PDA

View Full Version : What if we stop buying stuff?


baja
07-07-2012, 05:04 AM
What if we stop buying stuff?
By gardener1 Follow Fri, 6 Jul 2012, 1:26am 1,587 views 50 comments
Watch this discussion (1) Share Quote Permalink Flag
What if people just live somewhere but don't buy it?

In the Bay Area, in retirement Mexico, where ever.

That's me. A boomer on the threshold of retirement who owns nothing now and intends to buy nothing in the future. Not car, not house, none of it. Anywhere.

What comes of your speculation then?

Why do I need to own stuff when I can rent it for a fraction of the price? In the US, in Ecuador, in China? Why would I sink my hard earned money into a speculative venture when all I really want to do is live? I can live well without *owning* stuff.

What if more people like me stop buying losing propositions like real estate; we rent, we quit driving around in money sucking cars (we take the bus) we completely opt out of the ownership system?~(I have)~where does that land all of your speculative economic theories?

What happens then?

You quaintly think there aren't more people like me? People who realize that owning stuff is indentured servitude?

I had a meeting today with a financial planner and laid out my thoughts. Move somewhere outside the US, live off the stipends of minimal SSI and small other money, and just....exist. He was flabbergasted. Apparently no other client had ever come into his office without big plans for starting a business overseas and buying a place and making it big, big, bigger. My plan was small, small, smaller. We are 60 something Americans getting ready to drop off the radar.

Anybody with an ounce of good sense can see that buying property ANYWHERE is a risk that need not be taken. You can rent a place to live anywhere in the world and be money ahead. Roof over your head, done.

You real estate fools yammering amongst yourselves have each other convinced that money invested is money earned in the right amount in the right place in the right times and: voila! You're rich!

Meanwhile I'm sneaking out the back door, keeping my mouth shut and my money to myself and out of the taxman's hands....because I rent everything! And when I'm done with it I give it back to the owner who is paying the freight.

I do not understand the American obsession with *ownership*. I'm into the much cheaper and more useful *usership*.

People, you have been philosophically and financially fleeced.

broncobum6162
07-07-2012, 05:20 AM
times have changes...a lot of truth in that. I'm a 50 something and have changed my mind about a lot of things too. I wonder if Taco rented this server....

Ratboy
07-07-2012, 05:35 AM
Facts?

RhymesayersDU
07-07-2012, 06:34 AM
Rent your burro in Mexico, hippie.

baja
07-07-2012, 06:35 AM
Facts?

Why do some of you always demand to be spoon feed?

How about saying to yourself, " That is an interesting point of view I think i will do some thinking about the idea and maybe a little research."

baja
07-07-2012, 06:38 AM
This is the one vulnerability of the banksters.

Stop being a voluntary slave.

Jay3
07-07-2012, 06:43 AM
Why does this guy seem to think that everybody owns stuff? Most of the world rents. It's how you live when you don't have access to capital.

Sounds like he got burned by the cycle of constantly trading up houses, and instead of realizing he should have been content with a meager home all along, he thinks he's stumbled onto some kind of truth about renting being a great deal.

baja
07-07-2012, 06:47 AM
Why does this guy seem to think that everybody owns stuff? Most of the world rents. It's how you live when you don't have access to capital.

Sounds like he got burned by the cycle of constantly trading up houses, and instead of realizing he should have been content with a meager home all along, he thinks he's stumbled onto some kind of truth about renting being a great deal.

Did you get your crystal ball on Amazon?

Jay3
07-07-2012, 06:54 AM
Did you get your crystal ball on Amazon?

He constantly labels owning as a risk, as speculative venture, speculation, etc. -- without any facts to even give an example of what he's talking about.

By definition, a "venture" or a "speculation" is the purchase of a property in the hopes that it appreciates in value, and you make money.

He seems to be unaware that there is such thing as buying an asset because you need it, at a good non-speculative price. One which makes sense without "speculation." He seems to be marinated in the "trade up" culture without even realizing it -- such that the only thing that's occurred to him as a the counter-reaction is to rent. And hoard his money in a retirement fund. Which is fine, his choice.

But here's one answer to his question -- "Why own? Because you just told everybody to rent, therefore I want to own all these properties they are renting, instead of tying up my money in Wall Street stocks and foreign companies, I'd rather rent out properties through a business model that a personally understand and participate in."

Jay3
07-07-2012, 06:55 AM
I wonder how he feels about signing leases, whereby you are committed to pay the landlord for a longer period than just "now." Does he just go in and dictate terms like some sort of transient hobo?

baja
07-07-2012, 07:08 AM
I wonder how he feels about signing leases, whereby you are committed to pay the landlord for a longer period than just "now." Does he just go in and dictate terms like some sort of transient hobo?

Leasing does not equate to buying with a mortgage.

A 30 year fixed mortgage will cause you to pay $400,000 for a $100,000 house (approx) so in todays world of increasing property tax and escalating upkeep costs renting does make sense. But go ahead and buy in 2012 the banksters will love you for it.

HAT
07-07-2012, 07:10 AM
How much do you pay to rent your MacBook hippie?

baja
07-07-2012, 07:10 AM
If it flies, f*cks or floats lease it.

baja
07-07-2012, 07:12 AM
How much do you pay to rent your MacBook hippie?

$1500 cash, good for two years then I buy another so I rent it for two years and then give it to someone that will appreciate it.

baja
07-07-2012, 07:13 AM
define hippie

enjolras
07-07-2012, 07:14 AM
Leasing does not equate to buying with a mortgage.

A 30 year fixed mortgage will cause you to pay $400,000 for a $100,000 house (approx) so in todays world of increasing property tax and escalating upkeep costs renting does make sense. But go ahead and buy in 2012 the banksters will love you for it.

Meanwhile you're renting for free? At the end of 30 years I have a house. If I were to rent I'd still pay that $400,000 but I'd have.....?

Rohirrim
07-07-2012, 07:17 AM
Existentialism says you're renting everything you have. Even your breath.

Tombstone RJ
07-07-2012, 07:19 AM
What if we stop buying stuff?
By gardener1 Follow Fri, 6 Jul 2012, 1:26am 1,587 views 50 comments
Watch this discussion (1) Share Quote Permalink Flag
What if people just live somewhere but don't buy it?

In the Bay Area, in retirement Mexico, where ever.

That's me. A boomer on the threshold of retirement who owns nothing now and intends to buy nothing in the future. Not car, not house, none of it. Anywhere.

What comes of your speculation then?

Why do I need to own stuff when I can rent it for a fraction of the price? In the US, in Ecuador, in China? Why would I sink my hard earned money into a speculative venture when all I really want to do is live? I can live well without *owning* stuff.

What if more people like me stop buying losing propositions like real estate; we rent, we quit driving around in money sucking cars (we take the bus) we completely opt out of the ownership system?~(I have)~where does that land all of your speculative economic theories?

What happens then?

You quaintly think there aren't more people like me? People who realize that owning stuff is indentured servitude?

I had a meeting today with a financial planner and laid out my thoughts. Move somewhere outside the US, live off the stipends of minimal SSI and small other money, and just....exist. He was flabbergasted. Apparently no other client had ever come into his office without big plans for starting a business overseas and buying a place and making it big, big, bigger. My plan was small, small, smaller. We are 60 something Americans getting ready to drop off the radar.

Anybody with an ounce of good sense can see that buying property ANYWHERE is a risk that need not be taken. You can rent a place to live anywhere in the world and be money ahead. Roof over your head, done.

You real estate fools yammering amongst yourselves have each other convinced that money invested is money earned in the right amount in the right place in the right times and: voila! You're rich!

Meanwhile I'm sneaking out the back door, keeping my mouth shut and my money to myself and out of the taxman's hands....because I rent everything! And when I'm done with it I give it back to the owner who is paying the freight.

I do not understand the American obsession with *ownership*. I'm into the much cheaper and more useful *usership*.

People, you have been philosophically and financially fleeced.

Actually, this is not a bad idea per say. But the average Joe does have to own stuff, especially real estate. Otherwise, there will definitely not be a middle class as the uber wealthy end up owning pretty much everything.

but yes, common sense is key too.

DenverBroncosJM
07-07-2012, 07:20 AM
What if we stop buying stuff?
By gardener1 Follow Fri, 6 Jul 2012, 1:26am 1,587 views 50 comments
Watch this discussion (1) Share Quote Permalink Flag
What if people just live somewhere but don't buy it?

In the Bay Area, in retirement Mexico, where ever.

That's me. A boomer on the threshold of retirement who owns nothing now and intends to buy nothing in the future. Not car, not house, none of it. Anywhere.

What comes of your speculation then?

Why do I need to own stuff when I can rent it for a fraction of the price? In the US, in Ecuador, in China? Why would I sink my hard earned money into a speculative venture when all I really want to do is live? I can live well without *owning* stuff.

What if more people like me stop buying losing propositions like real estate; we rent, we quit driving around in money sucking cars (we take the bus) we completely opt out of the ownership system?~(I have)~where does that land all of your speculative economic theories?

What happens then?

You quaintly think there aren't more people like me? People who realize that owning stuff is indentured servitude?

I had a meeting today with a financial planner and laid out my thoughts. Move somewhere outside the US, live off the stipends of minimal SSI and small other money, and just....exist. He was flabbergasted. Apparently no other client had ever come into his office without big plans for starting a business overseas and buying a place and making it big, big, bigger. My plan was small, small, smaller. We are 60 something Americans getting ready to drop off the radar.

Anybody with an ounce of good sense can see that buying property ANYWHERE is a risk that need not be taken. You can rent a place to live anywhere in the world and be money ahead. Roof over your head, done.

You real estate fools yammering amongst yourselves have each other convinced that money invested is money earned in the right amount in the right place in the right times and: voila! You're rich!

Meanwhile I'm sneaking out the back door, keeping my mouth shut and my money to myself and out of the taxman's hands....because I rent everything! And when I'm done with it I give it back to the owner who is paying the freight.

I do not understand the American obsession with *ownership*. I'm into the much cheaper and more useful *usership*.

People, you have been philosophically and financially fleeced.

You should not be renting anything in your mid 60's. Your house should be paid for.

baja
07-07-2012, 07:24 AM
Meanwhile you're renting for free? At the end of 30 years I have a house. If I were to rent I'd still pay that $400,000 but I'd have.....?

A $100,000 house would rent for about $1000 a month. Over 30 years your would pay $360,000 with no property tax and no upkeep costs plus you have the freedom to invest the extra capital while the buyer in todays world is likely stuck in an upside-down mortgage. I choose freedom over ownership. Not to mention the extra money you invested over 30 years would allow you to buy a house for cash if it's ownership you want. It's a choice.

Tombstone RJ
07-07-2012, 07:26 AM
You should not be renting anything in your mid 60's. Your house should be paid for.

Not true my friend. Depends very much on where you live. I live in an area where real estate is stupidly expensive. I have friends who are an older couple who are in business for themselves. They decided many years ago that they can either be chained to a huge mortgage or rent cheaply and use the extra money for other things (like a savings/IRA).

It's paid off big time for them, especially with the current real estate crunch. Now they have real flexability to either move away, stay and pay cheap rent (they have been renting the same place for years and years) or travel around.

They made the right decision 20 years ago.

DenverBroncosJM
07-07-2012, 07:27 AM
A $100,000 house would rent for about $1000 a month. Over 30 years your would pay $360,000 with no property tax and no upkeep costs plus you have the freedom to invest the extra capital while the buyer in todays world is likely stuck in an upside-down mortgage. I choose freedom over ownership. Not to mention the extra money you invested would allow you to buy a house for cash if it's ownership you want. It's a choice.

Where are you getting these assinine figures from? 100000 house over 30 years with 2% property tax will get you to about 230,000.00. That's at 5%

baja
07-07-2012, 07:27 AM
You should not be renting anything in your mid 60's. Your house should be paid for.

If you are talking to me my house is paid for as is my ranch and all my high ticket items. I have 0 debt

baja
07-07-2012, 07:30 AM
Where are you getting these assinine figures from? 100000 house over 30 years with 2% property tax will get you to about 230,000.00. That's at 5%

http://mortgagemavin.com/mortgage-problems/mortgage-cost.aspx


Pre-Tax Analysis
Principal paid: $180,000
Total interest expense: $347,047.41
Down payment: $20,000
Points: $1,800
Other loan costs (legal fees, survey fees, etc.): $3,000
Private mortgage insurance (PMI): $11,400
Total mortgage cost: $563,247.41
After-Tax Analysis
Tax deduction for points: $450
Tax deduction for interest: $86,761.85
Total mortgage cost (after tax): $476,035.56

DenverBroncosJM
07-07-2012, 07:31 AM
Not true my friend. Depends very much on where you live. I live in an area where real estate is stupidly expensive. I have friends who are an older couple who are in business for themselves. They decided many years ago that they can either be chained to a huge mortgage or rent cheaply and use the extra money for other things (like a savings/IRA).

It's paid off big time for them, especially with the current real estate crunch. Now they have real flexability to either move away, stay and pay cheap rent (they have been renting the same place for years and years) or travel around.

They made the right decision 20 years ago.

I'm in southern California, doesn't get much more expensive. I bought my house 9-10 years ago. When I am 58 it will be paid off.

My house almost anywhere else in the nation is over priced, I could get the same house in Vegas for around 100k

baja
07-07-2012, 07:32 AM
Not true my friend. Depends very much on where you live. I live in an area where real estate is stupidly expensive. I have friends who are an older couple who are in business for themselves. They decided many years ago that they can either be chained to a huge mortgage or rent cheaply and use the extra money for other things (like a savings/IRA).

It's paid off big time for them, especially with the current real estate crunch. Now they have real flexability to either move away, stay and pay cheap rent (they have been renting the same place for years and years) or travel around.

They made the right decision 20 years ago.

On buying 20 years ago - Different time different rules

DenverBroncosJM
07-07-2012, 07:33 AM
http://mortgagemavin.com/mortgage-problems/mortgage-cost.aspx


Pre-Tax Analysis
Principal paid: $180,000
Total interest expense: $347,047.41
Down payment: $20,000
Points: $1,800
Other loan costs (legal fees, survey fees, etc.): $3,000
Private mortgage insurance (PMI): $11,400
Total mortgage cost: $563,247.41
After-Tax Analysis
Tax deduction for points: $450
Tax deduction for interest: $86,761.85
Total mortgage cost (after tax): $476,035.56


So is it 100000 or 180000? What interest rate is that 10%?

baja
07-07-2012, 07:37 AM
So is it 100000 or 180000? What interest rate is that 10%?

Plug in any number the formula is the roughly the same, interest rates vary but traditionally they have been about 6% on average. Explore the concept in today's market.

DenverBroncosJM
07-07-2012, 07:38 AM
So is it 100000 or 180000? What interest rate is that 10%?

Just followed the link to see the math, an ARM? The rate adjusts every 12 month. Really? Really?

Tombstone RJ
07-07-2012, 07:38 AM
On buying 20 years ago - Different time different rules

Yes and no, again, where I live real estate has always been very expensive. Also what is your point? I'm agreeing with you, with the adage of "common sense" which sometimes you neglect.

