|
ethical_rage posted:Former employee of mine's brother received a fairly large sum of cash (roughly 350,000) as an inheritance after their father passed away. How did unemployed people get a mortgage and car loans, that doesn't make sense
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 17:32 |
|
|
Zo posted:Did you miss the part where they put down half or more down payment for both of those? Putting down half on a loan or mortgage does not absolve you of the underwriting requirements to prove that you can pay the other half. Have you ever applied for a mortgage? It's a lot more complicated than writing a downpayment check and telling the bank you're good for the rest. Unless this happened in 2007.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
Zo posted:I'm pretty sure any bank will give you the okay on a 350k mortgage if you throw down 250k cash. So yes, it is that simple. You are wrong about that
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
Rudager posted:I'm not saying the bank is doing it as some long term investing strategy in the real estate market, I'm saying that when the guy applying for the loan is throwing down $250k on a $350k house, the bank has zero risk of not recovering the money and costs involved in repo'ing the house if it comes to that. Sure, but the point of mortgage lending is to make lots of interest money on payments made over time, not break even on your principle and foreclosure expenses after months-years of defaulted payments. Also if they had $250k equity in a $350k house and took a strict foreclosure with no leftover equity that's pretty bad with money assuming they didn't trash the place into ruins.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2014 15:30
|
|
|
MJBuddy posted:So if you're the banker, the typical 20% down mortgage type nets you 10,500 from the 3% closing cost. Brokers do not make 3% commission (more like 50 points to 1%) and it's calculated from the mortgage dollar value, not the sale price of the house.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
Everything Burrito posted:Found out from my dad this past weekend that my mother put the money she got from the sale of my grandma's house (the amount of which she refuses to tell anyone) in her checking account because she "might need it for something" so I figure it'll be gone in 6 months if it even lasts that long. You can look up the sale price of the house, that's a matter of public record
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Zo posted:it's funny how people are still insisting that a bank won't approve a 70% down payment mortgage for deadbeats when, in the actual original story, the deadbeats got the loan in the first place Because third hand stories on the Internet are always factually correct and complete in detail, it simply must be true and happened in just that way Edit: this would be pretty easy for you to investigate for yourself. Just pick any mortgage broker in the phone book and give them a call. Ask them if they can pre approve you for a no documentation loan with partial funding from an inheritance windfall from this tax year and that you're unemployed with no other assets and a bunch of car debt. BEHOLD: MY CAPE fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Nov 6, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:I saw a woman today pay $70 to send her Publisher's Clearing House entry forms via Express Mail. Definitely bad with money, because USPS Express only costs $16.99 for an envelope
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 04:33
|
|
|
Blackjack2000 posted:As a property investor I've studied listings for years and years, and I've found one surprising simple rule of thumb. The more expensive the area, the more sense it makes to rent. The cheaper the area, the more sense it makes to buy. There are certainly exceptions. If you spent a lot of money in NYC in the 90s, you did pretty well. Well, if you invested in the S&P in 1995 just to pick the middle of the decade you made over 500% as of today with generally favorable tax treatment, it was a good decade to own money
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2014 06:58
|
|
|
Kiwi Ghost Chips posted:You forgot one. Did your parents cosign any of your loans? They still alive? Congratulations, it's now undischargeable debt from hell for them!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2014 00:04
|
|
|
Devian666 posted:That's probably half of their net total income just on rent. He also plans to contribute $5.5k for retirement while sitting on $20k of credit card debt. There's a whole bunch of retarded decisions there. That and I can't understand where the remainder of their income is going. They must be blowing it on some bullshit. If they are paying $3700 rent somewhere there's a great chance a big loving chunk of it is going to NY or CA taxes
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
I like how out of all the bad decisions about houses, cars, and retirement posted in this thread, the thing that really provokes an entire page of argument is paying 20 cents too much for a cup of coffee from a K Cup machine
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2014 04:32
|
|
|
They don't circumvent interest, they just invent new terminology and contract structures to account for the necessary time value of money without explicitly calculating interest. For instance, a loan includes "profit" in a fixed sum, not interest, and a depositor is given periodic "gifts" instead of interest on their deposits. It's just word games.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:In the short term a renter may get away with paying below market value. A good example was the housing bubble, where it became increasingly easy to buy a house, pushing apartment rents down. So if you were renting then, good job. Right, while recognizing momentary exceptions to the general principle created by the high transaction costs and illiquidity of rental units, in the long run it is profitable to be a landlord, just like any other economic deployment of capital and just like it has always been since the first human to exert ownership over the use of land
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
Renegret posted:http://us.burberry.com/showerproof-car-coat-with-wool-cashmere-warmer-p39437491?gclid=CJuT3ML2xcICFSdn7AoddjwA-A&gclsrc=aw.ds He has great taste though
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
