|
you can def have multiple kids in a 3 bed at least up to a certain point as well
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 00:44 |
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:you can def have multiple kids in a 3 bed at least up to a certain point as well worked out for my folks. In my sophomore year or so I finally claimed the mostly-unused 8x10 office at the other end of the house for my own. Up until then I shared a room with my brother, and my sisters shared another. Bunk beds are magical, and honestly I could have finished HS sharing a room just fine... god knows I immediately went off to college and spent the next 3-4 years sharing a room anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 18:43
|
|
|
My family is working through selling off a deceased relative’s estate. Luckily it’s been relatively smooth sailing, except my mom is half convinced there’s a shadowy figure from a county over who is orchestrating a series of terrible potential buyers so they can swoop in with a lower offer and still look best by comparison.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 18:53
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:worked out for my folks. Don't remember if I posted it here, but my mom grew up with two sisters and both parents in a two room house. Not two bedroom, two room. One kitchen/dining room, second living/bedroom. The bathroom was an outhouse. Rural Poland in the 1950's. Her niece eventually got the land, tore it down, and has a modern 3 or 4 bedroom two story there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
notwithoutmyanus posted:This is something they owned since it was built 3 decades ago, so it wasn't like they were refusing us because they were underwater. Oh ye of little creativity. Of course they can be underwater in that house. There have been specifically crafted loan products popularized in the 90s that are made to turn your home equity into an ATM and they have led to a lot of sad stories.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 19:19
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Oh ye of little creativity. Of course they can be underwater in that house. There have been specifically crafted loan products popularized in the 90s that are made to turn your home equity into an ATM and they have led to a lot of sad stories. Well yes, reverse mortgages and whatnot do exist - but it was a guess that it was more an ego/pride thing since they wouldn't budge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 19:24
|
|
|
There are also just "I know what I got" people out there too. My best friend's dad held out for a full year selling their house became he knew what it was worth and wouldn't take a penny less than, IIRC, $900k. A year later he took $200k less when his accountant basically forced him to stop dicking around. It sat empty for a year and I think he could have sold it for more like $800k when he first listed it. It's the opposite of the people who are willing to sell to the very first bidder 12 hours after they list a house when they could just like, give it a week, have 30 bids, and probably get more money. I don't really get that hastiness either.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 19:29
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:The two big gaps I see are: Thanks for looking it over! 1) We are fortunate enough to have an above average amount in savings and investments that are basically tagged as retirement savings. Probably not retiring early, but should be able to retire in our mid-60s with the usual set of assumptions. 15% total contributions should get us across the finish line with a pretty acceptable standard of living. Hopefully we will have a paid off mortgage, too! 2) I am about to pay off a Chevy Bolt EUV that has 13k miles on it, and we own a Rav 4 outright with 120k miles on it. So, hopefully car expenses are relatively minimal for the foreseeable future. Overall at the age of 33 I am about to have probably the biggest step forward in income in my entire life when I graduate from grad school. I'll go from roughly 70k of comp (before benefits) to hopefully about 120k of salaried comp. There is some additional income upside for me, after 1-2 years of experience in my new role salaries do statistically increase by 10-20k with experience... That income level, however, is a pretty strong ceiling unless I do something like open my own private practice or go into an administrative role or something (at which point comp potential would go up substantially). These opportunities don't grow on trees, though. My wife makes 70k as a "program director" at a local college, and I do think could grow into higher level positions over time. Overall is there a super "clear line" to a dramatically higher income? Not really. In case of a real emergency I could moonlight a second job probably. But between the two of us I do think we are fairly likely to see mild-moderate increases in our income over time, in addition to expected annual COL increases. And yeah, daycare, woof. That is definitely looming in my subconscious. hobbez fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Sep 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 19:42
|
|
|
well hell it sounds like you're in good shape. I'd still budget a bit of money for car replacement eventually, and some for maintenance currently, but that's not a huge deal. I do notice that you are counting on the salary increase. I think it's reasonable if it's a locked-in professional degree, but it sounds like you are generally fairly topped out at 190-200k as a household. There are worse things, but the best way to get your 30 year fixed to be a more comfortable number is to make more money, which might be a tall order for you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 19:55
|
|
|
TheBacon posted:So your point is basically timeline? Like I’ll talk about myself. I just bought a 3 bedroom 1300sqft “starter home”. I have some personal goals of children within the next 10 years. If that comes to fruition I imagine I would want a larger house sometime in 7-10 years, but in the meantime wanted the equity and more importantly the ability to do whatever I wanted with my house (especially have a garage) even at the potential expense of 7% if rates do not come back down. I may never have kids and then this house is great, but if I do I do not see having multiple kids growing to adults without desiring a bigger house. Is that reasonable or do you think I would have been better served trying to get a 4-5 bed 2k+ sqft house of the jump? I feel like this “equity” argument is some stupid bullshit made up by the real estate industry to trick people into not renting. There are some major flaws in this logic, especially when you factor in a 7% interest rate.
