Housing costs, delayed marriage and the first-time buyer squeeze

I spent more than a decade as a real estate broker, and the biggest shift I watched wasn’t just what happened to prices. It was what happened to the conversations.

Early in my career, couples sitting across from me led with the dream: the neighborhood vibe, the commute they could live with, whether there was enough backyard for the dog they were probably going to get. Financial reality was always somewhere in the room, but it wasn’t the biggest focus. They’d already made the emotional decision. We were just figuring out the logistics together.

Somewhere in the last few years that dynamic flipped, and I don’t think it’s flipping back. The financial audit now happens before the dream does. Debt situations, income stability, who carries the mortgage if one job disappears. I watched it happen transaction by transaction and kept finding reasons to explain it away. Eventually I ran out of explanations. The math had gotten into the relationship itself, not just the deal.

I remember realizing this wasn’t an isolated pattern anymore. I was sitting across from people trying to figure out whether major life decisions were financially possible at all. The conversation wasn’t just “Which neighborhood do we want?” It was “Can we afford to get married first?” or “Should we combine income beforehand?” Housing wasn’t just shaping where people lived anymore. It was shaping the timeline of their lives.

The industry publishes rate commentary and inventory breakdowns. What it doesn’t publish is what I kept seeing in those rooms, something personal and a little uncomfortable, playing out quietly inside every transaction.

The math got into the relationship

By the end of my brokerage career, I could almost predict how the conversation would go. What started as a discussion about a relationship often turned into a discussion about debt, income, job security and housing costs. More than once, I found myself feeling less like a real estate broker and more like someone sitting in on a merger negotiation. Not that these people were unromantic, but because the financial stakes of getting it wrong were genuinely high in a way they weren’t for previous generations. Moving in together stopped being purely about wanting to wake up next to someone. For a lot of people it became a financial decision first and a romantic one second, and everyone involved understood that without saying it.

Couples are waiting longer to get married. The average age keeps going up, now sitting around 28 for women and 30 for men, about two years older than in 2015. The comfortable explanation is that people want to establish themselves first, travel, figure out who they are. That’s part of it. But higher housing costs consistently show up in the research as a direct driver of delayed marriage and lower birth rates. Not a correlation someone found in one study. A documented pattern across multiple decades of data. The financial pressure isn’t running parallel to the relationship pressure. It is the relationship pressure, dressed up in other language.

What couples used to figure out together after falling in love, a lot of them are now factoring in before letting themselves fall at all.

The return of practical partnership

For a while we had the luxury of pretending economic considerations had left the building when it came to choosing a partner. That was never entirely true but it was true enough, in enough places, for long enough, that it started to feel like permanent social progress.

Housing costs have been taking that apart piece by piece.

I saw it most clearly with single buyers. Some were successful professionals earning incomes that would have comfortably supported ownership earlier in my career. But the conversations kept circling back to the same reality: the path looked dramatically different alone than it did with a partner. Nobody said they were choosing relationships for financial reasons. They didn’t have to. The incentives were already sitting on the table.

Single buyers face nearly $18,000 more annually in housing costs than couples splitting the same bills in markets like Washington D.C. That’s not a minor inconvenience someone adjusts their budget around. That’s a structural incentive baked into partnership, operating on every person trying to figure out whether a relationship is worth committing to in an expensive city. The pull toward couplehood isn’t only emotional anymore. It’s financial, and in a lot of places the financial weight of it is heavier than the emotional one.

In 2024 first-time buyers represented just 21 percent of all purchases, the smallest share since 1981. The average age of someone buying their first home hit 40 that year. That’s not a delayed milestone in the way people usually mean it. That’s a compressed life sequence, years of relationship decisions and family planning and geographic commitment that got pushed into a smaller window because the financial circumstances kept refusing to cooperate. The people most affected aren’t sitting around blaming the housing market for their relationship problems. They’re just quietly making different decisions than they’d make if the math looked different, and calling it something else.

The industry is still pretending housing is just about housing

Pull up any major real estate market analysis right now and it’ll give you cap rates, months of supply, median days on market, interest rate projections. Useful information. Also a remarkably consistent way to avoid discussing what all those numbers are actually doing to people’s lives.

The transaction cost alone is punishing in ways the industry has never been eager to put front and center. On a median-priced home today, closing costs and fees can mean $25,000 to $40,000 in cash required at the table, on top of everything else, showing up late in the process after someone has already spent months falling in love with a house they now might not be able to close on. The buyers who clear that hurdle without breaking a sweat are almost always the ones with a financial backstop. Everybody else either figures it out under pressure or walks away.

I came up through the brokerage world. I know how much of that cost structure reflects real work and how much of it is just legacy pricing nobody had much incentive to challenge. The friction is real in some places. In a lot of others it accumulated over time and stayed because it was profitable to leave it alone.

The platforms worth paying attention to are the ones willing to actually reduce what it costs someone to get through the front door the first time. Not a cleaner interface or a faster app. A genuine reduction in the financial weight of the transaction for the people carrying it heaviest. That’s the disruption that matters.

What it actually cost

Housing used to be the backdrop of adult life. The place where the actual living happened.

Increasingly it’s the thing adult life has to negotiate with first, before it gets to be about anything else. The timeline for marriage, kids, which city to commit to, which relationships feel worth the risk. The housing market got expensive and then it got structural and now it’s inside decisions people think of as entirely personal.

The American dream is still there. It just requires two incomes, years of runway, and a relationship strong enough to survive the financial pressure before it earns the right to become something more. That’s an enormous amount to ask before the real life even starts.

The industry could say that honestly. It mostly hasn’t.

Blake O’Shaughnessy is a real estate broker turned co-founder of Ownli.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: [email protected]