With interest rates where they are now, depending on where you live, it might make sense to buy. Notice I said "might."

baja
07-07-2012, 07:40 AM
Yes and no, again, where I live real estate has always been very expensive. Also what is your point? I'm agreeing with you, with the adage of "common sense" which sometimes you neglect.

With interest rates where they are now, depending on where you live, it might make sense to buy. Notice I said "might."

and I am agreeing with you every case is different. All I am saying is in today's real estate market renting makes economic sense for many situations.

DenverBroncosJM
07-07-2012, 07:42 AM
Plug in any number the formula is the roughly the same, interest rates vary but traditionally they have been about 6% on average. Explore the concept in today's market.

You set up the worst loan in the world to try and prove your math. While some idiot would probably do that loan that is not an average loan. No one keeps an ARM for 30 years...

baja
07-07-2012, 07:43 AM
Just followed the link to see the math, an ARM? The rate adjusts every 12 month. Really? Really?

do the math for a 30 year fixed at 5%. keep in mind housing prices are still dropping. Being stuck in an upside down mortgage is the worse case scenario

Tombstone RJ
07-07-2012, 08:00 AM
If you can buy a ranch home (let's say, total hypothetical) that is like a 3 bed, 2 bath with an attached 2 car garage for like $180k and put a $10k down payment on it, and if you can get a 30 year fixed rate at less than 4%, then hell yah, why not buy?

You can pay that bad boy off by making your mortgage payment and then paying an additional amount to the principle. So if your mortgage payment is $800.00 a month, you can pay an additional $200 to the principle and still have an overall monthy payment of $1000.00 which should be very doable for most people.

Then, and this is key, don't get into any other financial debts. Always pay cash for everything, especially cars. Do not get into a car loan, period. If you make $50k a year you should be able to:

1. Make your mortgage payment and pay down the principle too
2. Put money into a savings account for things like paying cash for cars
3. Pay all your other living expenses (food, bills, clothes, etc.)

Put $150 a month into a savings account and in 3 years you'll have over $5k to pay cash for a car. If you can't find a decent car for $5k then I feel bad for you.

It's all common sense.

Beantown Bronco
07-07-2012, 08:01 AM
There's definitely an argument to be made for renting many of life's "major purchases" if you live in a major city with decent rental rates for houses or apts and good public transportation. But for a huge section of our population that lives in the burbs or country, it's not usually feasible.

For me, I priced it out and a home in the same town as mine that is comparable in size, etc. to mine goes for essentially the same amount as I pay for my 20 year mortgage (within $100) and my mortgage includes all taxes and insurance, so I'm not getting pooned there. Really, the only additional cost I have is upkeep, but that's minimal since my house is only 20 yrs old and my family is full of electricians, plumbers and general handymen. The only major expense I've had in the 5 years I've been there, I actually made a profit on (thanks to insurance and a governmental rebate on the replacement equipment I purchased).

By the time I'm 50, my house will be paid off and it will be an asset in my retirement portfolio, instead of a big $0 on that line for renters at my age. And I didn't lose out on any investment or savings potential along the way because my mortgage is the same as my monthly rental would've been.

And as far as cars? I prefer car ownership. It would actually cost me significantly more to keep leasing the same cars I have now vs owning them. And renting wouldn't make sense since I live well outside the city.

DenverBroncosJM
07-07-2012, 08:02 AM
do the math for a 30 year fixed at 5%. keep in mind housing prices are still dropping. Being stuck in an upside down mortgage is the worse case scenario

I know the math for a 100k house it's about 230k for the life of the loan not 400k

errand
07-07-2012, 08:07 AM
Why does this guy seem to think that everybody owns stuff? Most of the world rents. It's how you live when you don't have access to capital.

Sounds like he got burned by the cycle of constantly trading up houses, and instead of realizing he should have been content with a meager home all along, he thinks he's stumbled onto some kind of truth about renting being a great deal.

This

baja
07-07-2012, 08:20 AM
There's definitely an argument to be made for renting many of life's "major purchases" if you live in a major city with decent rental rates for houses or apts and good public transportation. But for a huge section of our population that lives in the burbs or country, it's not usually feasible.

For me, I priced it out and a home in the same town as mine that is comparable in size, etc. to mine goes for essentially the same amount as I pay for my 20 year mortgage (within $100) and my mortgage includes all taxes and insurance, so I'm not getting pooned there. Really, the only additional cost I have is upkeep, but that's minimal since my house is only 20 yrs old and my family is full of electricians, plumbers and general handymen. The only major expense I've had in the 5 years I've been there, I actually made a profit on (thanks to insurance and a governmental rebate on the replacement equipment I purchased).

By the time I'm 50, my house will be paid off and it will be an asset in my retirement portfolio, instead of a big $0 on that line for renters at my age. And I didn't lose out on any investment or savings potential along the way because my mortgage is the same as my monthly rental would've been.

And as far as cars? I prefer car ownership. It would actually cost me significantly more to keep leasing the same cars I have now vs owning them. And renting wouldn't make sense since I live well outside the city.

I agree buying is the better way to go in some situations, one example not mentioned is buying a fixer upper and build sweat equity. I guess my point is that in todays world in America it is better for a lot of people to rent.

Drunken.Broncoholic
07-07-2012, 08:32 AM
One word. Inherit.

baja
07-07-2012, 08:35 AM
There's definitely an argument to be made for renting many of life's "major purchases" if you live in a major city with decent rental rates for houses or apts and good public transportation. But for a huge section of our population that lives in the burbs or country, it's not usually feasible.

For me, I priced it out and a home in the same town as mine that is comparable in size, etc. to mine goes for essentially the same amount as I pay for my 20 year mortgage (within $100) and my mortgage includes all taxes and insurance, so I'm not getting pooned there. Really, the only additional cost I have is upkeep, but that's minimal since my house is only 20 yrs old and my family is full of electricians, plumbers and general handymen. The only major expense I've had in the 5 years I've been there, I actually made a profit on (thanks to insurance and a governmental rebate on the replacement equipment I purchased).

By the time I'm 50, my house will be paid off and it will be an asset in my retirement portfolio, instead of a big $0 on that line for renters at my age. And I didn't lose out on any investment or savings potential along the way because my mortgage is the same as my monthly rental would've been.

And as far as cars? I prefer car ownership. It would actually cost me significantly more to keep leasing the same cars I have now vs owning them. And renting wouldn't make sense since I live well outside the city.

One other consideration for your scenario is take that 10% downpayment and invest it, over 30 years that would be a substantial sum.

Jay3
07-07-2012, 08:47 AM
Leasing does not equate to buying with a mortgage.

A 30 year fixed mortgage will cause you to pay $400,000 for a $100,000 house (approx) so in todays world of increasing property tax and escalating upkeep costs renting does make sense. But go ahead and buy in 2012 the banksters will love you for it.

And with inflation and appreciation, the $100,000 house will be worth more than 100,000 in 30 years. But your payment remains locked on those "old" dollars, and the payment seems cheap in years 20 through 30. And meanwhile, your rent goes up due to inflation throughout those 30 years, so you pay way more than an average of 1,000 a month over those 30 years.

I can understand wanting to remain flexible so you can pick up and move, but I've never heard anyone (with a straight face) make the case that renting actually nets you money over 30 years in one house. It simply doesn't -- the landlord wins. Buying is like becoming your own landlord.

DBroncos4life
07-07-2012, 08:54 AM
So who do we rent from if everyone stops buying?

Drunken.Broncoholic
07-07-2012, 08:55 AM
Where I'm at in Carmel, the houses are owned by older generations. They bought the houses years ago when the houses we're worth much less. A 100,000 house in Carmel years ago is now worth well over 1,000,000. Those houses are passed down. Had they just rented the entire time? Rent wouldclve went from roughly 800 a month to now well over 3G a month. And that's for an old house.

OBF1
07-07-2012, 08:59 AM
If you can buy a ranch home (let's say, total hypothetical) that is like a 3 bed, 2 bath with an attached 2 car garage for like $180k and put a $10k down payment on it, and if you can get a 30 year fixed rate at less than 4%, then hell yah, why not buy?

You can pay that bad boy off by making your mortgage payment and then paying an additional amount to the principle. So if your mortgage payment is $800.00 a month, you can pay an additional $200 to the principle and still have an overall monthy payment of $1000.00 which should be very doable for most people.

Then, and this is key, don't get into any other financial debts. Always pay cash for everything, especially cars. Do not get into a car loan, period. If you make $50k a year you should be able to:

1. Make your mortgage payment and pay down the principle too
2. Put money into a savings account for things like paying cash for cars
3. Pay all your other living expenses (food, bills, clothes, etc.)

Put $150 a month into a savings account and in 3 years you'll have over $5k to pay cash for a car. If you can't find a decent car for $5k then I feel bad for you.

It's all common sense.


Common sense also forgot to mention that you totally forgot to add in the costs for insurance and taxes... Do not forget up keep/maintenance on said home. When you need that new roof or air conditioner remember those things cost a small fortune. DO they give way water where you live? Lawns and yards cost alot to keep green as well.

Buying a home in the long run is nothing more than a savings plan or a way to insure you have an affordable "Rent" when you get older or retire.

Captain 'Dre
07-07-2012, 09:06 AM
Leasing does not equate to buying with a mortgage.

A 30 year fixed mortgage will cause you to pay $400,000 for a $100,000 house (approx) so in todays world of increasing property tax and escalating upkeep costs renting does make sense. But go ahead and buy in 2012 the banksters will love you for it.

And what does paying rent get you in terms of tax write-offs?

That's why I own property. Mortgage interest write-offs save me big-time at tax time, and I have rental income that actually pays the mortgages. I am therefore building equity off what somebody else is paying in rent.

Owning rental properties isn't for everybody, I'd agree. Some people would consider it an enormous hassle, although that hasn't been MY experience.

baja
07-07-2012, 09:07 AM
And with inflation and appreciation, the $100,000 house will be worth more than 100,000 in 30 years. But your payment remains locked on those "old" dollars, and the payment seems cheap in years 20 through 30. And meanwhile, your rent goes up due to inflation throughout those 30 years, so you pay way more than an average of 1,000 a month over those 30 years.

I can understand wanting to remain flexible so you can pick up and move, but I've never heard anyone (with a straight face) make the case that renting actually nets you money over 30 years in one house. It simply doesn't -- the landlord wins. Buying is like becoming your own landlord.

I agree that is the way it has always been until now. House prices are still falling the elephant in the middle of the room is upside down mortgages

Captain 'Dre
07-07-2012, 09:09 AM
I agree that is the way it has always been until now. House prices are still falling the elephant in the middle of the room is upside down mortgages

Lucky for me, I bought well before the market peaked...

cmhargrove
07-07-2012, 09:12 AM
Interesting topic.

First off, I volunteer to be the buyer/owner making cash off the renters. The problem isn't with ownership, it is the cost of ownership. If you are good at the whole buy low/sell high thing it isn't rocket science. I think that so many people in today's America just try to live beyond their means, and that's what has screwed up much of our society.

I bought my first house, made a nice profit, used that money to buy my next one (made a better profit), and paid that large lump of cash down on my third house and now have about 70% equity in my current home.

I also own commercial property where the tenants pay me, and I build significant equity as well. It is a no brainer if you are smart about buying, selling, and the terms of financing - but to each their own.

I volunteer to buy the properties and have you rent them from me. You can just pay my bills so I have a nice nest egg to hand down to my kids.

Captain 'Dre
07-07-2012, 09:15 AM
Interesting topic.

First off, I volunteer to be the buyer/owner making cash off the renters. The problem isn't with ownership, it is the cost of ownership. If you are good at the whole buy low/sell high thing it isn't rocket science. I think that so many people in today's America just try to live beyond their means, and that's what has screwed up much of our society.

I bought my first house, made a nice profit, used that money to buy my next one (made a better profit), and paid that large lump of cash down on my third house and now have about 70% equity in my current home.

I also own commercial property where the tenants pay me, and I build significant equity as well. It is a no brainer if you are smart about buying, selling, and the terms of financing - but to each their own.

I volunteer to buy the properties and have you rent them from me. You can just pay my bills so I have a nice nest egg to hand down to my kids.

Said it better than I did, thanks.

baja
07-07-2012, 09:16 AM
And what does paying rent get you in terms of tax write-offs?

That's why I own property. Mortgage interest write-offs save me big-time at tax time, and I have rental income that actually pays the mortgages. I am therefore building equity off what somebody else is paying in rent.

Owning rental properties isn't for everybody, I'd agree. Some people would consider it an enormous hassle, although that hasn't been MY experience.

Again I agree that is a traditional way to grow wealth but in todays uncertain climate some people like to stay fluid.

Captain 'Dre
07-07-2012, 09:18 AM
One other consideration for your scenario is take that 10% downpayment and invest it, over 30 years that would be a substantial sum.

Except in my case, I'm far more knowledgeable about real estate than I am about stocks.

Gotta stick with what you know, and/or what you're good at.

Bronkota
07-07-2012, 09:18 AM
define hippie

< Hippias hippo >



hip∑pie also hip∑py

NOUN:
pl. hip∑pies
A person who opposes and rejects many of the conventional standards and customs of society, especially one who advocates extreme liberalism in sociopolitical attitudes and lifestyles.


http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj41/bronkota/hippie.jpg

WolfpackGuy
07-07-2012, 09:20 AM
Lucky for me, I bought well before the market peaked...

Or like us and bought after everything dropped (about as far as it could in our neighborhood) while securing a low interest rate.

baja
07-07-2012, 09:22 AM
Interesting topic.

First off, I volunteer to be the buyer/owner making cash off the renters. The problem isn't with ownership, it is the cost of ownership. If you are good at the whole buy low/sell high thing it isn't rocket science. I think that so many people in today's America just try to live beyond their means, and that's what has screwed up much of our society.

I bought my first house, made a nice profit, used that money to buy my next one (made a better profit), and paid that large lump of cash down on my third house and now have about 70% equity in my current home.

I also own commercial property where the tenants pay me, and I build significant equity as well. It is a no brainer if you are smart about buying, selling, and the terms of financing - but to each their own.

I volunteer to buy the properties and have you rent them from me. You can just pay my bills so I have a nice nest egg to hand down to my kids.

Again I agree traditionally that is a formula to grow wealth. Falling real estate prices of today say it's better to wait, putting your capital in a safe investment (Mexican CD's for example)to build wealth. Also there is the threat of future falling value of the dollar if for example OPEC switches from the dollar to a basket of currencies the dollar will fall (some believe a free fall)

WolfpackGuy
07-07-2012, 09:23 AM
I think that so many people in today's America just try to live beyond their means, and that's what has screwed up much of our society.

This.

Just because you can get approved for a loan on 500K house doesn't mean you HAVE to.

I know several people that got screwed with that logic.

baja
07-07-2012, 09:24 AM
Except in my case, I'm far more knowledgeable about real estate than I am about stocks.

Gotta stick with what you know, and/or what you're good at.

