|
Cultural Imperial posted:Haha yes These have been around for years: http://www.relianceproperties.ca/micro-lofts
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
Rime posted:These have been around for years: http://www.relianceproperties.ca/micro-lofts lmao, seems about right, micro suites for $250k sold really fast in GTA: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/12/23/micro-condos-canada-real-estate_n_6352118.html Developers are even trying to sell nano suites (200 sq feet) as another affordable housing solution
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
What in the loving hell is wrong with people that they'd consider buying an apartment that small? The average hotel room is 325 sq. ft. Can you even imagine living permanently in something less than two thirds of the size of an average hotel room (or even the same size)? Why would you do that? Why would you put yourself through that? Most of all, why would you buy that instead of just renting?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
PT6A posted:What in the loving hell is wrong with people that they'd consider buying an apartment that small? The average hotel room is 325 sq. ft. Can you even imagine living permanently in something less than two thirds of the size of an average hotel room (or even the same size)? Because it's affordable! I'm also curious what sort of Strata fees is required for those micro-suite apartment, I imagine since the building has luxury type amenities it would still be fairly high. also lol 
etalian fucked around with this message at 20:13 on Apr 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
PT6A posted:What in the loving hell is wrong with people that they'd consider buying an apartment that small? The average hotel room is 325 sq. ft. Can you even imagine living permanently in something less than two thirds of the size of an average hotel room (or even the same size)? Personally I would really enjoy it, as I like the structure it imposes on my living space and dislike the sprawl that results from a large house. I'd never pay more than $450/month for one of those though, and anyone who does is a first class idiot. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
Rime posted:Personally I would really enjoy it, as I like the structure it imposes on my living space and dislike the sprawl that results from a large house. I imagine with all the extra costs like the Strata it would probably more like $1000 a month.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Controversial opinion incoming: I bet you could rent these things profitably, unlike virtually every other condo dwelling type.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
What exactly is the difference between owning and renting a condo? You're still paying $1,000 a month to someone else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:What exactly is the difference between owning and renting a condo? You're still paying $1,000 a month to someone else. If you own, you don't have to deal with landlords, you don't have to deal with the possibility of getting evicted or not having your lease renewed, you generally have fewer restrictions on what you can do, and theoretically you get some of the money you paid back when you sell it. I don't think it's an amazing financial decision that you should rely on to retire comfortably or become rich, as some people seem to think it is, but I'm quite happy to be an owner, given my present circumstances.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
If you own, you are basically renting from yourself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
I could buy an apartment complex in Seattle for the game price and probably make twice the profit renting it out. The catch is that they'd be regular sized Apartments. Not dog kennels.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
Nothing wrong with owning. The problem becomes when you spend way too much of your income to own so that you don't have any money left for other things, or you expect your home to be your entire retirement strategy/savings funnel. Hell, I'd buy tomorrow if I could afford something good at the right price.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:What exactly is the difference between owning and renting a condo? You're still paying $1,000 a month to someone else. Pride of ownership
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
jet sanchEz posted:If you own, you are basically renting from the bank FTFY No one owns poo poo until they pay it off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
apatheticman posted:FTFY Also excited homeowners don't realize the first few years of loan are interest payments, so you really aren't paying down the total loan balance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:What exactly is the difference between owning and renting a condo? You're still paying $1,000 a month to someone else. Schlubs rent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
etalian posted:Also excited homeowners don't realize the first few years of loan are interest payments, so you really aren't paying down the total loan balance. What baffles me is how many mortgages have a limit to how much you can accelerate payments. Oh, you have extra revenue you'd like to spend on paying us back? Naw, don't bother, we prefer having you on the hook. Banks. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
PT6A posted:If you own, you don't have to deal with landlords, you don't have to deal with the possibility of getting evicted or not having your lease renewed, you generally have fewer restrictions on what you can do, and theoretically you get some of the money you paid back when you sell it. I don't think it's an amazing financial decision that you should rely on to retire comfortably or become rich, as some people seem to think it is, but I'm quite happy to be an owner, given my present circumstances. Seems to me that if you rent a condo you're guaranteed right now to pay less than a mortgage payment. If you buy a condo you are making a huge undiversified bet that it will appreciate in value.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
