likely to move to the suburbs.

What's interesting to me are places where large numbers of people (at least within a certain social circle) de-camp for a single place during holidays/weekends. The Hamptons are somewhat unique in this regard (on a weekend in July, most people I know in New York are out there). In London there's no one place that people go - they will have country homes all over England (or France, Italy, Spain...), and going to the country means getting away from people in London (aside from any family/friends that stay with you) as opposed to seeing even more of them.

[fflint]

In my experience, second homes are less common on the West Coast than they are on the East Coast. Oftentimes West Coasters will rent out vacation properties on Lake Tahoe or in Carmel or Laguna Niguel or wherever, but don't actually own them. My families back East all own relatively cheap vacation properties (e.g. Lake Winnipesaukee, coastal Maine, etc.).

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by fflint

In my experience, second homes are less common on the West Coast than they are on the East Coast. Oftentimes West Coasters will rent out vacation properties on Lake Tahoe or in Carmel or Laguna Niguel or wherever, but don't actually own them. My families back East all own relatively cheap vacation properties (e.g. Lake Winnipesaukee, coastal Maine, etc.).

I think this is probably true. The phenomenon of second homes affordable to "regular" people seems to be fairly common in some of the Eastern and Midwestern states.

Growing up in Michigan lots of people with modest household wealth had summer homes "up north", which could, for simple homes on an inland lake, be purchased for almost nothing. And they're often inherited through the generations, so you have summer memories extending for quite a long time.

My parents have a cottage "up north" in Michigan and the neighbors, from suburban Dallas, inherited the home, yet still make the long trek every summer.

It seems to be pretty common in the NYC area too. I know lots of people with homes in Upstate NY or PA. Obviously the East End of Long Island, Coastal Connecticut/RI, and the nice parts of the Jersey Shore are only for the affluent, but there are huge areas inland that are still pretty cheap.

[Corinthians]

Interesting, São Paulo becomes a ghost town between Christmas and the New Year .. if not for the athletic competition that draws thousands of competitors from outside the city would be even emptier.

Many people say that the best time of year is the one with less traffic, queues at museums, but most prefer even travel in the summer months.

I do not think NY or London, suffer the same purpose ..

"1.6 million vehicles must leave SP at Christmas", in addition there are thousands of people who leave the city by bus or by airplane. Virtually HALF the city travel this time of year, among the richest is almost one hundred percent.

[10023]

New Yorkers and Londoners also leave at Christmas, but these cities also get a lot of tourists at this time of year so they don't get as deserted.

[Minato Ku]

Same for Paris.
The time when Paris really get deserted despite the number of tourists is mid July and August.

[Centropolis]

Echoing the comments about "up north," second vacation homes on the lake/lakes seem very common for people from Great Lakes cities, although as the upper middle class has become less attainable for some people in the midwest I imagine there are more lake homes sitting vacant. I was impressed by the sheer number of modest lake homes in northern michigan.

[mhays]

The whole concept seems incredibly wasteful.

I also don't get why people would want one...instead of relaxing etc, you're going to spend much of the weekend traveling? And you have to do upkeep on a second place? Plus the cost?

I suspect it makes the most sense when people don't like their city enough.

[Tuckerman]

Most people I know, middle and upper middle class, in Europe have second homes. Perhaps this is also due to long histories of families. In Atlanta, we know few people who have second homes outside the city. Perhaps this is because of the climate here and the fact that many live in suburban type settings. International vacations and cruise ships seem to be the equivalent.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by mhays

The whole concept seems incredibly wasteful.

I also don't get why people would want one...instead of relaxing etc, you're going to spend much of the weekend traveling? And you have to do upkeep on a second place? Plus the cost?

I suspect it makes the most sense when people don't like their city enough.

i think some people take it too far. i understand a simple cabin a couple of hours away, that i get, but they seem to have fallen out of fashion.

i think its beyond absurd to have a suburban style vacation house in a "development," especially if you already live in suburbia.

one of the more interesting setups ive experienced is an old baptist retreat camp in the ozarks along a river that had half a dozen cabins or so and a central screened-in cooking kitchen that several people split and maintain together, and come and go at different times. it had almost a utopic feel in a way.