Agreed, once again I am not advocating a "one size fits all" scenario.

Drunken.Broncoholic
07-07-2012, 09:30 AM
This.

Just because you can get approved for a loan on 500K house doesn't mean you HAVE to.

I know several people that got screwed with that logic.

But it was all Bush's fault remember? Living beyond your
Means + banks pressured into high risk lending by Dodd and Frank = the crash.

People buying that big house with the extra bathroom, sticking a brand new boat in the driveway all on a 24,000 a year income.

Beantown Bronco
07-07-2012, 09:31 AM
One other consideration for your scenario is take that 10% downpayment and invest it, over 30 years that would be a substantial sum.

I bought in 2006. Any amount invested in the market in 2006 would most likely be worth less now. In 30 years, it might be substantial, but unless something crazy good happens to the market, it wouldn't be worth the $400K minimum that my house will be worth then (and that's assuming the housing market does nothing but stay flat).

broncocalijohn
07-07-2012, 09:36 AM
This is the one vulnerability of the banksters.

Stop being a voluntary slave.

I just talked to a teammate of my oldest boy and she told me they have been renting the same home for 14 years! I would rather be a 30 year mortgage slave with the write off and have massive equity in the house. Now who is being the "voluntary" slave in that equation? Real estate would have been the fastest retirement money maker for them if they bought in 1998 or even a few years later.
There is always risk in investment but the reward is sometimes that makes you smile knowing you did the right thing.
I would never rent or lease a car, furiture, appliances. Way too expensive. This person is obviously not a keen person for "the now". This is how it is in America. THey can retire in Latin America where maybe the rental costs are not as high but if you are going to do it in America, buy and dont rent! Old people never get rid of their **** anyways. I can drive down to the biggest retirement city right near my home and see them driving 1980s cars with their 1970s clothes.

baja
07-07-2012, 09:37 AM
I just talked to a teammate of my oldest boy and she told me they have been renting the same home for 14 years! I would rather be a 30 year mortgage slave with the write off and have massive equity in the house. Now who is being the "voluntary" slave in that equation? Real estate would have been the fastest retirement money maker for them if they bought in 1998 or even a few years later.
There is always risk in investment but the reward is sometimes that makes you smile knowing you did the right thing.
I would never rent or lease a car, furiture, appliances. Way too expensive. This person is obviously not a keen person for "the now". This is how it is in America. THey can retire in Latin America where maybe the rental costs are not as high but if you are going to do it in America, buy and dont rent! Old people never get rid of their **** anyways. I can drive down to the biggest retirement city right near my home and see them driving 1980s cars with their 1970s clothes.

If, if ,if - we are talking about today

broncocalijohn
07-07-2012, 09:38 AM
This.

Just because you can get approved for a loan on 500K house doesn't mean you HAVE to.

I know several people that got screwed with that logic.

Actually, they screwed themselves trying to keep up with the Joneses.

Beantown Bronco
07-07-2012, 09:39 AM
I would rather be a 30 year mortgage slave with the write off

That's a big point in the home ownership equation too. Mortgage interest is deductible. HUGE benefit that renters don't have.

broncocalijohn
07-07-2012, 09:40 AM
If, if ,if - we are talking about today

14 years ago was today in the same terms. It is a risk/reward venture. The companies that rent cars, appliances, homes, etc. is the same type of rip off (in appliances and cars) that happened then.

BTW, I just wrote that thing. Unless you didnt read it all, you read that quickly.

Archer81
07-07-2012, 09:40 AM
I dont like to share. Renting is borrowing someone else's stuff.

**** that.

:Broncos:

WolfpackGuy
07-07-2012, 09:41 AM
Actually, they screwed themselves trying to keep up with the Joneses.

Indeed.

baja
07-07-2012, 09:41 AM
14 years ago was today in the same terms. It is a risk/reward venture. The companies that rent cars, appliances, homes, etc. is the same type of rip off (in appliances and cars) that happened then.

BTW, I just wrote that thing. Unless you didnt read it all, you read that quickly.

come on it wasn't that long

WolfpackGuy
07-07-2012, 09:45 AM
But it was all Bush's fault remember? Living beyond your
Means + banks pressured into high risk lending by Dodd and Frank = the crash.

People buying that big house with the extra bathroom, sticking a brand new boat in the driveway all on a 24,000 a year income.

That ball started rolling when Clinton tinkered with Jimmah Carter's CRA.

I don't want to turn this into a political thread.

They all suck as far as I'm concerned.

chadta
07-07-2012, 10:18 AM
That ball started rolling when Clinton tinkered with Jimmah Carter's CRA.

I don't want to turn this into a political thread.

They all suck as far as I'm concerned.

Can i have a scoreboard so i can tell weather the liberals are sucking or blowing, first everybody should own a home, now everybody should rent.

Dont want to be a slave to the big bad banks, heres an idea, dont buy **** you cant afford

WolfpackGuy
07-07-2012, 10:33 AM
Dont want to be a slave to the big bad banks, heres an idea, dont buy **** you cant afford

But you can't tell that to the people that did or still practice that behavior.

Instant gratification is a powerful thing.

IHaveALight
07-07-2012, 10:39 AM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/L8YJtvHGeUU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/-PuyYVVVkIM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

rugbythug
07-07-2012, 10:39 AM
While a good Idea for old people. Investment properties for a 30-40 year old are a great idea.

Renting your own home not a terrible idea as it is an expense and not an investment. But you have to be ok with moving a lot or living in a subpar house. Great places get sold not rented.

I bought 38 houses in 2009 and should be ok when I decide to retire.

Archer81
07-07-2012, 10:45 AM
If you could buy 38 houses, you should be able to retire now.


:Broncos:

Tombstone RJ
07-07-2012, 02:21 PM
Common sense also forgot to mention that you totally forgot to add in the costs for insurance and taxes... Do not forget up keep/maintenance on said home. When you need that new roof or air conditioner remember those things cost a small fortune. DO they give way water where you live? Lawns and yards cost alot to keep green as well.

Buying a home in the long run is nothing more than a savings plan or a way to insure you have an affordable "Rent" when you get older or retire.

Can't insurance be part of the mortgage payment too, as are the taxes? You are right about upkeep and maintenance but point 3 can cover that as part of "other expenses" no?

But your point is still taken, that is, it costs a lot of money to own a home and many people don't take this type of stuff into consideration.

broncocalijohn
07-07-2012, 03:28 PM
One word. Inherit.

Menendez brothers tried that, didnt work out so well.

That loan graph is screwy. First, most banks now make you put down 20% so you can kiss the PM insurance gone (plus that only lasts when there is less than 20% equity in the house). You get mortgage deduction to the end, anyone not paying extra on a 30 year loan is a fool and with these interest rates so low, there isnt the same "3 times" the original loan amount going to interest. We refinanced to a 10 year loan and got a savings plus less years on the loan. For many people that bought 10 years ago, add the equity to the plus side when selling.
If you are the type that pays the minimum on your home loan for 30 years, you might have some issues.

rugbythug
07-07-2012, 05:03 PM
If you could buy 38 houses, you should be able to retire now.


:Broncos:

Other peoples money.

Agamemnon
07-07-2012, 07:20 PM
You can't really own property anyway. Stop paying your property taxes and see how much your really own it...

Ratboy
07-08-2012, 02:53 AM
I'm thinking about buying a cheap house in Florida to rent out.

Hopefully more people continue to rent.

I'll profit.

orinjkrush
07-08-2012, 06:52 AM
its also not so much buy versus rent, but rather downsizing your possession of things. it is true that the stuff you own can sometimes end up owning you (try owning a big boat or an airplane sometime "if it flys, floats or F***ks, rent it")
we should just stop buying new stuff 'cause its new or everyone has it. if you have an ipad, did you really need it? really? do you have a 4G smartphone? did you REALLY need it? do you have multiple modes of transportation for every member of your household? do you really need them? do you have a big screen flat panel in every room in your house?
do you live in a mcmansion? (does shanny need to live in a palace?) you get the point.

IHaveALight
07-08-2012, 09:29 AM
"What is this you call property? It cannot be the earth, for the land is our mother, nourishing all her children, beasts, birds, fish and all men. The woods, the streams, everything on it belongs to everybody and is for the use of all. How can one man say it belongs only to him?" -Massasoit, sachem of the Wampanoag

http://indian.malmborg.info/personer/bilder/massasoit.jpg

"My reason teaches me that land cannot be sold. The Great Spirit gave it to his children to live upon. So long as they occupy and cultivate it, they have a right to the soil. Nothing can be sold but such things as can be carried away" --Black Hawk, leader of the Sauk

https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSM3PYzR9h4Yx2E6245PD4JmCTSQ9zdy kmJ2Y5rUGn3b-ZATjlN4w

"I love this land and the buffalo and will not part with itÖI have heard you intend to settle us on a reservation near the mountains. I don't want to settle. I love to roam over the prairies. There I feel free and happy, but when we settle down we grow pale and die. A long time ago this land belonged to our fathers, but when I go up to the river I see camps of soldiers on its banks. These soldiers cut down my timber, they kill my buffalo and when I see that, my heart feels like bursting." -- Satanta, Kiowa Chief

https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRGkZlPmbiidVJVjzSUULIhQH4eJNqzS fPTgm2Z-0CtygWDl2lv

Jay3
07-08-2012, 09:50 AM
its also not so much buy versus rent, but rather downsizing your possession of things. it is true that the stuff you own can sometimes end up owning you (try owning a big boat or an airplane sometime "if it flys, floats or *****s, rent it")
we should just stop buying new stuff 'cause its new or everyone has it. if you have an ipad, did you really need it? really? do you have a 4G smartphone? did you REALLY need it? do you have multiple modes of transportation for every member of your household? do you really need them? do you have a big screen flat panel in every room in your house?
do you live in a mcmansion? (does shanny need to live in a palace?) you get the point.

I could fired up over this message ( in a positive way) a whole lot more than the original rant about the supposed superiority of renting.

I think the real message is to live without debt. A lot of people could really benefit from the Dave Ramsey type of approach. Even if they are not Christian, he gives some very good advice.

Hulamau
07-08-2012, 10:39 AM
Existentialism says you're renting everything you have. Even your breath.

Actually, this is true regardless of one's philosophical viewpoint. No one actually 'owns' their 'lives' ... we are all on borrowed time.

The apparent 'meness' most people are certain is 'you (as in them)' just expresses through life being lived, but the only kind of 'ownership' implied is a kind of mental and emotional phantom ownership that is commonly taken for granted as substantial, solid and lastingly real.

The typical innate feeling of owning one's life ... as in this is 'my life' ... is a deeply engrained psychological, emotional and energetic illusion or misconception that is learned through deep conditioning very early in life and that does indeed only 'seem' to make the world go around ... or at least it's what fuels all the endless 'stories' we all create and adopt as 'our identity', our hopes, dreams, and fears etc. etc.

These lives are a gift in any event .. not owned ... and are best to be celebrated and respected.

There's nothing wrong at all in that near universal illusion of ownership of one's life, its simply how human life typically unfolds. But seeing through the looking glass has its merits and brings a kind of solace, even while living through all these stories to the fullest.

The glorification of, and relentless focus on, the 'I, me, mine' is the biggest preoccupation going, and is so often the source of so much needless suffering and discord.

However, I think we are drifting off topic and into other waters here. :sunshine:

oubronco
07-08-2012, 11:11 AM
What if we stop buying stuff?


Then you won't have anything.....Duh

baja
07-08-2012, 11:14 AM
Actually, this is true regardless of one's philosophical viewpoint. No one actually 'owns' their 'lives' ... we are all on borrowed time.

The apparent 'meness' most people are certain is 'you (as in them)' just expresses through life being lived, but the only kind of 'ownership' implied is a kind of mental and emotional phantom ownership that is commonly taken for granted as substantial, solid and lastingly real.

The typical innate feeling of owning one's life ... as in this is 'my life' ... is a deeply engrained psychological, emotional and energetic illusion or misconception that is learned through deep conditioning very early in life and that does indeed only 'seem' to make the world go around ... or at least it's what fuels all the endless 'stories' we all create and adopt as 'our identity', our hopes, dreams, and fears etc. etc.

These lives are a gift in any event .. not owned ... and are best to be celebrated and respected.

There's nothing wrong at all in that near universal illusion of ownership of one's life, its simply how human life typically unfolds. But seeing through the looking glass has its merits and brings a kind of solace, even while living through all these stories to the fullest.

The glorification of, and relentless focus on, the 'I, me, mine' is the biggest preoccupation going, and is so often the source of so much needless suffering and discord.

However, I think we are drifting off topic and into other waters here. :sunshine:

But it is a great drift. A good thread is fluid,never understood the "stay on topic" mantra for OT threads.

The Hawaiians say "You are your story".

baja
07-08-2012, 11:17 AM
Actually, this is true regardless of one's philosophical viewpoint. No one actually 'owns' their 'lives' ... we are all on borrowed time.

The apparent 'meness' most people are certain is 'you (as in them)' just expresses through life being lived, but the only kind of 'ownership' implied is a kind of mental and emotional phantom ownership that is commonly taken for granted as substantial, solid and lastingly real.

The typical innate feeling of owning one's life ... as in this is 'my life' ... is a deeply engrained psychological, emotional and energetic illusion or misconception that is learned through deep conditioning very early in life and that does indeed only 'seem' to make the world go around ... or at least it's what fuels all the endless 'stories' we all create and adopt as 'our identity', our hopes, dreams, and fears etc. etc.

These lives are a gift in any event .. not owned ... and are best to be celebrated and respected.

There's nothing wrong at all in that near universal illusion of ownership of one's life, its simply how human life typically unfolds. But seeing through the looking glass has its merits and brings a kind of solace, even while living through all these stories to the fullest.

The glorification of, and relentless focus on, the 'I, me, mine' is the biggest preoccupation going, and is so often the source of so much needless suffering and discord.

However, I think we are drifting off topic and into other waters here. :sunshine:

But it is a great drift. A good thread is fluid,never understood the "stay on topic" mantra for OT threads.

The Hawaiians say "You are your story".

Great post BTW

IHaveALight
07-08-2012, 11:19 AM
What if we stop buying stuff?


Then you won't have anything.....Duh

What if we let go of materialistic ideology's and instead surrender only to that which is of pure meaning, not just for our selves, but for all?

cmhargrove
07-08-2012, 11:31 AM
What if we let go of materialistic ideology's and instead surrender only to that which is of pure meaning, not just for our selves, but for all?

Then, there would be no National Football League, and no Denver Broncos. Fail.

oubronco
07-08-2012, 11:45 AM
What if we let go of materialistic ideology's and instead surrender only to that which is of pure meaning, not just for our selves, but for all?

What if a Bear shyt in the woods, would it stink?