Jan posted:What baffles me is how many mortgages have a limit to how much you can accelerate payments. Prepayment risk is a serious issue to banks, because essentially, they have promised interest payments (revenue) to the other parties who have backed the loan. In the US, government loan market intervention allows 30yr fixed notes with no prepayment penalty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:17
|
|
|
Jan posted:What baffles me is how many mortgages have a limit to how much you can accelerate payments. Why is that baffling? Their interest (ha! pun!) is in making money from lending you money, not in you discharging your debt. If I'm a bank I want to collect as much interest from you as possible, not lose your business by having you discharge your loan earlier.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:18
|
|
|
on the left posted:Prepayment risk is a serious issue to banks, because essentially, they have promised interest payments (revenue) to the other parties who have backed the loan. It's pretty much because of government intervention you have ultra-long term fixed rate loans unlike in other countries.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
Tochiazuma posted:Why is that baffling? Their interest (ha! pun!) is in making money from lending you money, not in you discharging your debt. If I'm a bank I want to collect as much interest from you as possible, not lose your business by having you discharge your loan earlier. I'm well aware of that, I'm just surprised it's even allowed. We tend to frown on debt and see it as a bad thing, and yet in some cases we won't allow people to do the responsible thing and reduce their debt. And why? Because it could hurt banks' profit margins! Those poor bankers. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:56
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:But you still have to deal with the condo board. It really depends. If you're going to do something significant, the condo board might care (and, by the amount of construction noise I've heard, they certainly don't go out of their way to prevent you from doing more major things). If you want to re-paint, replace appliances, or something like that, you don't have to deal with them. You can smoke if you want. If you're taking a huge mortgage to afford a place, it's a much worse idea than if you already have enough money to buy a place either outright or with a large downpayment. Then, you're only basically throwing away the money that that money could've made if invested otherwise, and that shouldn't be a significant issue unless you've put all your eggs in the real estate basket. All investments carry some degree of risk, anyway. If you have less than 20-25% down, I'd say you're probably making a poor choice economically speaking. Jan posted:I'm well aware of that, I'm just surprised it's even allowed. We tend to frown on debt and see it as a bad thing, and yet in some cases we won't allow people to do the responsible thing and reduce their debt. People are going into it with their eyes open, no? A contract is signed with certain terms; if you don't like it, don't sign the fucker, or just renegotiate it. I've signed contracts with payment terms that benefit me (in exchange for other concessions elsewhere, generally) -- the fact that the payment terms are structured the way they are is the only reason, in some cases, why I considered the contract at all. It's neither wrong nor unethical, but I do wonder why people would agree to certain terms. They aren't being forced into it at gunpoint, mind you. EDIT: I should point out: I do disagree with payday loans and their ilk. However, it's not based on the fact that they're usurious, but because people are often economically coerced into taking loans at those terms. if we had a GMI, to ensure that people always have at least enough to survive, I would support payday loans completely. PT6A fucked around with this message at 03:44 on Apr 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
You loving idiots talk about buying property and all the bullshit warm and fuzzies like they're the best justification for borrowing the most money you'll probably ever borrow in your lifetime. I'm appalled that no one here has clued in that your ultimate goal to buying property should be so that you don't have to keep draining what is the largest (or rather should be) liability of your monthly income. Yes that's right, the best reason to own is so that you don't poo poo away the opportunity cost of doing more worthwhile things with your loving money. You guys should google "china" and "stock market" right now because it's loving hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:I'm appalled that no one here has clued in that your ultimate goal to buying property should be so that you don't have to keep draining what is the largest (or rather should be) liability of your monthly income. I believe that was my point? I pay neither rent nor a mortgage, it's quite lovely.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 06:05
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:You guys should google "china" and "stock market" right now because it's loving hilarious. The Chinese stock market seems to be doing fine unless I'm missing something?  Or, are you referring to this? http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/12/news/economy/china-gdp-forecast/index.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 06:10