MrOnBicycle posted:To be fair, Burberry trench coats looks very good. I'd never buy one, though, since the quality doesn't come anywhere near the price they're asking for it. It's fascinating what fraction of people who can't afford expensive designer clothing turn out to be knowledgeable and discerning connoisseurs of tailoring
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 13:43
|
|
|
"Investing in silver bullets will be the most unique way to preserve your wealth — and yet it’s priced as bullion"* *plus a low low 35-100% premium!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:To pile on, if your car is designed for premium, using regular will typically degrade your fuel economy to a point where it's not economical to use economy. Really? You sure about that? It would have to be a 20% improvement in fuel economy to cover the price spread, and I sincerely don't believe that modern engines lose 20% efficiency with the wrong octane grade gasoline put in them
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Nocheez posted:I had an Infiniti I30 that absolutely needed mid-grade at a minimum to keep from pinging in all conditions. I would alternate fill-ups from premium and mid-grade, and the one time I tried to run regular I got 14MPG in town and lots of pinging. With mid-grade/premium I would see 18MPG in town, and 26MPG on the freeway. I wouldn't include a 20ish year old car that actually pings with regular grade in my definition of modern engines but that's an interesting data point and it's convenient you remembered that one time
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
Guinness posted:Also, where do you live that premium costs 20 percent more than regular?? It's $2.45 for 87 and $2.85 for 93, so I guess that's 16.3%. The choices are 87/89/93 and my car says 91. Honestly given that cars have to deal with a lot more variables in the real world than ideal test octane formulations (temperature, humidity, air pressure, ethanol, impurities) the thought that octane rating can really cost an engine that can stop itself from knocking any significant fuel efficiency in street driving is hard to believe. Old engines or race cars, ok whatever.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
Nocheez posted:It was a loving 2001, smartass. ok 15 years if that will make you feel any better SiGmA_X posted:You're wrong. Go rent a 2015 M4, run it near dry and throw in regular for a tank. Then do a tank with 93. You'll see a substantial performance and MPG loss. It'll run entirely fine but at a large performance deficient. This isn't a new concept. No poo poo an $80,000 turbocharged sports car would suffer a performance loss? The specific claim I'm disputing is that per the poster above "if your car is designed for premium, using regular will typically degrade your fuel economy to a point where it's not economical to use economy" i.e. premium gas will pay for itself in increased fuel efficiency in street driving, not that 400 hp sports cars do not perform optimally while being floored around a track with low octane gas. Since you brought up BMW, here's my brand new 3 series on its first road trip with lowly 87 octane:  Does anyone want to seriously claim that putting 91/93 octane in a car with modern knock sensing and ignition timing - which was invented to deal with numerous environmental and fuel quality variables in vehicles sold around the entire planet, not to compensate for people putting the wrong grade of gas in the car - will give freebie 16% increased fuel efficiency for the average commuting driver, equaling or exceeding the increased cost at the pump today down the street from my house?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2014 07:37
|
|
|
HelloIAmYourHeart posted:How about this reddit guy? Police took my life savings after OP and his friend got pulled over. It is dumb to carry huge amounts of cash but a lot of people do it for all kinds of reasons, and bullshit administrative seizure of cash, valuables, and vehicles belonging to people never charged with a crime or charged with some minor traffic offense is a real thing
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2015 09:33
|
|
|
Rudager posted:Maybe you didn't read it but, "his friend" had a "personal amount" of Marijuana in the car as well. Why in your mind does the possession of a small amount of marijuana ("personal amount" presumably implying a misdemeanor/non-distribution or decriminalized quantity in whatever locale) by a second party entitle the police to seize $20,000 they stumble upon without a criminal charge or due seizure process?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2015 12:03
|
|
|
Rudager posted:I'm sorry I have to break it down to the absolute base level for you, but there was a reason that I put quotes around "personal amount" and "his friend". I get what you're implying but not everybody that happens to be in the same car as a joint is a drug dealer and the fact that you're just assuming the guy is lying is precisely the problem with civil forfeiture
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2015 12:31
|
|
|
Magic Underwear posted:No, but in the same car as weed AND 20k cash is extremely suspicious. Plus he won't even give any alternate explanation for the money. I think he should have a chance to get his money back but this is exactly the thing civil forfeiture was made for, before it was abused by greedy pigs. Right, and in any other circumstance when the police have suspicion that you are doing something wrong ("probable cause") they obtain a warrant and then arrest you and charge you with a crime. Civil forfeiture was made for seizing trafficked drugs, counterfeit goods, and assets of people like drug lords and foreign despots that are difficult for practical and jurisdictional reasons to prosecute - decidedly NOT to freely grab at cash or anything else of value local police might stumble across during traffic stops.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
HelloIAmYourHeart posted:My point in posting that story was that carrying your "life savings" in cash is bad with money. The car could have crashed and caught on fire, or he could have been carjacked and robbed. No question about it but "abject financial ruin with little or no recourse at the hands of law enforcement" should not be on that list of hazards.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