Beantown Bronco
07-08-2012, 11:54 AM
"What is this you call property? It cannot be the earth, for the land is our mother, nourishing all her children, beasts, birds, fish and all men. The woods, the streams, everything on it belongs to everybody and is for the use of all. How can one man say it belongs only to him?" -Massasoit, sachem of the Wampanoag

http://indian.malmborg.info/personer/bilder/massasoit.jpg

"My reason teaches me that land cannot be sold. The Great Spirit gave it to his children to live upon. So long as they occupy and cultivate it, they have a right to the soil. Nothing can be sold but such things as can be carried away" --Black Hawk, leader of the Sauk

https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSM3PYzR9h4Yx2E6245PD4JmCTSQ9zdy kmJ2Y5rUGn3b-ZATjlN4w

"I love this land and the buffalo and will not part with itÖI have heard you intend to settle us on a reservation near the mountains. I don't want to settle. I love to roam over the prairies. There I feel free and happy, but when we settle down we grow pale and die. A long time ago this land belonged to our fathers, but when I go up to the river I see camps of soldiers on its banks. These soldiers cut down my timber, they kill my buffalo and when I see that, my heart feels like bursting." -- Satanta, Kiowa Chief

https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRGkZlPmbiidVJVjzSUULIhQH4eJNqzS fPTgm2Z-0CtygWDl2lv

Worked out well for them....

bowtown
07-08-2012, 11:58 AM
What if we let go of materialistic ideology's and instead surrender only to that which is of pure meaning, not just for our selves, but for all?

It's a simple question Doctor, would you eat the moon if it were made of ribs?

Agamemnon
07-08-2012, 01:02 PM
Worked out well for them....

Yeah because their existential views were the reason they were many centuries behind in technology, and massively outnumbered to boot, right? ::)

houghtam
07-08-2012, 01:17 PM
Yeah because their existential views were the reason they were many centuries behind in technology, and massively outnumbered to boot, right? ::)

LOL. Gotta love it, might makes right.

Interesting thread. I submit that my liberal commie hippy nazi pinko wife and I have rented for 8 years (not counting 5 while in college), and absolutely love it...have no plans on buying. We've lived in Cincinnati, OH, Lansing, MI, Acworth, GA, Baton Rouge, LA, Birmingham, AL and Fort Wayne, IN all in the past 8 years. We couldn't have had that kind of flexibility owning a house, and I'm thankful we don't.

I'm also thankful every time it snows and the landlord is out shoveling our driveway, or when it's 100 degrees out and he's out there mowing our grass. Or when our water heater breaks and he's out the cash to fix it, not me. No thanks, I'll have another beer, keep doing what you're doing.

We live a life of simplicity. We don't save a ton, we mostly buy only what we need, and we survive pretty well. Hell, I purposely quit my job at the theater where I was making damn good money just to move closer to family. I could care less about how many deductions I get on my taxes...it's all just money, and the more money you have, the more money you need. Let all the people who want to step in to the rat race do so. People like me are content to sit back and watch.

baja
07-08-2012, 02:06 PM
LOL. Gotta love it, might makes right.

Interesting thread. I submit that my liberal commie hippy nazi pinko wife and I have rented for 8 years (not counting 5 while in college), and absolutely love it...have no plans on buying. We've lived in Cincinnati, OH, Lansing, MI, Acworth, GA, Baton Rouge, LA, Birmingham, AL and Fort Wayne, IN all in the past 8 years. We couldn't have had that kind of flexibility owning a house, and I'm thankful we don't.

I'm also thankful every time it snows and the landlord is out shoveling our driveway, or when it's 100 degrees out and he's out there mowing our grass. Or when our water heater breaks and he's out the cash to fix it, not me. No thanks, I'll have another beer, keep doing what you're doing.

We live a life of simplicity. We don't save a ton, we mostly buy only what we need, and we survive pretty well. Hell, I purposely quit my job at the theater where I was making damn good money just to move closer to family. I could care less about how many deductions I get on my taxes...it's all just money, and the more money you have, the more money you need. Let all the people who want to step in to the rat race do so. People like me are content to sit back and watch.

You better hope meck doesn't read this post, he will call you a commie pinko traitor.

Meck77
07-08-2012, 02:33 PM
If you have too much stuff maybe you should start with your computer.

ZONA
07-08-2012, 02:56 PM
Buying a home in America is set up so wrong. The fact that on a 30 year fixed you are paying almost all interest for the first 15 years is total BS. It should be set up like 60% interest and 40% equity. 99% of people who buy a home only live in it for less then 5 years, that's a fact. So "owning" is really the wrong term to used for most mortgages. You're really just renting but on the hook long term. I was one of those people. Lived in my house for 12 years though. And I bought in a down market. Basically I came out even after 12 years. I count myself lucky. Now I rent, live in just as nice of a place without being on the hook for all the additional maintenance fees such as landscaping, pest control, appliances, etc.

Beantown Bronco
07-08-2012, 03:13 PM
Yeah because their existential views were the reason they were many centuries behind in technology, and massively outnumbered to boot, right? ::)

Not at all what I meant, but not surprised you can't figure that out.

orinjkrush
07-08-2012, 04:16 PM
Worked out well for them....

any civilization or race or tribe or group that does not believe in PROPERTY ownership, must be eradicated by the nazi feudalists: e.g. native americans, communists, socialists etc. its why we could never let castro or chavez exist peacefully yet fully embrace marcos and noriega. its abominable. capitalism has always been the prime directive, not democracy.

Jay3
07-08-2012, 04:23 PM
Buying a home in America is set up so wrong. The fact that on a 30 year fixed you are paying almost all interest for the first 15 years is total BS. It should be set up like 60% interest and 40% equity. 99% of people who buy a home only live in it for less then 5 years, that's a fact. So "owning" is really the wrong term to used for most mortgages. You're really just renting but on the hook long term. I was one of those people. Lived in my house for 12 years though. And I bought in a down market. Basically I came out even after 12 years. I count myself lucky. Now I rent, live in just as nice of a place without being on the hook for all the additional maintenance fees such as landscaping, pest control, appliances, etc.

The amount of interest and principal is not set arbitrarily by the bank. It is a direct result of 30 year term chosen.

If you set it up 60/40, it pays off way before 30 years, like super early. Smart to pick on of those loans, though. But the payment will be higher.

Captain 'Dre
07-08-2012, 06:01 PM
One word. Inherit.

So the strategy to apply here is: "Be born into a wealthy family". Hilarious!

Captain 'Dre
07-08-2012, 06:07 PM
I just talked to a teammate of my oldest boy and she told me they have been renting the same home for 14 years! I would rather be a 30 year mortgage slave with the write off and have massive equity in the house. Now who is being the "voluntary" slave in that equation? Real estate would have been the fastest retirement money maker for them if they bought in 1998 or even a few years later.
There is always risk in investment but the reward is sometimes that makes you smile knowing you did the right thing.
I would never rent or lease a car, furiture, appliances. Way too expensive. This person is obviously not a keen person for "the now". This is how it is in America. THey can retire in Latin America where maybe the rental costs are not as high but if you are going to do it in America, buy and dont rent! Old people never get rid of their **** anyways. I can drive down to the biggest retirement city right near my home and see them driving 1980s cars with their 1970s clothes.

Ha! You're talking about Seizure... er... Leisure World! Ha!

broncocalijohn
07-08-2012, 06:11 PM
Ha! You're talking about Seizure... er... Leisure World! Ha!

Yes but they now call it Laguna Woods. Same difference to the locals that have been here for at least 15 years. They have term limits for their new city though. Well, not really but how many terms can they actually serve before dying or getting too old to care or know?

broncocalijohn
07-08-2012, 06:13 PM
Buying a home in America is set up so wrong. The fact that on a 30 year fixed you are paying almost all interest for the first 15 years is total BS. It should be set up like 60% interest and 40% equity. 99% of people who buy a home only live in it for less then 5 years, that's a fact. So "owning" is really the wrong term to used for most mortgages. You're really just renting but on the hook long term. I was one of those people. Lived in my house for 12 years though. And I bought in a down market. Basically I came out even after 12 years. I count myself lucky. Now I rent, live in just as nice of a place without being on the hook for all the additional maintenance fees such as landscaping, pest control, appliances, etc.

Why didnt you get a 25, 20 year loan? Why didnt you make one extra payment a year to have that go directly to principal? If you get a 30 year loan and then set yourself up for those minimum payments, you should be the one to blame. You lived in a house for 12 years in a down market and state you just broke even? That is on you, not the bank. Either save more to get a 20 year loan (or less) or make those extra voluntarily payments.

Captain 'Dre
07-08-2012, 06:21 PM
L

We live a life of simplicity. We don't save a ton, we mostly buy only what we need, and we survive pretty well. Hell, I purposely quit my job at the theater where I was making damn good money just to move closer to family. I could care less about how many deductions I get on my taxes...it's all just money, and the more money you have, the more money you need. Let all the people who want to step in to the rat race do so. People like me are content to sit back and watch.

Which leaves me wondering how you made "damn good money" working at a theater.

Agamemnon
07-08-2012, 06:59 PM
Not at all what I meant, but not surprised you can't figure that out.

Yes because clearly I'm at fault, not your flippant, five word post...

rugbythug
07-08-2012, 07:07 PM
any civilization or race or tribe or group that does not believe in PROPERTY ownership, must be eradicated by the nazi feudalists: e.g. native americans, communists, socialists etc. its why we could never let castro or chavez exist peacefully yet fully embrace marcos and noriega. its abominable. capitalism has always been the prime directive, not democracy.

Having done business with people who actually live in Venezuela and other like countries, your devil is misplaced.

When the rule of law exist on the whims of a few with no oversight you know you are in trouble.

Agamemnon
07-08-2012, 07:10 PM
Having done business with people who actually live in Venezuela and other like countries, your devil is misplaced.

When the rule of law exist on the whims of a few with no oversight you know you are in trouble.

Wouldn't that describe the many dictators the US has put into power and supported over the past 50+ years?

rugbythug
07-08-2012, 07:10 PM
Yes because clearly I'm at fault, not your flippant, five word post...

does an existential existence encourage advancement?

If it does not and clearly it does not. Might this be one of the reasons why the American Indian was decimated by a superior force.

rugbythug
07-08-2012, 07:14 PM
Wouldn't that describe the many dictators the US has put into power and supported over the past 50+ years?

The person in charge is less important than the way power is shared and the requisite checks and balances. This is on the country itself.

Captain 'Dre
07-08-2012, 07:19 PM
does an existential existence encourage advancement?

If it does not and clearly it does not. Might this be one of the reasons why the American Indian was decimated by a superior force.

By "superior", you presumably mean "more powerful", or "in possession of better weapons"... not "more enlightened" or "spiritually advanced".

rugbythug
07-08-2012, 07:22 PM
By "superior", you presumably mean "more powerful", or "in possession of better weapons"... not "more enlightened" or "spiritually advanced".

Superior= the ability to totally annihilate your enemy to the point that their very survival is only because the conquerors wished it.

houghtam
07-08-2012, 07:31 PM
Which leaves me wondering how you made "damn good money" working at a theater.

Assistant District Manager

Captain 'Dre
07-08-2012, 08:15 PM
Superior= the ability to totally annihilate your enemy to the point that their very survival is only because the conquerors wished it.

Which doesn't make the conqueror "better"... just more powerful. Right?

Were the Nazi's better than the Jews just because they annihilated so many of them?

houghtam
07-08-2012, 08:22 PM
BEHOLD AND BOW BEFORE THE MIGHT OF MY SMALL POX IMMUNITY

bowtown
07-08-2012, 08:23 PM
Just checking in, has a winner been declared for this high school essay writing contest yet?

Archer81
07-08-2012, 08:24 PM
Yes. Before those horrible Europeans came with their "ownership" economics the natives of the Americas lived in peace, never knew war, fed themselves by organic farming and their religious practices were new agey and existential.

...

:Broncos:

IHaveALight
07-08-2012, 09:14 PM
Superior= the ability to totally annihilate your enemy to the point that their very survival is only because the conquerors wished it.

Superior = a race of people who don't even have such a concept in their understanding because they would never consider such a thing.

IHaveALight
07-08-2012, 09:24 PM
It's a simple question Doctor, would you eat the moon if it were made of ribs?

No. For one I don't eat death. But not only that I actually consider the consequences of my actions and am not willing to throw the Earth's axis out of whack for my own personal gain.

IHaveALight
07-08-2012, 09:39 PM
https://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/602390_498461170170209_858013832_n.jpg

Broncosman
07-08-2012, 10:45 PM
What if we stop buying stuff?
By gardener1 Follow Fri, 6 Jul 2012, 1:26am 1,587 views 50 comments
Watch this discussion (1) Share Quote Permalink Flag
What if people just live somewhere but don't buy it?

In the Bay Area, in retirement Mexico, where ever.

That's me. A boomer on the threshold of retirement who owns nothing now and intends to buy nothing in the future. Not car, not house, none of it. Anywhere.

What comes of your speculation then?

Why do I need to own stuff when I can rent it for a fraction of the price? In the US, in Ecuador, in China? Why would I sink my hard earned money into a speculative venture when all I really want to do is live? I can live well without *owning* stuff.

What if more people like me stop buying losing propositions like real estate; we rent, we quit driving around in money sucking cars (we take the bus) we completely opt out of the ownership system?~(I have)~where does that land all of your speculative economic theories?

What happens then?

You quaintly think there aren't more people like me? People who realize that owning stuff is indentured servitude?

I had a meeting today with a financial planner and laid out my thoughts. Move somewhere outside the US, live off the stipends of minimal SSI and small other money, and just....exist. He was flabbergasted. Apparently no other client had ever come into his office without big plans for starting a business overseas and buying a place and making it big, big, bigger. My plan was small, small, smaller. We are 60 something Americans getting ready to drop off the radar.

Anybody with an ounce of good sense can see that buying property ANYWHERE is a risk that need not be taken. You can rent a place to live anywhere in the world and be money ahead. Roof over your head, done.

You real estate fools yammering amongst yourselves have each other convinced that money invested is money earned in the right amount in the right place in the right times and: voila! You're rich!

Meanwhile I'm sneaking out the back door, keeping my mouth shut and my money to myself and out of the taxman's hands....because I rent everything! And when I'm done with it I give it back to the owner who is paying the freight.

I do not understand the American obsession with *ownership*. I'm into the much cheaper and more useful *usership*.

People, you have been philosophically and financially fleeced.

when you can pay for it . what does it make sense to rent ?

Archer81
07-09-2012, 12:34 AM
If everyone rented...who would we rent from?

Eradication of property rights is the first step to enslaving a people and subjecting them to the whim of government. Nazis, Communists, theocratic autocracies...they all do this. The individual eventually becomes an asset to the state, and is subordinated to the needs of the state. The government ensures their complete dominance over the individual by making you need them.

All because some assclown decided "renting" is better than owning.

:Broncos:

baja
07-09-2012, 03:50 AM
What if everybody liked the Denver Broncos, why then there would be no support for other teams and we would be left with only one team and the NFL would die. Oh my!

baja
07-09-2012, 04:12 AM
http://patrick.net/forum/?p=1214009

Beantown Bronco
07-09-2012, 07:01 AM
By "superior", you presumably mean "more powerful", or "in possession of better weapons"... not "more enlightened" or "spiritually advanced".