|
|
|
Xoidanor posted:The Chinese stock market seems to be doing fine unless I'm missing something? No basically despite from a index view looking like a value low PE stock market, piles of Chinese companies now have 50+ PEs. You also have piles of Chinese opening new brokerage accounts since right now stocks can only go higher.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 06:19
|
|
|
Xoidanor posted:The Chinese stock market seems to be doing fine unless I'm missing something? The Shanghai composite has advanced 70% over the past 5 months. I agree, that sounds pretty good and recommend investing everything in it ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 06:27
|
|
|
I meant fine in the sense that it hadn't crashed overnight. Anyone putting money into China right now is a gambling addict.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 07:00
|
|
|
Xoidanor posted:I meant fine in the sense that it hadn't crashed overnight. Anyone putting money into China right now is a gambling addict. The whole BRIC has strong fundamentals.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
So it's a wealthy Cinese person's best bet to leverage capital control loopholes and buy assets abroad, before the house of cards collapses? Somewhere safe maybe, like Canada. Hah, poo poo, this next decade will be a rollercoaster, won't it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 07:13
|
|
|
Jan posted:What baffles me is how many mortgages have a limit to how much you can accelerate payments. The limit tends to be 15% per year. If a person has enough disposable income to apply an extra ~$37,500 every 12 months against a $250,000 mortgage, that person probably should have signed up for a much more aggressive repayment plan in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 13:15
|
|
|
Antifreeze Head posted:If a person has enough disposable income to apply an extra ~$37,500 every 12 months against a $250,000 mortgage, that person probably should have signed up for a much more aggressive repayment plan in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 13:20
|
|
|
Execute all ursurers IMO, it's in the bible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 13:39
|
|
|
Antifreeze Head posted:The limit tends to be 15% per year. If a person has enough disposable income to apply an extra ~$37,500 every 12 months against a $250,000 mortgage, that person probably should have signed up for a much more aggressive repayment plan in the first place. Loads of people with serious money still take out mortgages and pay them off slowly, especially in low interest rate environments. Investing at 5% is objectively better than paying down a 2.9% mortgage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
Saltin posted:Loads of people with serious money still take out mortgages and pay them off slowly, especially in low interest rate environments. Investing at 5% is objectively better than paying down a 2.9% mortgage. That is until everything tips over and your investment suddenly is at -28% which can take years to recover while you'll simultaneously be hosed if your mortgage is up for refinancing which forces you to liquidate your investment and property at a massive loss. Leveraging can work out but over-leveraging due to a low-interest rate is dumb and borders on gambling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 14:24
|
|
|
Saltin posted:Loads of people with serious money still take out mortgages and pay them off slowly, especially in low interest rate environments. Investing at 5% is objectively better than paying down a 2.9% mortgage. If these people aren't going to make additional payments anyway, what does it matter that there is a cap on the amount that they could overpay?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:Execute all ursurers IMO, it's in the bible. Truth
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
Antifreeze Head posted:The limit tends to be 15% per year. If a person has enough disposable income to apply an extra ~$37,500 every 12 months against a $250,000 mortgage, that person probably should have signed up for a much more aggressive repayment plan in the first place. Some people might get a couple one time windfalls, perhaps a sales job which would make such infrequent payments possible. Though its a moot point to pay down long term debt at 2-2.5% instead of investing at 8-12% into simple index ETFs, unless of course people are scared of the market and have no risk tolerance. Saltin posted:Loads of people with serious money still take out mortgages and pay them off slowly, especially in low interest rate environments. Investing at 5% is objectively better than paying down a 2.9% mortgage. 5%  LemonDrizzle posted:I disagree - you may have variable income, or you may want flexibility in how you allocate your capital. I'd much rather have a low minimum payment with the option of making aggressive overpayments than be locked into making high minimum payments no matter what. This right here, I did the same thing with my mortgage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
jm20 posted:Some people might get a couple one time windfalls, perhaps a sales job which would make such infrequent payments possible. Though its a moot point to pay down long term debt at 2-2.5% instead of investing at 8-12% into simple index ETFs, unless of course people are scared of the market and have no risk tolerance. Unless you are getting greater than 15% of your mortgage sized windfalls annually it really is a moot point. If you are in that boat, and you want to aggressively pay it down, then just discharge the loan when the mortgage comes up for renewal. Early pay down at these rates is a poor choice, so I imagine everyone is going to do it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 14:59
|
|