If you want a starter home for the benefits of home ownership that’s totally fine. Probably the right call for a lot of people. But don’t justify it to yourself as a safe, sane investment if your plan is to sell in 10 years or under. That’s just putting yourself in an extremely risky position that is 100% avoidable. If your goal is to let your money make money, buying a home to live in is extremely unlikely to do that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 20:07
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:well hell it sounds like you're in good shape. I'd still budget a bit of money for car replacement eventually, and some for maintenance currently, but that's not a huge deal. Agreed, we need to have our eyes open about income increases. Good thought to account for the cost of kids too. Again this is “max budget” we’re looking at. It is certainly possible we end up with something in the 600s or maybe even 500s, in which case hell yeah. Appreciate your feedback, truly
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 20:22
|
|
|
It’s a very interesting thing to think about, maybe just due to where I have lived but looking back 50 years the correct thing to do has always been buy yesterday if possible, today if you can’t. Every indication has been to me that getting on the treadmill is the correct move independent of intangible things. For me personally the intangible things are very strong and so I pushed slightly past what I would prefer to be in a situation I was happy with. I understand the overall point, it does seem awfully conservative to me though or maybe is just general when more of it really matters the location/market.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 20:22
|
|
|
hobbez posted:Thanks for looking it over! I'm going to be the contrarian one here and say that from where I"m sitting it looks like you're slicing it pretty thin. At 97500/mo net and a monthly payment of 4500 you might be under that 30% of gross on housing, but you're also putting yourself in a situation where one of you being out of work for a few months could get really loving uncomfortable. I'll admit to being extremely conservative on this, but my thinking is always that two jobs equals double the exposure to layoffs, but it also equals a greater chance that only one person is out of work at any given time. This is also going to be colored by the fact that more than once I've been in a situation where I got put out of work and had 3-4 months before my next job, and it's happened with my wife as well. My question would be how long do you think you could tread water if one of you was out of work? Ideally you'll have a decent rainy day fund to help stretch that, but not putting yourself in a situation where both incomes are 100% necessary to keep a roof over your head is best.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 20:25
|
|
|
TheBacon posted:It’s a very interesting thing to think about, maybe just due to where I have lived but looking back 50 years the correct thing to do has always been buy yesterday if possible, today if you can’t. Every indication has been to me that getting on the treadmill is the correct move independent of intangible things. For me personally the intangible things are very strong and so I pushed slightly past what I would prefer to be in a situation I was happy with. I understand the overall point, it does seem awfully conservative to me though or maybe is just general when more of it really matters the location/market. Same thing for me in my area. Except for about a 3-4 year period around 2008, which is too short to stay in a place anyway. I get not all markets are the same. I get there is still risk like "all the business move out" and you have a Detroit situation. But those are not outsized risks unless there are already clear warning signs, like buying in to a one company or one industry town. Or a city that is literally sinking into the ocean. We still have a housing inventory shortage. It's not going to be magically resolved any time soon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 20:29
|
|
|
Pilfered Pallbearers posted:I feel like this “equity” argument is some stupid bullshit made up by the real estate industry to trick people into not renting. There are some major flaws in this logic, especially when you factor in a 7% interest rate. I feel I should pin that list to the fridge whenever the urge for something new takes place, as it makes a whole ton of sense. In fairness, of years of checking through the market out of curiosity it’s the first time I’ve seen something and been all ‘oh gently caress’ over it. I sent the link to a friend who also said ‘that’s loving perfect’ when she saw. Maybe in ten years…
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 20:29
|
|
|