If sitting around in the grass smoking the good stuff makes one "more enlightened" and more "spiritually advanced", then I guess we should've all just stayed in college.

houghtam
07-09-2012, 07:43 AM
The reality is that those injuns had it coming.

They should have spent their time inventing guns, developing immunity to diseases, and parceling up their land so that they could adequately defend it. It's the injuns' own fault they got rolled.

They had it coming. They were just sitting here on this land, not developing it, warring amongst each other and worshiping false gods.

Besides, think of all the civilization we brought them. Without us, where would they have gotten their firewater and the resulting alcoholism? We taught them the value of property ownership, manifest destiny, and not using all the parts of a hunt. Hell, we even gave them back part of the land we took from them so that they could live on it all by themselves!

The white man did right by those injuns, I don't care what any of you god and 'Murrica hatin' liberals think.

DBroncos4life
07-09-2012, 08:54 AM
The reality is that those injuns had it coming.

They should have spent their time inventing guns, developing immunity to diseases, and parceling up their land so that they could adequately defend it. It's the injuns' own fault they got rolled.

They had it coming. They were just sitting here on this land, not developing it, warring amongst each other and worshiping false gods.

Besides, think of all the civilization we brought them. Without us, where would they have gotten their firewater and the resulting alcoholism? We taught them the value of property ownership, manifest destiny, and not using all the parts of a hunt. Hell, we even gave them back part of the land we took from them so that they could live on it all by themselves!

The white man did right by those injuns, I don't care what any of you god and 'Murrica hatin' liberals think.
So what have YOU given back to the native Americas?

baja
07-09-2012, 09:08 AM
So what have YOU given back to the native Americas?

I gave a Navaho a happy ending massage once. I think she liked it she moaned a lot, in fact I call her Mona the Navaho.

DBroncos4life
07-09-2012, 09:11 AM
I gave a Navaho a happy ending massage once. I think she liked it she moaned a lot, in fact I call her Mona the Navaho.

That's what I call giving. :P

Tombstone RJ
07-09-2012, 09:14 AM
Superior = a race of people who don't even have such a concept in their understanding because they would never consider such a thing.

the natives americans went to war with each other on a regular basis.

houghtam
07-09-2012, 09:14 AM
So what have YOU given back to the native Americas?

I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Oh and I didn't pretend the Native Americans were asking for it.

baja
07-09-2012, 09:18 AM
I dropped 800 bucks at an Indian casino once.

houghtam
07-09-2012, 09:20 AM
I dropped 800 bucks at an Indian casino once.

Pfft, lightweight.

DBroncos4life
07-09-2012, 09:21 AM
I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Oh and I didn't pretend the Native Americans were asking for it.

I'm sure that means a lot to them.

baja
07-09-2012, 09:21 AM
I bought a genuine turquoise neckless from a Navaho for 250 bucks that later melted on the dash of my car. That was giving.

CPA
07-09-2012, 09:30 AM
Fine rent an apartment, lease a car. Just because you don't own it doesn't mean someone else doesn't. And "out of the Taxman's hands"??? Is this guy serious?

DBroncos4life
07-09-2012, 09:32 AM
I bought a genuine turquoise neckless from a Navaho for 250 bucks that later melted on the dash of my car. That was giving.

You left their country that was huge.

baja
07-09-2012, 09:33 AM
You left their country that was huge.

No I didn't I was just in hartford, Boston and Tucson. Today i"m in La Jolla Ca. so there.

Archer81
07-09-2012, 10:12 AM
Isnt it Navajo?

:Broncos:

IHaveALight
07-09-2012, 10:13 AM
the natives americans went to war with each other on a regular basis.

They did this to eradicate the other tribes and to claim their land as their own, merely for self gain?

Archer81
07-09-2012, 10:22 AM
They did this to eradicate the other tribes and to claim their land as their own, merely for self gain?


Aztecs, Mayans, Incas and Olmecs say hello.

:Broncos:

baja
07-09-2012, 10:44 AM
Isnt it Navajo?

:Broncos:

yes there is a tribe callied Navajo

The Navaho are a tribe of Indian whores.

baja
07-09-2012, 10:46 AM
Aztecs, Mayans, Incas and Olmecs say hello.

:Broncos:

Don't know about the others but the Mayans are alive and well in Souther Mexico. They are the ones that come to your belly button

Powderaddict
07-09-2012, 10:48 AM
I rented for the first 8 years of my marriange, and bought a house a year ago. My Motgage (including taxes and insurance) was only about $150 more than rent. And now, I'm paying myself instead of a landlord. And got a pretty good fixed rate as well.

I kind of agree with the basic idea the writer is putting forth, being happy with less. I've driven cheap cars, bought cheap motorcycles, and kept hobbies and spending simple. I'm paying down debt, and should be debt free in the next few years. Some I've known that made significantly more than I do have lost everything. I still could lose everything, but that everything isn't all that much, and I wouldn't be devestated.

Live within your means, whatever that means. I don't need the latest/greatest devices, TVs, cars, etc. And I think I'm happier, and my marriage is better off (less money stresses) for it.

houghtam
07-09-2012, 10:49 AM
Don't know about the others but the Mayans are alive and well in Souther Mexico. They are the ones that come to your belly button

Hilarious!

Fedaykin
07-09-2012, 10:54 AM
If you're staying in a place long term (at least 10 years) then it's a no brainer: buy, don't rent (assuming you can actually afford it which means 20% down and a payment <25% of your gross). You're literally throwing money away if you rent that long, and have noting to show for it after.

You're paying the landlords mortgage instead of your own when you rent long term. Buying stuff for someone else instead of yourself. Makes no sense.

Fedaykin
07-09-2012, 10:56 AM
What if we let go of materialistic ideology's and instead surrender only to that which is of pure meaning, not just for our selves, but for all?

Because materialism is what keeps us alive.

houghtam
07-09-2012, 10:59 AM
If you're staying in a place long term (at least 10 years) then it's a no brainer: buy, don't rent (assuming you can actually afford it which means 20% down and a payment <25% of your gross). You're literally throwing money away if you rent that long, and have noting to show for it after.

You're paying the landlords mortgage instead of your own when you rent long term. Buying stuff for someone else instead of yourself. Makes no sense.

Makes no sense unless you don't look at a place to live as an investment, but rather...a place to live.

IHaveALight
07-09-2012, 12:16 PM
Because materialism is what keeps us alive.

Not sure I see the contradiction with my statement and this. We can detach from the current materialist ideology's and still provide for ourselves and others (which the current ideology fails to do, actually it does the complete opposite, it encourages for us to make gains at others expense) food, shelter, water and even luxury's such as technological advancement and yes even professional football.

I'm not saying that native Americans ever had it completely right. I'm not saying that we need to live in a primitive culture to live in unity either. But clearly the way we live today is not the way of a supreme, all knowing, flawless society. We live in a world filled with greed, lies, war, genocides and the like while destroying everything in our way and concerning ourselves with profits above all. Clearly we are doing something wrong and we need to start paying attention to that and asking ourselves how do we advance our evolution of compassion for the entirety of everything on this planet so that we can move away from all that selfishness and work towards becoming a peaceful, sustainable, unified planet. Democracy has been a great advancement, capitalism has probably been one of the most destructive ideology's to ever exist on this planet.

IHaveALight
07-09-2012, 12:26 PM
And capitalism has corrupted our once promising, beautiful democracy.

houghtam
07-09-2012, 12:28 PM
Not sure I see the contradiction with my statement and this. We can detach from the current materialist ideology's and still provide for ourselves and others (which the current ideology fails to do, actually it does the complete opposite, it encourages for us to make gains at others expense) food, shelter, water and even luxury's such as technological advancement and yes even professional football.

I'm not saying that native Americans ever had it completely right. I'm not saying that we need to live in a primitive culture to live in unity either. But clearly the way we live today is not the way of a supreme, all knowing, flawless society. We live in a world filled with greed, lies, war, genocides and the like while destroying everything in our way and concerning ourselves with profits above all. Clearly we are doing something wrong and we need to start paying attention to that and asking ourselves how do we advance our evolution of compassion for the entirety of everything on this planet so that we can move away from all that selfishness and work towards becoming a peaceful, sustainable, unified planet. Democracy has been a great advancement, capitalism has probably been one of the most destructive ideology's to ever exist on this planet.

I'm sure you've read Childhood's End, if I know you as well as I think I do. Your answer is there. Humanity is incapable of taking the next evolutionary step because they are too stupid to do so. They need an outside force to guide them, and that force isn't God.

Captain 'Dre
07-09-2012, 12:35 PM
I dropped 800 bucks at an Indian casino once.

800 bucks?!?!? No wonder you don't own anything!!!

IHaveALight
07-09-2012, 12:39 PM
I'm sure you've read Childhood's End, if I know you as well as I think I do. Your answer is there. Humanity is incapable of taking the next evolutionary step because they are too stupid to do so. They need an outside force to guide them, and that force isn't God.

Never heard of it. Humanity just needs to wake up from it's delusions and it is doing so one by one. Evolution doesn't happen over night. We have the power, we are the power and we are in complete control of the reality that we exist in. What we ask for and what we demand so we get. Right now the planet is asking for greed and it's getting it.

BroncoBeavis
07-09-2012, 12:41 PM
Following an outsider's or centralized plan is a path to nowhere.

A macroeconomy is far too complex to be managed by an "expert" or panel of "experts"

A small group of people is so completely incapable of knowing enough to build a modern economy that they don't even know what they don't know. All their efforts to direct the masses to their noble ends will only lead to epic failure. People have to (and should be allowed to) write their own scripts. Freedom is nothing without being free to succeed (or fail)

Anyone ever read I, Pencil?

Captain 'Dre
07-09-2012, 12:44 PM
Live within your means, whatever that means. I don't need the latest/greatest devices, TVs, cars, etc. And I think I'm happier, and my marriage is better off (less money stresses) for it.

Concur. Every car I ever owned (except one) I paid for up front in cash, and my current daily driver-- the only car I ever bought NEW, btw-- is 19 years old.

Get a good car, a car you like, keep it for a long time, and you'd be amazed at what it does for your finances. No way I'd own two rental properties outright if I had made owning sleek, newer vehicles my priority.

ludo21
07-09-2012, 12:44 PM
ive been playing disc golf instead of golf.

wayyyyy cheaper hobby.

Captain 'Dre
07-09-2012, 12:45 PM
ive been playing disc golf instead of golf.

wayyyyy cheaper hobby.

Yeah, but those discs are 9 bucks each! :)

Captain 'Dre
07-09-2012, 12:49 PM
Assistant District Manager

That sounds a lot different from "working in a theater". :)

Captain 'Dre
07-09-2012, 12:54 PM
The reality is that those injuns had it coming.

They should have spent their time inventing guns, developing immunity to diseases, and parceling up their land so that they could adequately defend it. It's the injuns' own fault they got rolled.

They had it coming. They were just sitting here on this land, not developing it, warring amongst each other and worshiping false gods.

Besides, think of all the civilization we brought them. Without us, where would they have gotten their firewater and the resulting alcoholism? We taught them the value of property ownership, manifest destiny, and not using all the parts of a hunt. Hell, we even gave them back part of the land we took from them so that they could live on it all by themselves!

The white man did right by those injuns, I don't care what any of you god and 'Murrica hatin' liberals think.

Yes. And metaphorically speaking, the lands that got rebated to the Indians were the intestines and organ meat, not the muscle.

ludo21
07-09-2012, 12:56 PM
Yeah, but those discs are 9 bucks each! :)

ya but its free to play vs. 50 bucks a pop.

houghtam
07-09-2012, 01:00 PM
That sound a lot different from "working in a theater". :)

True, but I did actually work in a theater. My company the DMs ran their own theater and had to oversee everyone else's. I probably should have specified "good" job at the theater. :) For the larger chains, that could mean assistant managers, as well.

houghtam
07-09-2012, 01:02 PM
Never heard of it. Humanity just needs to wake up from it's delusions and it is doing so one by one. Evolution doesn't happen over night. We have the power, we are the power and we are in complete control of the reality that we exist in. What we ask for and what we demand so we get. Right now the planet is asking for greed and it's getting it.

Interesting. I would suggest you pick it up sometime. It's by Arthur C. Clarke, and I don't want to give anything away, but it does deal with quite a bit of what you're talking about.

IHaveALight
07-09-2012, 01:13 PM
I'm sure you've read Childhood's End, if I know you as well as I think I do. Your answer is there. Humanity is incapable of taking the next evolutionary step because they are too stupid to do so. They need an outside force to guide them, and that force isn't God.

Interesting. I would suggest you pick it up sometime. It's by Arthur C. Clarke, and I don't want to give anything away, but it does deal with quite a bit of what you're talking about.

I would also like to add that stupidity or lack of knowledge has nothing to do with it. It's merely a matter of awareness, we only know what we're aware of. Claiming the stupidity of others only comes from separatism and selfishness.

Tombstone RJ
07-09-2012, 01:23 PM
They did this to eradicate the other tribes and to claim their land as their own, merely for self gain?

there's different reasons but certainly the rights to land was one of the reasons they went to war, that is, territorial disputes & that kind of stuff. Much of it centered around "resources" and I'm sure some of it was due to good old fashioned hatfields and mccoys type of stuff.

nobody likes war, nobody wants it but its inevitable when humans are involved.

houghtam
07-09-2012, 01:28 PM
I would also like to add that stupidity or lack of knowledge has nothing to do with it. It's merely a matter of awareness, we only know what we're aware of. Claiming the stupidity of others only comes from separatism and selfishness.

I think you're confusing ignorance, which is innocent, and willful ignorance, which is not.

Requiem
07-09-2012, 01:31 PM
This thread is dumb. I'm going to buy a new thread.

cmhargrove
07-09-2012, 02:52 PM
https://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/602390_498461170170209_858013832_n.jpg

The only problem is that many people actually are their "true self" on the left side of your chart. Some people really are a-holes.

IHaveALight
07-09-2012, 04:08 PM
The only problem is that many people actually are their "true self" on the left side of your chart. Some people really are a-holes.

LOL We are all a-holes. ;)

baja
07-09-2012, 04:22 PM
800 bucks?!?!? No wonder you don't own anything!!!


No you dumb shiit I'm a train engineer, I dropped off 800 bucks i.e. male indians. Some of you people can't read.

IHaveALight
07-09-2012, 04:33 PM
I think you're confusing ignorance, which is innocent, and willful ignorance, which is not.

I think I get what you're trying to say. To me, as long as we live in a self oriented world there will always be willful ignorance to some degree but that is a great minority of the ignorance. The majority is just unaware. We also exist in a reality where our beliefs and ideals influence our actions to a great degree. So while we may know we are destroying the rain forest for capital gain our ability to fully understand the situation and be aware that there is a solution is completely compromised, or even to be aware to create or look for solutions. We can be aware of the problem and innocently ignorant to the overall situation at the same time.

houghtam
07-09-2012, 04:41 PM
I think I get what you're trying to say. To me, as long as we live in a self oriented world there will always be willful ignorance to some degree but that is a great minority of the ignorance. The majority is just unaware. We also exist in a reality where our beliefs and ideals influence our actions to a great degree. So while we may know we are destroying the rain forest for capital gain our ability to fully understand the situation and be aware that there is a solution is completely compromised, or to even to be aware to create or look for solutions. We can be aware of the problem and innocently ignorant to the overall situation at the same time.