[mhays]

I like how the world (at least this country) is moving heavily toward the sharing economy. Car sharing, bike sharing, tool libraries, and so on.

Now how about shared second homes? We'll call them...hotels. Hell, even an old scammy timeshare would be a tiny cost compared to a second home.

[pdxtex]

Originally Posted by mhays

The whole concept seems incredibly wasteful.

I also don't get why people would want one...instead of relaxing etc, you're going to spend much of the weekend traveling? And you have to do upkeep on a second place? Plus the cost?

I suspect it makes the most sense when people don't like their city enough.

thats because people buy them too far away from their primary home. our family cottage is 8 miles from parents house. it was a total chunk of shit when we bought it but we fixed it up and now its awesome. 8 miles west and you are out in the woods on a 400 acre lake. close enough that they go out there a few times a week. they like living in town (chelsea, michigan) though because its still walkable all their friends live there.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by mhays

Hell, even an old scammy timeshare would be a tiny cost compared to a second home.

before i met my wife, she got suckered into buying a scammy one week timeshare at a resort down in cabo. she paid off the loan before i met her, and the only continuing cost for us is the $600/year maintenance fee. it's by no means a 2nd home for us because it's only one week a year that we use to escape the upper midwest winter for an oh so brief respite.

the people who have second homes in chicago have cottages or cabins on one of the 8 trillion little lakes that dot wisconsin and michigan (or on lake michigan itself). they typically go to their summer home for a 1 or 2 week vacation during the summer, along with 4 day weekends on memorial day/labor day/4th of july, along with a great many other weekends during the summer, even into fall for the colors.. it's not at all the same thing as going to a hotel or owning a timeshare.

my wife often talks about one day owning a lake house, but the idea holds little appeal to me. the cost does not seem worth the benefit. it's much cheaper to simply just rent a lake house when you want to use one. and not being tied to one property allows one to explore different lakes and areas.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by pdxtex

thats because people buy them too far away from their primary home. our family cottage is 8 miles from parents house. it was a total chunk of shit when we bought it but we fixed it up and now its awesome. 8 miles west and you are out in the woods on a 400 acre lake. close enough that they go out there a few times a week. they like living in town (chelsea, michigan) though because its still walkable all their friends live there.

hah! i've been to chelsea, nice little town. i went to seitz's tavern, where you stand up at the bar and there's an old tiled floor. felt like i had walked into 1948 in a good way.

[Larry King]

Yes, a place in town and a place down the shore is the philadelphia dream

Though my family opted for the poconos instead.

[240glt]

Originally Posted by mhays

The whole concept seems incredibly wasteful.

I also don't get why people would want one...instead of relaxing etc, you're going to spend much of the weekend traveling? And you have to do upkeep on a second place? Plus the cost?

I suspect it makes the most sense when people don't like their city enough.

Our family has had this little cottage on a lake in central British Columbia for quite some time now. It belongs to my side of the family (we purchased in with our inheritance from Grandma when she passed) and I'm the one who primarily takes care of it, pays the utilities (power and satelite) and the taxes, and have been fixing it up on the inside for the past few summers.

We love going out there even though it is an eight hour drive from our city, We love the peace, quiet, serenity and nature. It's great for us because it makes it easy to travel with our dogs

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

my wife often talks about one day owning a lake house, but the idea holds little appeal to me. the cost does not seem worth the benefit. it's much cheaper to simply just rent a lake house when you want to use one. and not being tied to one property allows one to explore different lakes and areas.

Yeah for me, the cost/benefit doesn't make sense at all. If you gonna have a second vacation home, you're pretty much tied to 1 spot during your vacation, and can't really travel much to other areas. (And if you are traveling, then the second home is not worth the upkeep). I rather just buy investment property inside the city and rent it out, and then spend my vacation on international/domestic travel. This is what my family has done.