TheBacon posted:It’s a very interesting thing to think about, maybe just due to where I have lived but looking back 50 years the correct thing to do has always been buy yesterday if possible, today if you can’t. Every indication has been to me that getting on the treadmill is the correct move independent of intangible things. For me personally the intangible things are very strong and so I pushed slightly past what I would prefer to be in a situation I was happy with. I understand the overall point, it does seem awfully conservative to me though or maybe is just general when more of it really matters the location/market. This post is from 2007. Its not always a slam dunk, although for a lot of people any kind of saving is impossible so a home is better just because you lose the house if you don't stop paying into it. A lot of people have lost their shirts because they panicked into the FOMO "I should have bought yesterday". I do think owning is just far better than renting, but you have to be in the right place to own. If you think you're going to want to sell/upgrade/whatever in a short amount of time, that margin for owning becomes a lot smaller
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 20:51
|
|
|
Lockback posted:This post is from 2007. I was accounting for 2008 in my post. Prices did not really appreciably depress in the area I lived in 08-09, at worst they stagnated. Buying in 2007 was probably still the correct call.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 20:56
|
|
|
TheBacon posted:I was accounting for 2008 in my post. Prices did not really appreciably depress in the area I lived in 08-09, at worst they stagnated. Buying in 2007 was probably still the correct call. buying before 2007 is probably even better
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 21:21
|
|
|
TheBacon posted:It’s a very interesting thing to think about, maybe just due to where I have lived but looking back 50 years the correct thing to do has always been buy yesterday if possible, today if you can’t. Every indication has been to me that getting on the treadmill is the correct move independent of intangible things. For me personally the intangible things are very strong and so I pushed slightly past what I would prefer to be in a situation I was happy with. I understand the overall point, it does seem awfully conservative to me though or maybe is just general when more of it really matters the location/market. I lived through the biggest real estate boom in history. I could afford to get into the housing market in my late '20s and then rode the boom up. The exception was that I had to sell one house at well below the mortgage. If I'd stayed in the area where the house was, I'd have had no salary to pay for it. I could afford to move anyway; lots of people couldn't. If I'd stayed in the town I grew up in, I would have paid off the mortgage much earlier, but the town has completely collapsed: the fancy mansions on Main Street stand empty, paint peeling. That hypothetical house would be worth a great deal less than I had paid for it. This was not predestined. This is being lucky. The industry you work in can collapse. The major industries in the area you work in can collapse, driving housing prices down the drain. The company you work for can close its office where you live, dumping a lot of houses into the market at once. Your individual choices affect none of these, yet any of these can eat your down payment. I had a friend who moved to Phoenix at a major company's behest. There was a housing collapse in that area, and then the major company closed its office and pulled him back. He was still paying the mortgage a couple of years later, because he couldn't sell the house. Past performance does not guarantee future results, boy howdy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 21:27
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:I'll admit to being extremely conservative on this, but my thinking is always that two jobs equals double the exposure to layoffs, but it also equals a greater chance that only one person is out of work at any given time. This is also going to be colored by the fact that more than once I've been in a situation where I got put out of work and had 3-4 months before my next job, and it's happened with my wife as well. I don't disagree with any of this. I think if she were to lose her job, we could almost squeeze by on my salary alone (at least without children), but it would be an extremely tight rice and beans for dinner situation at best. In this scenario though, she could probably work at least part time doing, well, anything, to make up some of the difference. Since I'm the primary bread winner, me losing my job would be a bigger problem. That being said, my work is in high demand, and can be done remotely nationwide, so it's not entirely sensitive to a single business closing or the work drying up in one particular location. I also have a license in a backup field (nursing) with almost unlimited labor demand. The earning potential isn't as high, but I could basically have a job earning almost 60%+ of my "lost" salary basically immediately. Not that that isn't a big loss, but I'd be likely to be back in the workforce pretty quickly at least. Pick up some overtime on top or do a travel contract and I can probably keep us afloat for a while. We also have a healthy e-fund. So yeah, I think it's totally reasonable to think about what would happen should one of us lose our jobs! It would be a big deal, and super stressful. I don't think I'm too delusional that these are reasonable contingencies plans should the worst happen. All that being said I do think you are 100% right to ask these questions and going through my reasoning is helpful hobbez fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Sep 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 21:54