100 HOGS AGREE posted:Anything over like a couple grand in cash is probable cause enough for the police to seize it without charging you and then you have to go to court to prove it was your legally acquired money. This happens constantly because police departments get to keep a portion of it for their operating costs. Yep, the perverse incentives that make police more interested in finding a jackpot than actually stopping crime are a big part of the problem, especially in the era of police militarization and all the cool expensive poo poo that requires. At least some states have effectively abolished civil forfeiture by either imposing onerous standards of evidence or taking away the golden carrot by putting proceeds of forfeiture into a general fund rather than going directly to the seizing agency.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Not a Children posted:A lot of white-collar employers have a clause in their hiring documents that requires employees to get approval to take on other work. If an employer finds out, it's pretty much up to them how they react. They might not care if he's getting all his work done, but they may potentially sue him depending on the terms of his employment. He could easily get taken to court for some sort of fraud. I bet he'd get fired but what would be the point of suing the guy?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
TwoSheds posted:Set an example for the next guy that thinks of doubling down on the company dime? You don't think firing would accomplish that?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
A doctor's office would almost always take a couple hundred bucks for copays or visit charges but definitely ask if you're like paying for a surgery or something in cash
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2015 15:28
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:They can ask all they want, and then you can say "and I withdrew savings in cash so we can both save money on this transaction." What are they going to do, call the bank and ask how to fill out a SAR? A doctor's office receptionist or some accounts receivable clerk does not want to sit there with thousands of dollars cash in a drawer for the exact same reasons the original poster didn't want to have $17k sitting around in his/her house
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
Knyteguy posted:Furniture is mostly unnecessary. They had really nice modern style couches, a nice tv stand, and well a kind of crappy dining room table (which they gave to us so that was cool). All of that has been replaced. The dining room table could be justified I suppose. How can they finance more cars with a recent repo?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2015 02:50
|
|
|
laxbro posted:http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/01/26/distressed-family-swamped-by-an-underwater-home/ On one hand I feel bad for anyone caught up in the mortgage bubble, on the other hand they make $100k and have been freeloading in a custom built $600k house for six years
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
Barry posted:Ok, but in this specific example (swapping out 1 unit for 36 units), how could that single event cause rent to go up? You now have 36x the units that you used to (give or take based upon sizes and all that, naturally). It's not like one for 36, it's like 8 for 36 and some of those were already sublet and partitioned. You are correct that strictly replacing X units with X+Y units would in theory drive rent down, but the error in your observation is that housing units are not a strictly fungible commodity competing solely on price. The developer knocks down relatively undesirable property (which they paid a premium for anyways if the sellers had any savvy) and replaces it with high trim, high accomodation luxury rental and prices to recoup their costs plus a profit. There's limited demand elasticity in the housing market because at the end of the day, people have to live somewhere and eventually they just have to choose one of the options available regardless of the price or be homeless. Relatively few people can simply abstain from the housing market until a favorable opportunity presents itself (e.g. crashing a couch or parents house).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
Devian666 posted:I'm the guy held under the thumb of the bank even though I chose to borrow money from them. Sure you have a point, but it's not like banks have ever been known to go out of their way to structure everything about bank accounts and credit cards against the consumer in order to maximize fees and interest, no siree
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:I get that every day at work. "I forgot to pay so the evil company cancelled my policy AND wanted me to pay a reinstatement fee AND wanted me to pay last months premium that I never paid! THE NERVE OF THE EVIL COMPANY". Consequently they are the same people likely to reject automatic payments because ~reasons~, then flip out when their bills are late. Do you realize that millions of people cannot get a regular "free" bank account even if they want one? Reasons for this range from bad credit to being blacklisted for previous account closures to being in the US undocumented/illegally. There are entire empires of services clamoring to nickel and dime the "unbanked", these fee-based debit cards for people paid in cash chief among them. Google Wallet is entirely free to use - as long as you have a checking account. Otherwise it's a 3% transfer fee to fund.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2015 05:49
|
|
|
Those are some seriously awful lease deals on those cars
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
Rudager posted:Guys, don't you seem to understand, he has UNLIMITED EARNING POTENTIAL! All he has to do is earn more, duh. Of course you can, you are typically but not always underwater on a lease in the dollar value of $(car value - lease payoff amount)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
Golluk posted:I suspect those may be fully loaded vehicles, which can bring up the cost substantially (Gotta have that $1400 nav system). It boggles my mind how a guy in car sales could be over paying by that much on a car. Still I pay less than either of those cars for a BMW. He's probably getting ruined by a combination of expensive financing, bad residuals, and a bad sale price (still the most important variable in a lease just like any automotive transaction).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 17:32 |
|
|
icehewk posted:Community college for two years and then a state university is the way to go. Unless you want to enter a career where degree prestige potentially matters a lot to your long-term career prospects, like law, finance, consulting, academics, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2015 05:55
|
|