|
Volmarias posted:Have you never felt this? It's like being embraced by a toasty warm crotch angel. It's been a while I'm a filthy poor who has to go to a laundromat. (Free drying! Good with money!)
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 07:35 |
|
|
Alright, maybe the kept husband part was a stretch. I was told at one point I would never have to work though. Anyways, here is someone GWM, teetering on the brink of being BWM going forward. https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/57t83s/im_24_4_months_ago_i_quit_my_job_and_moved_into_a/ I'm 24, 4 months ago I quit my job and moved into a truck. I have $49k in the bank, what do I do with it? posted:As the title says I now live in a truck and have been exploring the United States. I have no debt and no investments, all 49k sitting in a checking or savings account. I was saving to buy a house but upon house searching I decided to hit the road and have been having the time of my life. My expenses are around $ 500 a month, mostly gas and food. I have always been scared to invest my money, it's my life savings, it gives me freedom. But I know it's losing value and I should be doing something with it. I'm scared if I put it in the market it will go down when I need it. And I don't want to tie it up, I like it being liquid I have no idea what my future holds or when I will need it. Please help me Pesonal Finance, put my mind at ease and help me understand my options.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
I posted a while back when my sister in law and her husband were considering doing rent-to own, I suggested to them them not to but... Well they did it and its been 9 months or so, weather is finally getting cold and their furnace recently died. They said that they will have to buy their own replacement because the contract says that they're on the hook for all repairs even though they haven't exercised the option to buy the house yet. I didn't think you could sign away your rights as a renter. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
BraveUlysses posted:I posted a while back when my sister in law and her husband were considering doing rent-to own, I suggested to them them not to but... All the fun unexpected costs of home ownership with none of the building equity, what a great idea!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
I don't think you can sign away your rights as a renter. Also they would probably be better off just moving and losing whatever "equity" they have in the house instead of buying a new furnace.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
Hashtag Banterzone posted:I don't think you can sign away your rights as a renter. Hobofire in the living room is GWM.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
Living in countries where your personal comfort depends on the seasons is BWM.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
BraveUlysses posted:I posted a while back when my sister in law and her husband were considering doing rent-to own, I suggested to them them not to but... Yeah generally you can't actually sign away your rights, they should move. You should keep us apprised when they refuse to move and do some half-assed fix/get evicted somehow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
I told my SiL that you can't sign your rights away and they need to get the owner to fix it. Hopefully they will get it fixed. I have a feeling they will pay out of pocket, due to 'sunk costs' and not being willing to walk away from the money going towards the rent-to-own part of the contract, or fear that they owner will kick them to the curb after the first year if they bother them with repair requests. OBAMNA PHONE fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Oct 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
BraveUlysses posted:or fear that they owner will kick them to the curb after the first year if they bother them with repair requests. Can that even happen? I mean, if you can be evicted while making all your necessary rent payments on a Rent-to-Own, what stops a landlord from waiting until Year X-1 and then kicking you so that you lose all equity, then starting over? (Or raising your rent sky-high for the final year so that you can't afford it?)
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
This does not seem like a very good ownership structure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
Because it's not, and it's mostly used by people with lovely credit and/or no savings who are desperate to buy a home anyway. You still have to qualify for a mortgage at the end(can't get one? you're SOL, wave goodbye to the 'downpayment' you've been building and all those extra fees you paid on top of normal rent), you're locked into the purchase price set at the start of the agreement(hope the housing market doesn't go down!), you're SOL if the landlord loses the property for any reason, and the rent-to-buy industry is poorly regulated & full of scummy landlords trying to take advantage of tenants(who likely can't afford a lawyer, because they're broke and have lovely credit). It has zero advantages over renting normally & saving money/repairing credit in the meanwhile.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
I can't see how a non-crooked landlord would ever enter into that agreement anyway. So you're going to sign up to keep a specific tenant in the property for God knows how long and hope they qualify for a mortgage at the end of it? The only way that thing makes sense from the landlord's perspective is if you have the same rights to terminate a lease as in a normal rental, which means any tenants would be utterly insane to agree to it. It's a real shame that we sold everyone on this house, car, and 2.5 children American Dream bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Lol that rent to buy sounds like the great GWM rental contract ever, for the landlord. Is the rent above market value too?mastershakeman posted:I was a stay at home dad for 6 months. it sucks. maybe the key to being a kept husband is no kids and maids
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:I can't see how a non-crooked landlord would ever enter into that agreement anyway. So you're going to sign up to keep a specific tenant in the property for God knows how long and hope they qualify for a mortgage at the end of it? The only way that thing makes sense from the landlord's perspective is if you have the same rights to terminate a lease as in a normal rental, which means any tenants would be utterly insane to agree to it. It's only a shame because we stopped paying enough to afford a home. Houses are loving boss and claiming that it's better to rent is just sour grapes cause no one can afford it anymore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
The really valuable part of buying a house for most people is the staibiltiy in your housing situation it provides. Houses aren't an 'investment', but knowing your housing expenses and having the option to stay in the same place for years is very valuable, especially in terms of building actual communities. It's hard when the best you have is a one-year period and then you don't know if you will have to move, or how far you will have to go. NancyPants posted:I can't see how a non-crooked landlord would ever enter into that agreement anyway. So you're going to sign up to keep a specific tenant in the property for God knows how long and hope they qualify for a mortgage at the end of it? The only way that thing makes sense from the landlord's perspective is if you have the same rights to terminate a lease as in a normal rental, which means any tenants would be utterly insane to agree to it. The only way a non-predatory rent-to-own makes sense is if the landlord is some sort of non-profit/government program that has the objective of housing people who have trouble qualifying for traditional mortgages. Otherwise a landlord would just sell conventionally, or use the predatory version where people pay you higher than usual rent for years before something slips up and they lose the option to buy (plus the money they have paid so far).