|
|
|
In my area of california, salaries have not kept up with the rising cost of real estate. One of those two things has to budge eventually, the two lines on the chart are diverging over time. Could be a change in the job market, maybe my little working class suburb city turns into martha's vinyard like playground for the rich, along with the rest of the bay area... or maybe salaries just lurch upward so we can keep services available, I dunno. But maybe in 20 years houses will cost the same as they do today because of an absolute limit hit to what people can afford to pay.  Nothing's guaranteed, but in the world of sound investments, real estate has a pretty good track record. It's just a very expensive investment, the taxes and fees are enormous compared to, say, buying stocks or something. Those transaction and carrying costs add risk and complexity that can be less obvious to folks who just look at the chart of home prices and go "gosh how could you lose." Plus like, you gotta live somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 21:58
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:In my area of california, salaries have not kept up with the rising cost of real estate. One of those two things has to budge eventually, the two lines on the chart are diverging over time. This isn't new, and it's not just california. I don't see what's going to make it change.  Leperflesh posted:Plus like, you gotta live somewhere. That's what's most likely to change. As in, those who didn't get on in time and without generational wealth will be living in rentals.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 22:14
|
|
|
at some point we're gonna build up and build more right????
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 22:16
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:at some point we're gonna build up and build more right???? Places people want to live/where there are jobs are going to require government cooperation (incentivizing non-luxury construction) and intervention (zoning, telling nimbys to gently caress off) on scales we've not seen yet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 22:19
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Places people want to live/where there are jobs are going to require government cooperation (incentivizing non-luxury construction) and intervention (zoning, telling nimbys to gently caress off) on scales we've not seen yet. oh for sure but like its gotta happen right, otherwise what is the option
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 22:21
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:at some point we're gonna build up and build more right???? It's this, yeah, like there's piles of money to be made building more homes, and pressure on regulators to make it easier is likely to rise with prices. Also all the baby boomers will die off in the next 20 years, restoring the country to a flatter, more reasonable demographic chart. On the other hand, we may have to absorb a few million refugees from Florida. There's a lot of reasons to think prices will keep going up, although not "forever" in a true sense of that word, heat death of the universe etc. etc. "Not in my lifetime" is possible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 22:22
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:On the other hand, we may have to absorb ftfy
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 22:34
|
|
|
While people bailing out of tampa bay might afford california real estate and that's what I was thinking about, I sorta doubt a million Bangladeshis will. But I guess general population pressure also pushes up real estate prices, so yeah them too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 22:42
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:oh for sure but like its gotta happen right, otherwise what is the option House price collapse/correction is a theory. Reality is this problem is at least 3-5 years+ out - it'll get significantly worse before it gets better, so I have no answer. We're in an explicit bubble right now, and rents are exploding because of it. We have a massive inventory shortage. US rents are no exception to the problem, and US home prices are also matching this in turn. Everyone who bought cheap is holding on for dear life and not selling, generally speaking. I mean a 2-ish% mortgage impact on home price vs a 6% impact today is an equivalent of a house jumping about 50% in net cost - affordability index has dropped in half. Entire country CPI's tend to grow because of that. Example: Canada. Canada being a nice example too, where housing has jumped 25% in 5 years and so has rent. Rent prices themselves are accelerating, so either we build more stuff, actually focus on reinstating rent control which New York is potentially pushing the other way instead of fixing the problem, or we're going to end up with more people on the streets. In short, we have an abundance of problems, and we have an abundance of idgaf from society. I would not expect rates to drop anytime soon, which isn't going to help either. Tomorrow's *interest rate discussion* is going to tell us if the US government, and by and large a majority of the world which will respond in turn, care or not.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 23:01