Then it seems we just have a disagreement on what portion of the world is willfully ignorant and what portion is innocently ignorant. I contend that the majority of the world has purposefully put on blinders to what would actually improve the world.

baja
07-09-2012, 04:44 PM
I do not think one can be purposefully ignorant.

houghtam
07-09-2012, 04:47 PM
I do not think one can be purposefully ignorant.

Neither do I, which is why I originally called it stupidity.

Captain 'Dre
07-09-2012, 04:54 PM
there's different reasons but certainly the rights to land was one of the reasons they went to war, that is, territorial disputes & that kind of stuff. Much of it centered around "resources" and I'm sure some of it was due to good old fashioned hatfields and mccoys type of stuff.

nobody likes war, nobody wants it but its inevitable when humans are involved.

Sadly, I'm afraid this isn't true. It turns out that war is good for the economy, and there are plenty of 'mericans who covet foreign oil enough to fight about it. :(

And btw... the Hatfield and McCoy feud-- in which seven people were killed-- started over a goat.

baja
07-09-2012, 04:57 PM
Neither do I, which is why I originally called it stupidity.

I guess if you count denial you could make a case for it.

houghtam
07-09-2012, 05:00 PM
Sadly, I'm afraid this isn't true. It turns out that war is good for the economy, and there are plenty of 'mericans who covet foreign oil enough to fight about it. :(

And btw... the Hatfield and McCoy feud-- in which seven people were killed-- started over a goat.

The legend is that it's a pig, but most historians recognize that the feud probably started before that, as a result of a former union soldier returning to secessionist soil.

And I'm surprised that I missed that line in Tombstone's response. One only needs to look at Cheney, Rove, Haliburton, etc. to realize that there absolutely is a certain percentage of the population who want war.

Fedaykin
07-10-2012, 03:41 PM
Makes no sense unless you don't look at a place to live as an investment, but rather...a place to live.

I might be misunderstanding what you're saying, but even if you're just looking for a place to live, it still makes more sense to pay your own mortgage instead of someone else's.

Short term, renting is a better option, but long term (anything over 5 years in a typical market -- i.e. not during this bubble burst) buying usually lets you at least reduce housing costs rather than throwing 100% of your housing costs down the drain.

houghtam
07-10-2012, 04:37 PM
I might be misunderstanding what you're saying, but even if you're just looking for a place to live, it still makes more sense to pay your own mortgage instead of someone else's.

Short term, renting is a better option, but long term (anything over 5 years in a typical market -- i.e. not during this bubble burst) buying usually lets you at least reduce housing costs rather than throwing 100% of your housing costs down the drain.

Yes, you are misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm saying that I do not consider the place where I live to be an investment opportunity. It's just...where I live. I'm not throwing money away, because I truly don't care. It's immaterial to me. As long as I have a nice neighborhood, good schools, good location and okay neighbors, I honestly don't see the difference, other than "hey you can have more money if you do this."

Don't care. Don't need it, and I like renting.

And this is all not factoring in the fact that I never have to do any yard work, snow removal or maintenance...that is, outside of working in our garden that our landlord was nice enough to let us grow.

Now, I can hear all the snickering going on...I've heard it before: "What a fool he's throwing his money away." Yes, it's a very foolish thing to do if money is what drives you. That's just not who I am.

JakeZ01
07-10-2012, 04:39 PM
I thought this was a football site? Mind blown.

baja
07-10-2012, 04:45 PM
I will say buying land is a very different investment than buying a house on a small city lot.Owning fertile land with water is the closest thing there is to security in life

baja
07-10-2012, 04:48 PM
I thought this was a football site? Mind blown.

The Denver Broncos are on summer vacation. Thought a BIG fan like you would know that.

Archer81
07-10-2012, 06:15 PM
If we stop buying stuff...

Demand for stuff will drop.

Employers will have to lay off, and eventually close their businesses.

Means more people out of work.

Means the economy retracts, then collapses.

The government collapses.

We return to hunter gatherer style with roving bands of tribal people fighting over remaining technology and easily harvested food items.

3/4 of the people on earth die from starvation, disease and small scale warfare.

So by all means. Stop buying ****.

:Broncos:

Jay3
07-10-2012, 06:36 PM
We return to hunter gatherer style with roving bands of tribal people fighting over remaining technology and easily harvested food items.


I see your point. This does indeed sound awesome. Agreed.

IHaveALight
07-10-2012, 06:57 PM
So where does freedom factor in?

One thing I've learned is freedom, free time, doing what I want >>> working my ass off, money, material accumulation

Getting into a mortgage is quite a commitment and most definitely takes away freedoms.

FYI I am actually a home owner, but I did buy well below my means.

Wealth isn't what you own rather it's how you spend your time. - Durianrider
Absolute truth.

IHaveALight
07-10-2012, 07:03 PM
If we stop buying stuff...

Demand for stuff will drop.

Employers will have to lay off, and eventually close their businesses.

Means more people out of work.

Means the economy retracts, then collapses.

The government collapses.

There's some panic for a bit, lot's of social unrest, people die.

Great minds come together and forge the next evolution in idiology's that protect above all the people and the planet and promote advancement in unity and peace.

:Broncos:

Fixed it for you.

houghtam
07-10-2012, 07:29 PM
So where does freedom factor in?

One thing I've learned is freedom, free time, doing what I want >>> working my ass off, money, material accumulation

Getting into a mortgage is quite a commitment and most definitely takes away freedoms.

FYI I am actually a home owner, but I did buy well below my means.


Absolute truth.

Very well put. If I hadn't quit my job, I would have spent today pulling my hair out trying to figure out where I'm going to fit the 3000 people for the midnight of Dark Knight Returns, as well as trying to cram 5 prints of "Ice Age: Is This Story Over Yet" into 3 theaters worth of space.

Instead, I woke up at 8am, watered the garden, played army guys with my son, made us some lunch, cleaned my rifle, watched a movie, helped cook dinner, played trains and cars with my son, watched the All-Star game, and laughed while watching Lawrence O'Donnell call Mitt Romney a "bloviating ignoramus."

Guess what I'm doing tomorrow? More of the same. :)

Archer81
07-10-2012, 08:13 PM
Fixed it for you.


You have greater faith in people then I do.

And it will be more than "a few people" that die.


:Broncos:

Archer81
07-10-2012, 08:14 PM
Very well put. If I hadn't quit my job, I would have spent today pulling my hair out trying to figure out where I'm going to fit the 3000 people for the midnight of Dark Knight Returns, as well as trying to cram 5 prints of "Ice Age: Is This Story Over Yet" into 3 theaters worth of space.

Instead, I woke up at 8am, watered the garden, played army guys with my son, made us some lunch, cleaned my rifle, watched a movie, helped cook dinner, played trains and cars with my son, watched the All-Star game, and laughed while watching Lawrence O'Donnell call Mitt Romney a "bloviating ignoramus."

Guess what I'm doing tomorrow? More of the same. :)


Uhh...


:Broncos:

houghtam
07-10-2012, 08:36 PM
Uhh...


:Broncos:

Yep. He's an unabashed lefty, but he's entertaining as hell. I watch him with the same mentality that I do Bill Maher or Daniel Tosh or (did) George Carlin.

broncocalijohn
07-10-2012, 08:39 PM
ive been playing disc golf instead of golf.

wayyyyy cheaper hobby.

We had an awesome thread on that last year if I recall.

EDIT: Thank you "Search" (not the dude from 3rd Bass)
http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=98125&highlight=disc+golf

See post #27. Forgot how funny I really am!

Buckey Backer
07-10-2012, 09:00 PM
Meanwhile you're renting for free? At the end of 30 years I have a house. If I were to rent I'd still pay that $400,000 but I'd have.....?

I have argued this point with my younger brother for years as he owns and I rent. Now lets assume this person purchases a house for 30 years at $1100 a month and I rent an apartment or home for $600 a month for 30 years....and the key here is that we earn the same income for those 30 years. I believe I will have more freedom and less stress and $200,000 alone that this person would have spent on the house just in the rent vs payment. I will be able to travel and live it up while I am young while this person would have to wait until they are in there 60's to get that $200,000 and that is if the house sells and doesn't end up losing even more over the years. Now we haven't even begun to add up the money a person spends on the taxes, up keep, and the basic care of the house over 30 years...while I don't even spend a dime on even the smallest things like a light bulb or if something breaks down. Then there is all the money one spends on electric and water on a house vs what I spend on renting an apartment. Another key thing here to remember is I have this money now to spend as one can never know when they might die and to me its better to live well while you are young and can enjoy it...vs being older and then having to sell the house in order to pay for all the medical bills and as one gets older and kids move out everyone down sizes anyway as they don't need a big house. So...I see that times are changing and more and more people are tired of losing their butts and are switching to renting and having that extra money sitting there if needed now vs playing the waiting game and trust me...many people who trusted their 401K to be there and now have half of what or less of what they were counting on. ^5

BroncoBeavis
07-10-2012, 09:10 PM
I have argued this point with my younger brother for years as he owns and I rent. Now lets assume this person purchases a house for 30 years at $1100 a month and I rent an apartment or home for $600 a month for 30 years....

There's no way you rent a home comparable to a $1,100 dollar-a-month 30-year mortgaged house for $600.

houghtam
07-10-2012, 09:17 PM
There's no way you rent a home comparable to a $1,100 dollar-a-month 30-year mortgaged house for $600.

True, it's not quite apples to apples, but if you go the other way, a house with a $600 a month mortgage is going to come with a lot more baggage to worry about than an apartment in that price range.

baja
07-10-2012, 09:26 PM
Very well put. If I hadn't quit my job, I would have spent today pulling my hair out trying to figure out where I'm going to fit the 3000 people for the midnight of Dark Knight Returns, as well as trying to cram 5 prints of "Ice Age: Is This Story Over Yet" into 3 theaters worth of space.

Instead, I woke up at 8am, watered the garden, played army guys with my son, made us some lunch, cleaned my rifle, watched a movie, helped cook dinner, played trains and cars with my son, watched the All-Star game, and laughed while watching Lawrence O'Donnell call Mitt Romney a "bloviating ignoramus."

Guess what I'm doing tomorrow? More of the same. :)

I have basically done what ever I wanted to do all my adult life. I promised myself that in parochial school

BroncoBeavis
07-10-2012, 09:31 PM
True, it's not quite apples to apples, but if you go the other way, a house with a $600 a month mortgage is going to come with a lot more baggage to worry about than an apartment in that price range.

That's true, but at the end of the day it comes down to what meets you and your family's needs. Which makes comparing the economics of completely dissimilar properties kinda pointless.

Taco John
07-10-2012, 09:39 PM
I don't get the idea that buying a home is a bad investment. I suppose at the age of 60, it is. But at the age of 30-50, owning a home is a great investment.

baja
07-10-2012, 09:47 PM
I don't get the idea that buying a home is a bad investment. I suppose at the age of 60, it is. But at the age of 30-50, owning a home is a great investment.

Traditionally it has been but we are in a long running downward housing market . Today it is better to wait until this shakes itself out. Nothing more restrictive than finding yourself in an upside down mortgage

baja
07-10-2012, 09:48 PM
Different story if you are a cash buyer and catch a great short sale.

Once again a big advantage for the rich.

broncocalijohn
07-10-2012, 09:50 PM
I have argued this point with my younger brother for years as he owns and I rent. Now lets assume this person purchases a house for 30 years at $1100 a month and I rent an apartment or home for $600 a month for 30 years....and the key here is that we earn the same income for those 30 years. I believe I will have more freedom and less stress and $200,000 alone that this person would have spent on the house just in the rent vs payment.

anyone else see the flaw in this logic? He buckey, let me know who is renting out a space for you at $600 that is not only comparable to your brothers owned place but also never goes up in rental fees for 30 years! Sorry, but unless you are really Bob and you live at home in the rented basement for those 30 years, your analogy sucks. Seems you might have trouble committing to big boy status.

broncosteven
07-10-2012, 09:53 PM
If you are talking to me my house is paid for as is my ranch and all my high ticket items. I have 0 debt

I am going to regret looking into this thread, had it not got into 8 pages I wouldn't have bothered, and viewing the 1st couple pages of posts but if we are supposed to be renting why is it Ok for you to own a house and a ranch and all your big ticket items that you are telling others to rent?

baja
07-10-2012, 09:54 PM
anyone else see the flaw in this logic? He buckey, let me know who is renting out a space for you at $600 that is not only comparable to your brothers owned place but also never goes up in rental fees for 30 years! Sorry, but unless you are really Bob and you live at home in the rented basement for those 30 years, your analogy sucks. Seems you might have trouble committing to big boy status.

Buying was a good idea pre 2005 today not so much. Times change ya know.

baja
07-10-2012, 09:56 PM
I am going to regret looking into this thread, had it not got into 8 pages I wouldn't have bothered, and viewing the 1st couple pages of posts but if we are supposed to be renting why is it Ok for you to own a house and a ranch and all your big ticket items that you are telling others to rent?

I bought over 20 years ago. Why is it so hard to understand the housing market has changed. Rent and wait for the bottom is what I would advise today

BTW when you finish reading the thread you will see my take is everyone's circumstances are unique, for some depending on location and the individual's life style, commitment to that location buying now makes sense. This is not a "one size site all" topic.

broncosteven
07-10-2012, 10:38 PM
I bought over 20 years ago. Why is it so hard to understand the housing market has changed. Rent and wait for the bottom is what I would advise today

We bought our home over 15 years ago and have refied down to a "Historic low" rate (per the lady doing the refi) over a 30 year note. We pay early on our mortgage and will continue to do so, should have it paid off in about 17 years if we keep paying as much extra that we do every month, which is still less than the old mortgage payment. If my health gets worse or something else happens we can pay the minimum and still benefit from a low payment.

The key is living in your means and not keeping pace with what the Jone's are buying.

I guess it would make sense to rent for a year or 2 before starting a family to see if the housing market falls anymore than it will, I think in most areas it has fallen as far as it will and is actually under what they were around 2005ish when I know my house was appraised for it's highest value.

Renting to send a message to THE MAN is a totally other concept that is more wacky than sense.

baja
07-10-2012, 10:47 PM
We bought our home over 15 years ago and have refied down to a "Historic low" rate (per the lady doing the refi) over a 30 year note. We pay early on our mortgage and will continue to do so, should have it paid off in about 17 years if we keep paying as much extra that we do every month, which is still less than the old mortgage payment. If my health gets worse or something else happens we can pay the minimum and still benefit from a low payment.

The key is living in your means and not keeping pace with what the Jone's are buying.

I guess it would make sense to rent for a year or 2 before starting a family to see if the housing market falls anymore than it will, I think in most areas it has fallen as far as it will and is actually under what they were around 2005ish when I know my house was appraised for it's highest value.