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
quote:The really valuable part of buying a house for most people is the staibiltiy in your housing situation it provides. Houses aren't an 'investment', but knowing your housing expenses and having the option to stay in the same place for years is very valuable, especially in terms of building actual communities. It's hard when the best you have is a one-year period and then you don't know if you will have to move, or how far you will have to go. I love how neither my family nor my wife's family understands this.  : Why aren't you buying a home? You should be buying a home by now and building equity! : The average house here is 9X my gross wages (bay area), the break-even point is around 10 years, and I'm on my 5th job in nine years because of the way my industry works. : You're not getting any younger! : I... know that? : GRANDKIDS!!!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
Sundae posted:I love how neither my family nor my wife's family understands this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
You need to build equity in your children so when your furnace or roof goes to poo poo they can repair them for you, y'see
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
Not a Children posted:You need to build equity in your children so when your furnace or roof goes to poo poo they can repair them for you, y'see This is literally why my great-grandparents had 9 kids. Why pay for farm labor when you can make your own and save?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
BigDave posted:This is literally why my great-grandparents had 9 kids. Why pay for farm labor when you can make your own and save? Better yet take in foster kids and force them to work, the state will pay YOU to do it!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
SiGmA_X posted:Lol that rent to buy sounds like the great GWM rental contract ever, for the landlord. Is the rent above market value too? Not expensive hobbies. Just time consuming hobbies. Widdling, for instance. Maybe making expensive hand made dollhouse furniture. Learn how to tan your own leather and make some wallets from raw cowhide. Raise and breed horses. Horses have to be cheap if you board them yourself! There's endless possibilities!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:Better yet take in foster kids and force them to work, the state will pay YOU to do it! Didn't the sov citizens that took over that national park greeting center do this?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Didn't the sov citizens that took over that national park greeting center do this? That group has a name. It's "Y'all Qaeda"
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Didn't the sov citizens that took over that national park greeting center do this? Yeah I got the idea from that thread
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
There was a statewide raise of 1.5% that went into effect in October. But our payroll operates on a two-week lag and the first and second of October were weekends, so there were no payable hours for salaried employees. We just had a state judge (who makes around 210k a year) come complain to HR about the 1.5% raise not being incorporated into their October 14th check and that they needed the money because they budgeted that week with the assumption that they would have the raise in that paycheck and now they were going to be late on their mortgage payment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Not expensive hobbies. Just time consuming hobbies. Widdling, for instance. Maybe making expensive hand made dollhouse furniture. Learn how to tan your own leather and make some wallets from raw cowhide. Raise and breed horses. Horses have to be cheap if you board them yourself! There's endless possibilities! I tried to learn whittling when I was in college by borrowing my roommate's knife and gathering sticks from outside and really practicing a lot, i spent a lot of time outdoors and it was a great thing to just have occupying your hands while sitting around a campfire or whatever. The results were universally terrible but hey it was free!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
BigDave posted:This is literally why Terrible Opinions posted:It's only a shame because we stopped paying enough to afford a home. Houses are loving boss and claiming that it's better to rent is just sour grapes cause no one can afford it anymore. There's pros and cons to both ways. If I lived in an area with even competent rental management, I'd be happy to rent for a very long time and let maintenance/repairs, for example, be someone else's problem. Ashcans posted:The really valuable part of buying a house for most people is the staibiltiy in your housing situation it provides. Houses aren't an 'investment', but knowing your housing expenses and having the option to stay in the same place for years is very valuable, especially in terms of building actual communities. It's hard when the best you have is a one-year period and then you don't know if you will have to move, or how far you will have to go. For some, that's stability. For others, it's an albatross. If you have to move because your job requires it or you have to relocate due to a downturn, now you have to worry about the debt and being rid of the thing. Even when you break even on the sale, lots of people find it more of a pain in the rear end than they want to deal with. Costs to own a house aren't as flexible as when renting, but you still have areas where property taxes and credits can change drastically. You still have severe weather and housefires. What would be the benefits of a program like that over say, a zero-down mortgage with PMI? Would the landlord get some sort of subsidy to make that worth it? BonerGhost fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Oct 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