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:at some point we're gonna build up and build more right???? Things are starting to look a little better on the legislative front, but it’s all state and local so positive change is really going to vary from place to place. The US is also building more multifamily than it has in decades, so that’s a plus. Still not enough but at least going in the right direction.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 23:22
|
|
|
California passed a statewide law prohibiting local governments from prohibiting ADUs via zoning, e.g. every homeowner in the state that has a garage or a yard with enough space for setback rules etc. can add a unit, albeit at exorbitant contractor costs these days. It should help, gradually, a bit. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/05/21/adu-granny-flat-california-housing-crisis/ And now the legislature is considering new laws to permit ADUs to be sold separatly, too. The state has also recently enforced a new law that requires cities to permit new housing including in their expensive neighborhoods, and when a ton of cities simply failed to meet the law, the law effectively created a window in which builders could file plans and ignore zoning restrictions, many of which did. So a bunch of cities are going to get stuff in the next 3 years that is just blatantly against their previous zoning restrictions but they can't do poo poo about it. That should also help, gradually, a bit. https://www.planetizen.com/news/2023/02/121599-bay-area-cities-largely-miss-housing-element-deadline This is the sort of thing I mean when I say that pressure on regulators to make it easier increases as home prices extend beyond incomes more and more. It remains to be seen how effective these will be, but the state showing a willingness to play hardball vs. recalcitrant (usually wealthy) cities is promising.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 23:33
|
|
|
Pro-condo posting in the house buying thread? Do mine own eyes deceive me?! In the same vein as this Onion classic, no doubt https://www.theonion.com/report-98-percent-of-u-s-commuters-favor-public-trans-1819565837
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 23:59
|
|
|
notwithoutmyanus posted:House price collapse/correction is a theory. Reality is this problem is at least 3-5 years+ out - it'll get significantly worse before it gets better, so I have no answer. the solution to housing prices is absolutely not to feed the bubble by lowering interest rates. basically the main way out is build baby build which at least has some positive economic effect at least here in  we likely getting limited rent control but that's not a solution by itself
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 00:30
|
|
|
Do builders borrow money to build?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 00:34
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:Do builders borrow money to build? Does taking quarter million dollar deposits for purchasing off the plan count? Here in Australia a whole bunch of them are going bankrupt due to the rise in material prices meaning that a whole bunch of people have lost their life savings with zero recourse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 00:39
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:Do builders borrow money to build? You could subsidize construction loans for builders while not tanking the rest of the macroeconomy so that home buyers can have lower mortgage rates.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 01:07
|
|
|
I definitely trust the same IT professionals doom posting earlier about a house purchase that went fine to come up with a good solution to this problem
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 01:15
|
|
|
right arm posted:I definitely trust the same IT professionals doom posting earlier about a house purchase that went fine to come up with a good solution to this problem This entire forum is probably half IT professionals. But you know how Musk is about that. If you can engineer a network, you can engineer an economy! It's that simple, clearly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 01:41
|
|
|
If the cost of housing never corrects, we are very, very screwed as a society. And maybe that's the case. But since I'm trying to hope that it's not, I've committed myself to not buying a home I wouldn't be more-or-less happy to live in for the rest of my life if I had to. If that means I'm renting forever, well hey that sucks. I've settled in to watching what's available with the intent to maybe buy in the next 1 to 20 years.
Ditocoaf fucked around with this message at 01:53 on Sep 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 01:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 00:44 |
|
|
right arm posted:I definitely trust the same IT professionals doom posting earlier about a house purchase that went fine to come up with a good solution to this problem Excuse me, I am definitely not an IT professional. I'm an IT amateur.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 01:54
|
|