Renting to send a message to THE MAN is a totally other concept that is more wacky than sense.

Sounds like you have made some wise choices and as a result are in good shape.

I often create threads to stimulate discussion and do not necessurally agree with the position of the thread information. On this one I agree with the part about not buying a new car. I have never had a car payment and have always managed to have a nice ride. I like not having that payment and especially like not baying some bank all that interest.

I bought my current house because I got a great deal. The seller carried most of the balance and I had it paid off in 6 years. I was fortunate to make a chunk of money in year six and paid it off.

broncocalijohn
07-10-2012, 11:43 PM
Buying was a good idea pre 2005 today not so much. Times change ya know.

doesnt change his retarded post. He has no clue what hell he is talking about.

IHaveALight
07-11-2012, 01:32 AM
You have greater faith in people then I do.

And it will be more than "a few people" that die.


:Broncos:

Of course I have faith in people...

I have faith in myself = I have faith in all that is
Unity

Beantown Bronco
07-11-2012, 06:20 AM
Buying was a good idea pre 2005 today not so much. Times change ya know.

I'd argue the opposite.

Real estate prices and interest rates are at historical lows right now. Now is the BEST time to be a first time homebuyer.

baja
07-11-2012, 06:27 AM
I'd argue the opposite.

Real estate prices and interest rates are at historical lows right now. Now is the BEST time to be a first time homebuyer.

Here are some people what would disagree ith you;

FHA mortgage delinquencies skyrocket more than 25%


The FHA has been the lender of last resort throughout the housing bubble crash. They insured loans which didnít properly price in risk during a declining market. No private lender would have made such loans, particularly as the super-low interest rates engineered by the federal reserve. The FHA has tried to raise its cost of money to cover the risk by increasing the insurance fees which drives up the effective interest rate, but their onerous fees have fallen short of covering the upcoming losses.

In the FHAís defense, the loans they underwrote were of high quality, and although they reached pretty low for FICO scores, the documentation and underwriting was sufficient to protect the taxpayer from unqualified borrowers. What the FHA couldnít protect the taxpayer from is the losses associated with falling prices.

As a business model, subprime lending works in an environment of rising prices. Even when the default rates are high, if prices are rising, the losses on those defaults is minimal. However, when prices are falling, high default rates make for very large default losses, and the business model is untenable. FHA is facing a similar problem, but for different reasons.

FHA had good underwriting, but the tiny down payments and falling prices have trapped all of their borrowers underwater. Over time, people want to move. The FHA will need to approve many short sales from underwater borrowers in 2007-2011 vintage loans, particularly from the earlier vintages that are severely underwater. Of course, that assumes the owner bothers with the short sale process. With no equity, itís easy for an FHA borrower to simply stop paying and move on. To them, the house was no different than a rental. Their down payment was not much larger than a security deposit, and they recover that with just a few months of squatting before they go.

The problem isnít that FHA borrowers are subprime borrowers, although some are sprinkled into the mix. The real problem is that prices went down, and the only viable choices for FHA borrowers are short sale or strategic default. Either ones means the FHA insurance fund takes a hit, and if enough borrowers need or want to move, the FHA will face serious losses. I think a bailout is inevitable.

http://ochousingnews.com/news/fha-mortgage-delinquencies-skyrocket-more-than-25?source=Patrick.net

Beantown Bronco
07-11-2012, 06:36 AM
I have argued this point with my younger brother for years as he owns and I rent. Now lets assume this person purchases a house for 30 years at $1100 a month and I rent an apartment or home for $600 a month for 30 years....and the key here is that we earn the same income for those 30 years. I believe I will have more freedom and less stress and $200,000 alone that this person would have spent on the house just in the rent vs payment. I will be able to travel and live it up while I am young while this person would have to wait until they are in there 60's to get that $200,000 and that is if the house sells and doesn't end up losing even more over the years. Now we haven't even begun to add up the money a person spends on the taxes, up keep, and the basic care of the house over 30 years...while I don't even spend a dime on even the smallest things like a light bulb or if something breaks down. Then there is all the money one spends on electric and water on a house vs what I spend on renting an apartment. Another key thing here to remember is I have this money now to spend as one can never know when they might die and to me its better to live well while you are young and can enjoy it...vs being older and then having to sell the house in order to pay for all the medical bills and as one gets older and kids move out everyone down sizes anyway as they don't need a big house. So...I see that times are changing and more and more people are tired of losing their butts and are switching to renting and having that extra money sitting there if needed now vs playing the waiting game and trust me...many people who trusted their 401K to be there and now have half of what or less of what they were counting on. ^5

Bucky,

I like how you're only talking about rental advantages and ignoring a ton of the advantages to buying.

1st: as has already been pointed out, your pricing structure right off the bat is extremely flawed. A report literally just came out today that found that rental rates are at historic highs right now and going UP. No way you can rent a comparable apt for half of a mortgage. You just can't.

2nd: mortgage interest deductions. Nothing comparable in the rent world. This can save you tens of thousands of dollars over the life of a mortgage.

3rd: why can't a person with a mortgage travel and live it up when they're young? I do it. All my friends do it. Strange.

4th: you say

I have this money now to spend as one can never know when they might die and to me its better to live well while you are young and can enjoy it...vs being older and then having to sell the house in order to pay for all the medical bills and as one gets older

My rent on a similar house in my same town = my mortgage payment. I would have no more money to spend now if I rented vs owning. So I'm living just as well when I'm young.

And medical bills? How would you propose to pay for them if they were so large I needed to sell my house, if you were a renter and didn't have that money from the sale of a house when you're older. Remember now, your paying the same in rent as me, so you don't have any more savings than I do.

5th: you bring up 401(k)s losing money. Yeah, so? A 401(k) doesn't care if I rent or own. It's going to do the same thing.

6th: you ignore some other negatives about renting. If you're in an apt or town house, you most likely have thin walls and have to deal with a whole host of neighbor issues that I don't have to deal with, given my 2 acre buffer between me and my neighbors.

I could go on.

Beantown Bronco
07-11-2012, 06:39 AM
Here are some people what would disagree ith you;

FHA mortgage delinquencies skyrocket more than 25%


The FHA has been the lender of last resort throughout the housing bubble crash. They insured loans which didnít properly price in risk during a declining market. No private lender would have made such loans, particularly as the super-low interest rates engineered by the federal reserve. The FHA has tried to raise its cost of money to cover the risk by increasing the insurance fees which drives up the effective interest rate, but their onerous fees have fallen short of covering the upcoming losses.

In the FHAís defense, the loans they underwrote were of high quality, and although they reached pretty low for FICO scores, the documentation and underwriting was sufficient to protect the taxpayer from unqualified borrowers. What the FHA couldnít protect the taxpayer from is the losses associated with falling prices.

As a business model, subprime lending works in an environment of rising prices. Even when the default rates are high, if prices are rising, the losses on those defaults is minimal. However, when prices are falling, high default rates make for very large default losses, and the business model is untenable. FHA is facing a similar problem, but for different reasons.

FHA had good underwriting, but the tiny down payments and falling prices have trapped all of their borrowers underwater. Over time, people want to move. The FHA will need to approve many short sales from underwater borrowers in 2007-2011 vintage loans, particularly from the earlier vintages that are severely underwater. Of course, that assumes the owner bothers with the short sale process. With no equity, itís easy for an FHA borrower to simply stop paying and move on. To them, the house was no different than a rental. Their down payment was not much larger than a security deposit, and they recover that with just a few months of squatting before they go.

The problem isnít that FHA borrowers are subprime borrowers, although some are sprinkled into the mix. The real problem is that prices went down, and the only viable choices for FHA borrowers are short sale or strategic default. Either ones means the FHA insurance fund takes a hit, and if enough borrowers need or want to move, the FHA will face serious losses. I think a bailout is inevitable.

http://ochousingnews.com/news/fha-mortgage-delinquencies-skyrocket-more-than-25?source=Patrick.net

baja, your article actually supports my point. Those cited in your article are all people that bought 3+ years ago. NOT people that bought in the last 2 years AFTER the prices went down, short sales became rampant and interest rates plummeted. THAT is what I'm talking about. No time in history has been better for a first time homebuyer than today and in the last 12-24 months. They are reaping the rewards of all those short sales your article is talking about.

baja
07-11-2012, 06:51 AM
baja, your article actually supports my point. Those cited in your article are all people that bought 3+ years ago. NOT people that bought in the last 2 years AFTER the prices went down, short sales became rampant and interest rates plummeted. THAT is what I'm talking about. No time in history has been better for a first time homebuyer than today and in the last 12-24 months. They are reaping the rewards of all those short sales your article is talking about.

I have already said shopping for a great short sale is a good way to go.

...and yes the market is much better than it was in 2008 but it is still not bottomed out IMO so for many buyers (especially first time buyers) it is better to wait a while longer unless as I have said in earlier posts they can qualify for a great short sale or repo.

baja
07-11-2012, 06:52 AM
Don’t Indulge. Be Happy.

By ELIZABETH DUNN and MICHAEL NORTON

HOW much money do you need to be happy? Think about it. What’s your number?

Many of us aren’t satisfied with how much we have now. That’s why we’re constantly angling for a raise at work, befriending aged relatives and springing, despite long odds, for lottery scratch tickets.

Is it crazy to question how much money you need to be happy? The notion that money can’t buy happiness has been around a long time — even before yoga came into vogue. But it turns out there is a measurable connection between income and happiness; not surprisingly, people with a comfortable living standard are happier than people living in poverty.

The catch is that additional income doesn’t buy us any additional happiness on a typical day once we reach that comfortable standard. The magic number that defines this “comfortable standard” varies across individuals and countries, but in the United States, it seems to fall somewhere around $75,000. Using Gallup data collected from almost half a million Americans, researchers at Princeton found that higher household incomes were associated with better moods on a daily basis — but the beneficial effects of money tapered off entirely after the $75,000 mark.

Why, then, do so many of us bother to work so hard long after we have reached an income level sufficient to make most of us happy? One reason is that our ideas about the relationship between money and happiness are misguided. In research we conducted with a national sample of Americans, people thought that their life satisfaction would double if they made $55,000 instead of $25,000: more than twice as much money, twice as much happiness. But our data showed that people who earned $55,000 were just 9 percent more satisfied than those making $25,000. Nine percent beats zero percent, but it’s still kind of a letdown when you were expecting a 100 percent return.

Interestingly, and usefully, it turns out that what we do with our money plays a far more important role than how much money we make. Imagine three people each win $1 million in the lottery. Suppose one person attempts to buy every single thing he has ever wanted; one puts it all in the bank and uses the money only sparingly, for special occasions; and one gives it all to charity. At the end of the year, they all would report an additional $1 million of income. Many of us would follow the first person’s strategy, but the latter two winners are likely to get the bigger happiness bang for their buck.

We usually think of having more money as allowing us to buy more and more of the stuff we like for ourselves, from bigger houses to fancier cars to better wine to more finely pixilated televisions. But these typical spending tendencies — buying more, and buying for ourselves — are ineffective at turning money into happiness. A decade of research has demonstrated that if you insist on spending money on yourself, you should shift from buying stuff (TVs and cars) to experiences (trips and special evenings out). Our own recent research shows that in addition to buying more experiences, you’re better served in many cases by simply buying less — and buying for others.

More here;

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/08/opinion/sunday/dont-indulge-be-happy.html?pagewanted=1&source=Patrick.net&_r=1&hp

Beantown Bronco
07-11-2012, 06:56 AM
I have already said shopping for a great short sale is a good way to go.

...and yes the market is much better than it was in 2008 but it is still not bottomed out IMO so for many buyers (especially first time buyers) it is better to wait a while longer unless as I have said in earlier posts they can qualify for a great short sale or repo.

Even if the market hasn't completely bottomed out, I have a hard time believing interest rates are going to stay in the 3s past this year. I'd rather buy now and maybe pay a little more in puchase price, but pay a rate in the 3s vs waiting to save another 20-30 grand on the house, only to end up paying significantly more in the long run when rates go back into the 5s or worse.

baja
07-11-2012, 06:59 AM
Even if the market hasn't completely bottomed out, I have a hard time believing interest rates are going to stay in the 3s past this year. I'd rather buy now and maybe pay a little more in puchase price, but pay a rate in the 3s vs waiting to save another 20-30 grand on the house, only to end up paying significantly more in the long run when rates go back into the 5s or worse.


Interest rates have to stay low the economy is still very fragile. But we are in basic agreement there are some wise buys out here now. I would buy in the country far sooner than in a city.

Captain 'Dre
07-11-2012, 08:33 AM
Even if the market hasn't completely bottomed out, I have a hard time believing interest rates are going to stay in the 3s past this year. I'd rather buy now and maybe pay a little more in puchase price, but pay a rate in the 3s vs waiting to save another 20-30 grand on the house, only to end up paying significantly more in the long run when rates go back into the 5s or worse.

Particularly if you find a property NOW that you LOVE. There is no guarantee that you'll find a place you like as much later on. A bird in the hand...

ludo21
07-11-2012, 09:14 AM
My wife and I pay less to the own than to rent.

Also that ability to have people over and have far more space to enjoy is well worth the maintenance that goes into a home. (and i freaking hate, hate, hate yard work)

IHaveALight
07-11-2012, 03:35 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/PQtRXqBQETA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Awareness

houghtam
07-11-2012, 03:46 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/PQtRXqBQETA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Awareness

That guy's a genius.

IHaveALight
07-11-2012, 03:50 PM
"But I believe that they are free
And we believe that they are free
Cause I believe that they are me
Washed by the sun"

cmhargrove
07-11-2012, 04:11 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/PQtRXqBQETA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Awareness

It would be a lot better to watch the video without that God awful singing...

Nothing like an annoying nasal ballad.

Fedaykin
07-11-2012, 04:26 PM
Yes, you are misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm saying that I do not consider the place where I live to be an investment opportunity. It's just...where I live. I'm not throwing money away, because I truly don't care. It's immaterial to me. As long as I have a nice neighborhood, good schools, good location and okay neighbors, I honestly don't see the difference, other than "hey you can have more money if you do this."

Don't care. Don't need it, and I like renting.

And this is all not factoring in the fact that I never have to do any yard work, snow removal or maintenance...that is, outside of working in our garden that our landlord was nice enough to let us grow.

Now, I can hear all the snickering going on...I've heard it before: "What a fool he's throwing his money away." Yes, it's a very foolish thing to do if money is what drives you. That's just not who I am.

It's only about money as it functions as a means to an end. In my particular case that end is security. Specifically, the security of knowing me and my family will have a place to live.

If I were to rent instead of buy, at any point in time it would be bordering on trivial to lose my home. $1000 a month rent + $? utilities when you're unemployed is a bitch. $0 mortgage (after it's paid off) + $?utilities + $? tax is doable even if I'm working a minimum wage job or less. Of course, while I'm in the process of paying it off I'm just as vulnerable, but once it is paid off (which should be only a couple more years) I will be far more secure (both financially and quality of life) than if I were renting.