SiGmA_X posted:Will they kick in for your housing and nanny costs, if you have children (providing you want them)? GWM?  BWM: My extended family. I could go on forever. Actually, this is the BWM story thread, so I loving will. My in-laws had five children. They told all five to follow their dreams. Four of the five went to private arts colleges (theater, theater lighting, illustration, dance), and the fifth did restaurant/hotel management. The parents consolidated all the student loans into one huge $250Kish Parent PLUS loan at around 9% interest. They got that high a rate because they kept reconsolidating ever time a new loan was disbursed, each time upping the interest rate by an eighth of a percent or whatever it is. They had no idea what this meant or how it worked, and they expected their kids to "claim the loan from the bank" to get their portion of it after they graduated and found a job. Once I pointed out that this was literally impossible, they suggested that instead, their kids should take out loans, use the loan cash to pay them their share, and then repay the loan individually. Also (effectively) impossible, because no bank will give you a loan that size for zero collateral, and definitely not at a rate comparable to or better than the 9%. That's okay, though -- three of the five kids haven't paid off squat because they (don't) work in theater. The one successful actress is making payments on hers, and my wife and I threw them (unofficial) cash-for-settlement, effectively, from our writing royalties. We basically paid down our share of the mass loan and moved on. Meanwhile, they've bought a house and expanded it because "they want a big family" which apparently is bigger than five kids. They expanded it in 2008. They are now $150,000 underwater, in 2016, on the house and still have a mortgage. Dad in law is in his mid-60s and has no plans to retire, but I don't think he realizes that his company can choose that for him at his age. Back to "have a big family" again. They joined the state foster program. Really a lovely thing to do, very nice of them. They fostered quite a few kids, then adopted three more. The age range of their children now spreads from (current day) 10 to 35. We're up to 8 kids, for people keeping track at home. Side note: Two of those three adoptees have developmental disorders. One is pretty minor, but the other is pretty substantial and will likely stunt his growth forever and require a feeding tube. Then they told everyone that they wanted to adopt a ninth child. They wanted to adopt a girl they were fostering. At the time this is happening, she is about 1.5 years old and the parents are in their early 60s. My wife and I push back hard, saying hell no, don't you dare do that. The others are more ambivalent but finally decide it's a bad idea. As a group, we tell their parents that it's a bad idea. The parents ignore us and adopt her anyway, tell the kids that they're going to have to "suck it up and be responsible adults" when they die of old age and we all inherit their children. By we, I really mean me and my wife, because we're the only ones with stable incomes. Oh, and if we do inherit them, here's the list of demands (which I promptly laughed at and declined to follow). It included things like "you should find jobs in [their state] so that the kids can stay in their same school districts, etc etc." Score tracker: $150K of consolidated student loan debt (after subtracting the amount my wife and I paid), $150,000 of mortgage debt, mid-sixties, and a (now) three-year-old daughter with three other adoptees under the age of 16. Now they've started talking about retirement. "In the next few years" they want to retire. The dad's military pension should be enough to live off of, if all the kids pitch in and help the way families are supposed to. (Note: These same parents gave my wife a lecture on personal responsibility, back before we were married, when she got pneumonia and missed two weeks of work and asked for help with her rent payment because she didn't get any paid time off. I covered her rent because they wouldn't help. They also refused to let their college-aged children live at home while attending school, even for the ones staying local, because "getting out and paying rent is part of growing up.") Meanwhile, on the other side of the family tree, my own mother is approaching retirement. In what my family perceives as traditional Italian style, we basically always live in multi-generational homes. The last five years or so are the first time we've had only two generations under one roof in forever. My grandparents are going to die soon, and my mother is preparing for what she foresees as the inevitable move to live with her own children. Catch: One of them lives in Namibia, and the other (me) moves every 2-3 years for work and currently lives in a small apartment in the bay area. This mother is also perturbed that neither of her children have given her grand-kids yet, because by the time she was my age, she had two children. We're being... you guessed it... irresponsible by not having kids and a house! How is she supposed to be a live-in grandma taking care of our kids when we don't have kids, and how is she supposed to be a live-in anything when we don't have a house? In her defense, she has offered the money from the sale of the family house to buy something together (more than the other side can say), but her likely sale-price won't even be a down payment here. It won't work. At least, not yet. She also, thankfully, acknowledges that I can't keep living in the family house because my industry doesn't exist where they live. So now I have two pairs of parents expecting me to support them in some form or another, four adult in-laws who may or may not need help too in the future, and an inheritance entirely comprised of sibling-children because of the sheer amount of debt that side of the family took on. I can say no all I like and hang the in-laws out to dry (my wife is even okay with this to a limited extent), but the problem is that the people who suffer the most from it, if I do, are the adopted children who had no say or fault in any of this bullshit. BWM: Being the only fiscally stable part of the family?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Give your mother the adoptees. Boom, all problems solved
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
Edit: ^^^ That is actually a remarkably innovative solution. She gets to live-in care for kids, your in-laws get cared for, you'll just have to foot the bills for it all. Wow Sundae, when you stopped providing us with tales or your woe in the TPS thread, I had no idea you were squirreling away all this personal suffering for the future.  Now I don't begrudge you your job improvement at all!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
Not a Children posted:Give your mother the adoptees. Boom, all problems solved Something Awful solves another family crisis. I don't know why OP was complaining so much when the solution was right in front of his face! *que laugh track from sitcom and end credits start scrolling*
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Not a Children posted:Give your mother the adoptees. Boom, all problems solved Uh actually that might work. My mother is my BWM today: My mom tried to take money out of her IRA to cover my dad's cremation (they have been divorced for ages) after I told her my husband and I have it covered, and she figured this was a good idea because she has "like $6k in there". I wasn't done with my panic attack before she tried to put it on her Discover card.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Sundae posted:
Was the plan to operate a dinner theater as the family business?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
Sundae posted:We're being... you guessed it... irresponsible by not having kids and a house! The only thing worse than this is when they call you selfish for it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
quote:Give your mother the adoptees. Boom, all problems solved Ashcans posted:Edit: ^^^ That is actually a remarkably innovative solution. She gets to live-in care for kids, your in-laws get cared for, you'll just have to foot the bills for it all. Wow... how did I miss that option? $10 well spent on SA indeed! (And now you understand why I kept putting up with those lovely companies. I'm planning for three families' worth of retirements and needed all the paychecks I could get.  )Though seriously, I straight up can't do it so I'm not too worried. I can't support three parents, three young children who aren't even mine, plus any children of my own as well. I can support my own little family and then some, but not that much, especially not with the boomer-sized expectations of my in-laws. I mean, they have a two-bedroom camper, for gently caress's sake. Sundae fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Oct 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Not expensive hobbies. Just time consuming hobbies. Widdling, for instance. Maybe making expensive hand made dollhouse furniture. Learn how to tan your own leather and make some wallets from raw cowhide. Raise and breed horses. Horses have to be cheap if you board them yourself! There's endless possibilities! Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:There was a statewide raise of 1.5% that went into effect in October. But our payroll operates on a two-week lag and the first and second of October were weekends, so there were no payable hours for salaried employees. Sundae posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
Dr. Eldarion posted:The only thing worse than this is when they call you selfish for it. It's pretty selfish not contributing to over populating the planet, or maintaining excessive house prices via financialisation of the housing market. It's also greedy to not consume to support baby boomers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
This dumb motherfucker discovered a fraudulent credit card with a delinquent balance on his credit history and wants to keep it because "it is worth $200 to have good credit". "Good credit" in this instance means 650, this is a good score for such a young person and isn't an emergency so why bother right guys?  Credit scores are a pretty hosed up construct that comes across as a little cult like. It seems like the best scores belong to those who don't care about them anyways 
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 07:35 |
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Didn't the sov citizens that took over that national park greeting center do this? The one who committed suicide by cop did. Even with free labor his ranch wasn't turning a profit. The kids they fostered were their primary source of income. "“That was my main source of income,” Finicum said. “My ranch, well, the cows just cover the costs of the ranch." 
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2016 04:36
|
|