It all boils down to making a smart purchase -- which a lot of people don't do. A smart purchase is a home well within your current means, so that it can be bought/paid off in a reasonable amount of time (10-15 years max).

Buckey Backer
07-11-2012, 06:34 PM
Not sure where you got that the apartment and home are to be comparable in size? This was just an example based on two people making the same income...lets say $3200 a month take home. Thus why I live in an apartment as I don't have to mow the lawn, fix the fence, paint the house, fix the water heater, fix the floors that got flooded and so on...! While you are busting your buns to pay your house payment and still find time to mow the lawn or fix whatever is broken on the house I am out spending my money and having less stress. Show me a chart or some numbers that can track that amount of stress and what it does to your life. On response #2...exactly my point you have to have deductions to even come close to saving the money I save on rent and expenses. On #3...remember this was based on two people having the same income...not based on your income currently and your friends incomes? #4 and 5 you lost me a bit...? #6...once again you added your 2 acre buffer between you and your neighbor...but that is your current situation and not what was given in my example. Also it depends on how you see the neighbors as I see it as an asset not a burden...as there is always someone there which I can count on to keep an eye on my place and I don't have to worry if they are keeping their lawn mowed or their fence from falling down. If you want to get detailed...my apartment is built very well and you can't hear any of the neighbors.

Lastly...don't take everything so personal as its just one persons opinion vs another and you are entitled to live the way you want as am I and every other American. No one every stated that those who purchase a home were stupid or anything... well lets say maybe if you live in California and want to pay $1,000,000 for a home you could buy in Texas for $125,000...now that would be stupid. Take care and enjoy your big home and your big yard...but be sure to wear some sun screen when mowing the yard or do you spend money to have someone else maintain it...as that would be another expense.
:yayaya:





Bucky,

I like how you're only talking about rental advantages and ignoring a ton of the advantages to buying.

1st: as has already been pointed out, your pricing structure right off the bat is extremely flawed. A report literally just came out today that found that rental rates are at historic highs right now and going UP. No way you can rent a comparable apt for half of a mortgage. You just can't.

2nd: mortgage interest deductions. Nothing comparable in the rent world. This can save you tens of thousands of dollars over the life of a mortgage.

3rd: why can't a person with a mortgage travel and live it up when they're young? I do it. All my friends do it. Strange.

4th: you say



My rent on a similar house in my same town = my mortgage payment. I would have no more money to spend now if I rented vs owning. So I'm living just as well when I'm young.

And medical bills? How would you propose to pay for them if they were so large I needed to sell my house, if you were a renter and didn't have that money from the sale of a house when you're older. Remember now, your paying the same in rent as me, so you don't have any more savings than I do.

5th: you bring up 401(k)s losing money. Yeah, so? A 401(k) doesn't care if I rent or own. It's going to do the same thing.

6th: you ignore some other negatives about renting. If you're in an apt or town house, you most likely have thin walls and have to deal with a whole host of neighbor issues that I don't have to deal with, given my 2 acre buffer between me and my neighbors.

I could go on.

Buckey Backer
07-11-2012, 06:38 PM
anyone else see the flaw in this logic? He buckey, let me know who is renting out a space for you at $600 that is not only comparable to your brothers owned place but also never goes up in rental fees for 30 years! Sorry, but unless you are really Bob and you live at home in the rented basement for those 30 years, your analogy sucks. Seems you might have trouble committing to big boy status.

Where do you come up with anything being comparable with the apartment vs the house...? Only thing was the wages earned to be comparable..????Hilarious!

Requiem
07-11-2012, 07:25 PM
Wouldn't even consider owning a home as a single person under 30. Just how a brotha feel about it.

broncocalijohn
07-11-2012, 11:08 PM
Where do you come up with anything being comparable with the apartment vs the house...? Only thing was the wages earned to be comparable..????Hilarious!

no, you had your brother (or whoever it was) and you making the same payment to live. That is how we came up with the easy conclusion that you think your rent is the exact same as a home payment. Tell us about your stress when you are 60 years old and still renting while your brother has been mortgage free for 5 years as he sold his 4 bedroom home for a 2 bedroom condo by the beach and ready to retire. Your post leaves out a lot of nuggets that are true to life. I am 42 and will not only have my home paid off in 6 years but also our condo. We will be able to live in Laguna Beach with either a **** load of money or continue renting out our condo for almost all profit. Maybe you will be that 60 year old renting out our condo stressing when you can retire.

broncocalijohn
07-11-2012, 11:10 PM
Wouldn't even consider owning a home as a single person under 30. Just how a brotha feel about it.

Depends on your situation. I knew I wanted to raise a family here and started my business at 19 so at 24, I bought a 2500 square foot house. it will be paid off when I am 48 and kids will be young teenagers. Life should be good.

Beantown Bronco
07-12-2012, 07:02 AM
Not sure where you got that the apartment and home are to be comparable in size?

Because I'm trying to compare apples to apples. And, before you entered this thread, that was the example we were throwing around. Two more or less identical houses that I looked at when I was in the market back in 2004. One was a rental, the other was a purchase. I would've had the same rental payment as my mortgage turned out to be.

This was just an example based on two people making the same income...lets say $3200 a month take home. Thus why I live in an apartment as I don't have to mow the lawn, fix the fence, paint the house, fix the water heater, fix the floors that got flooded and so on...!

Wow. How much work do you think owning a home is? Not everyone buys a dump. I spend MAYBE 10 hours a year mowing and taking care of my lawn, and I have about 2 acres. I have siding on my house. 0 hrs of painting. Fix the fence? I've stained the wood portion - maybe an hour a year. The rest is chain link - 0 hrs of maintenance and still looks new. Water heater? I literally just replaced my whole system. 0 hrs of maintenance for me. My insurance gave me $3,500 and it only cost me $1,200 for a new tankless system and there was a $500 mail in rebate from the government on it because it was energy efficient. 0 hrs of labor because it was all taken care of by insurance. I actually profited a few thousand dollars when my old system broke. Beat that.

While you are busting your buns to pay your house payment and still find time to mow the lawn or fix whatever is broken on the house I am out spending my money and having less stress. Show me a chart or some numbers that can track that amount of stress and what it does to your life.

Again, my house payment would be the same as rent, so I'm not busting my butt any more to make payments. And I have zero stress. Just had my annual physical last week and my blood pressure is 98/78.

People in apartments have stress I'll never have to worry about. Bad landlords for one. Bad neighbors that you share walls with for two. I enjoy being able to crank up my movies and not have to worry about neighbors telling me I can't have the subwoofer going after 8PM. And God help you if you have Indian people in your apt. You can't get rid of that smell.

And I can have all the pets I want.

On response #2...exactly my point you have to have deductions to even come close to saving the money I save on rent and expenses.

Not true. I more or less break even before I even take tax deductions into account. It's a bonus.

On #3...remember this was based on two people having the same income...not based on your income currently and your friends incomes? #4 and 5 you lost me a bit...? #6...once again you added your 2 acre buffer between you and your neighbor...but that is your current situation and not what was given in my example. Also it depends on how you see the neighbors as I see it as an asset not a burden...as there is always someone there which I can count on to keep an eye on my place and I don't have to worry if they are keeping their lawn mowed or their fence from falling down. If you want to get detailed...my apartment is built very well and you can't hear any of the neighbors.

Well, this is the disconnect. This debate was going on pages before you got here and involved more general terms as opposed to your very specific scenario, of which we had no details. If we're going to break it down that specifically, then of course your situation renting is going to be better than SOMEONE'S who bought. But, if we're looking at the big picture, it's different. I just read a study two days ago that showed that this is statistically the worst time in history to rent. I know this is the case in the Boston area. Rents are insane and home prices haven't been this low in decades. Most people are facing the same situation I faced. Rent or buy, you're looking at forking out the same amount per month on average. The only ones who are renting are the ones who can't get approved for a mortgage because they have bad credit or those who can't scrap together even a 5% down payment. Those who have the choice to do either one would by and large be better off buying, unless they plan on moving out of the area within 5 years.

Beantown Bronco
07-12-2012, 07:14 AM
Here's a timely article from today's yahoo front page:

http://shine.yahoo.com/decorating/couple-lives-240-square-foot-apartment-213500626.html

240 sq ft apt for $1,500/month rent. Yikes!

55CrushEm
07-12-2012, 07:39 AM
Even if the market hasn't completely bottomed out, I have a hard time believing interest rates are going to stay in the 3s past this year. I'd rather buy now and maybe pay a little more in puchase price, but pay a rate in the 3s vs waiting to save another 20-30 grand on the house, only to end up paying significantly more in the long run when rates go back into the 5s or worse.

Just refinanced to 2.875%......that's right.....in the 2's !!

No closing costs, either. Whoot!

:strong:

Requiem
07-12-2012, 07:49 AM
Depends on your situation. I knew I wanted to raise a family here and started my business at 19 so at 24, I bought a 2500 square foot house. it will be paid off when I am 48 and kids will be young teenagers. Life should be good.

Well of course, I was really just speaking from my perspective right now. Obviously, there are going to be situations that arise that might make things different. At this point in my life I see myself being mobile for a while. I want to travel and do things that are fun while I am young and don't have to worry about responsibilities past myself and helping my family. I don't have any interest in such a purchase until I'm capable.

I'm not in "get a career" mode, because I'm still pondering going back to school and until some things shake out in the economy, I just don't see myself making such a big investment. I had the opportunity to seriously consider home ownership in Fargo a few years ago when I had a really good paying job, but I still couldn't justify it. Even though I liked the area, I knew it wasn't somewhere I wanted to be for the long haul. That area has been relatively recession/depression proof compared to other places in the country, but I'd of been up poo creek without a pattle had something went wrong, jobs got cut, etc. So, of course I decided no. At any case, in my eyes, I'd have to find that place (somewhere you truly love) first before I'd ever make the commitment. I have been a lot of places, but I haven't been *there* yet.

Additionally, I'd have to find that special someone to make it work. . . maybe. I had no problems throwing affordable rent prices the past few years and didn't see it being a "waste" of money. Being young, a bachelor, with little material possesions (besides technology, music equipment, etc.) -- I don't have a need for a large place. A couple hundred square foot studio apartment or one bedroom is fine for me. Wherever I move to next, that'll be the likely scenario. Considering I spend little time at home (after work) besides relaxing and sleep, I wouldn't EVER pay a buttload on a mortgage.

JJG
07-12-2012, 07:53 AM
Where do you come up with anything being comparable with the apartment vs the house...? Only thing was the wages earned to be comparable..????Hilarious!

basically your saying that person #1 pays 18% of his take home towards rent, will be less stressed and have more disposable income, short term (since who knows how long you'll live), than person#2 who pays a ridiculous 34% of his take home towards his mortgage.

brilliant!

BroncoBeavis
07-12-2012, 07:57 AM
basically your saying that person #1 pays 18% of his take home towards rent, will be less stressed and have more disposable income, short term (since who knows how long you'll live), than person#2 who pays a ridiculous 34% of his take home towards his mortgage.

brilliant!

Cardboard boxes are cheap. I should move the family into a nice spacious refrigerator box for a week and see how my blood pressure does. :)

JJG
07-12-2012, 08:13 AM
Cardboard boxes are cheap. I should move the family into a nice spacious refrigerator box for a week and see how my blood pressure does. :)

Spring for the "double wide"Hilarious!

Meck77
07-12-2012, 09:00 AM
Traditionally it has been but we are in a long running downward housing market . Today it is better to wait until this shakes itself out. Nothing more restrictive than finding yourself in an upside down mortgage

People make the mistake thinking they make money when they sell. If done correctly you "make" money the moment you buy it.

Ex. I just closed on a property tax value of 135k for 42k. Market value is well over 150k. Needs some work and elbow grease but do the numbers. That is called instant equity.

I certainly understand the fear people have with owning. It isn't for everyone and there are advantages to renting depending on one's circumstances.

I'm a firm believer in the world is what you make it. Where some see risk, failure and losses others see value, opportunity, and return on investment.

Trying to time to the market with any investment isn't that easy either. I've never been one to try and time bottoms. I do believe in trends though and the trend is certainly one's friend.

The next big trend is obviously the next presidential election. That will sway the markets and one must be prepared to act accordingly.

Don't let the fear mongers out there rattle you guys. America is still the land of opportunity! There is a reason that even the wealthy people of the world are buying homes in America instead of their own countries. See China, Mexico, Russia etc.

If you are renting do yourself a favor even if you don't want to buy or plan on buying. Go see a lender and have them pull your credit. You may have issues on there that you aren't even aware of. Start working on them now as these things take time to clear up. Also, if you are like Buckey living in an apartment and enjoy seeing the maintenance man change your light bulbs Hilarious! and you really are saving money then why wouldn't you stack cash for a down payment for the future?
At some point there will be a deal that you cannot and should not pass up! There are deals everyday then there are LIFE CHANGING DEALS. Why wouldn't you prepare yourself and your family for financial freedom?

baja
07-13-2012, 06:59 AM
Investors buying REO cripple the move-up market
GARDEN GROVE, NEWS Tagged with: Speculation-Investment
Jul
12
2012

Prices crashed in 2007 and 2008 down to levels of relative affordability due to shrinking loan balances from the withdrawal of toxic loan products. Each of the loan owners who used unstable loans lost their houses and their creditworthiness. As a result, millions of foreclosures hit the market and there were not enough buyers to support prices at historic levels of affordability, so many markets crashed well below fundamental values.



The group who ordinarily take equity from a previous sale to support a move-up market is absent because they have neither the credit nor the equity to complete the sale. The absent move-up buyer is keeping sales volumes relatively low as compared to historic standards. realtors have been touting the strength of home sales recently by comparing them to the record low sales volumes of the last three years. In truth, we are still about 20% below the average sales volume of the last 20 years, mostly due to the lack of a viable move-up market.

Over the last few years, much of the housing market sales volume came from cashflow investors seeking better yields. The small investors are being joined by large hedge funds to buy properties to hold for their rental income. These buyers do not favor move-up markets because prices are still inflated, and the cashflow returns donít make sense. Some speculate in these move-up markets, but few professional investors place money there. Most of the investor purchases have been below-median properties with good rental yields.

The reason this opportunity exists for investors is because there simply arenít enough first-time homebuyers to absorb all the inventory. Some have postulated that investors are driving prices up for owner occupants. That isnít the case. Cashflow investors donít typically crowd out families. Someone buying a property as an owner occupant typically bids more aggressively than an investor because they are not worried about the rental returns. Cashflow investors are bottom feeders looking for bargains, so they are less prone to get caught up in bidding wars.

One result of all the investor activity at the bottom of the housing ladder is that first-time homebuyers who are the backbone of tomorrowís move-up market are fewer in number. When prices start going back up, the equity which ordinarily would have supported a move up market will instead add to the wealth of an investor who wonít be selling the property to port the equity into a move-up house. As a consequence, the move up market will languish for much longer than most realize.

When Foreclosure Supplies Fall, the Bottom Falls Out of Housing

http://ochousingnews.com/news/investors-buying-reo-cripple-the-move-up-market?source=Patrick.net