Confused with the current market

[temeculaguy]

Just an addendum, the 2k daycare is bugging me. Is there a grandparent or relative that isn’t doing anything? It’s almost the equivalent of rent. I feel blessed seeing your story since I only had to deal with the childcare thing for a short time, but a place with another room, even a place you buy, shouldn’t be 2k more and many people have a relative who would exchange free rent/utilities/food for childcare. Because you wrote of the trips to visit relatives in Europe, it may not be an option. If it is, that can be soloution. With so many people unemployed, are you related to any of them that wouldn’t mind living in So Cal for free? Grandparents and great grandparents can be a nice influence on the younguns, sometimes it is an impossibility but sometimes all you need to do is ask.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=scaredycat]TG, day care is that expensive, esp. in pricey places, esp. if you want quality. live-in is cheaper, if you’re ok with committing tax fraud and employing illegals, which may not be a good idea.

i’d put 0 in the college fund, make the kids borrow, all the money you save will displace grants. saving for college is a ripoff.

I would eat cheaper food. try generic gin, it’s good. and oatmeal. I can eat and get drunk for pennies a day.[/quote]

Scardey, you may be right, I’m probably a bit out of touch with the day care thing. When I did employ the household help, I used an agency and got a green card and college educated nanny. She still didn’t speak english, but we all learned spanish, luckily the kids school was a short walk as she didn’t drive. The point is, look for alternatives, weigh options, open your mind a little and you might find ways to cut corners to make ends meet. I’ve spent a few years on these boards defending my chosen town, but truth be told, I’m here entirely because of one reason, free child care. The grandmas live in Temecula, Tg lives in temecula, end of discussion. The bonus is that my mortgage is the same price as other people’s child care bill, I have many blessings to count because of that, but mostly I am thankful because looking backwards over my career as a parent, grandmas are the the bomb, I envy my kids relationship with their grandmas that I never had and I’ve done some some smart things in my life but they all pale in comparison to living within walking distance to both my kids grandmas. Nothing feels better than getting stuck at work and knowing that grandma will be spoiling them rotten in my absence.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=scaredycat]TG, day care is that expensive, esp. in pricey places, esp. if you want quality. live-in is cheaper, if you’re ok with committing tax fraud and employing illegals, which may not be a good idea.

i’d put 0 in the college fund, make the kids borrow, all the money you save will displace grants. saving for college is a ripoff.

I would eat cheaper food. try generic gin, it’s good. and oatmeal. I can eat and get drunk for pennies a day.[/quote]

Scardey, you may be right, I’m probably a bit out of touch with the day care thing. When I did employ the household help, I used an agency and got a green card and college educated nanny. She still didn’t speak english, but we all learned spanish, luckily the kids school was a short walk as she didn’t drive. The point is, look for alternatives, weigh options, open your mind a little and you might find ways to cut corners to make ends meet. I’ve spent a few years on these boards defending my chosen town, but truth be told, I’m here entirely because of one reason, free child care. The grandmas live in Temecula, Tg lives in temecula, end of discussion. The bonus is that my mortgage is the same price as other people’s child care bill, I have many blessings to count because of that, but mostly I am thankful because looking backwards over my career as a parent, grandmas are the the bomb, I envy my kids relationship with their grandmas that I never had and I’ve done some some smart things in my life but they all pale in comparison to living within walking distance to both my kids grandmas. Nothing feels better than getting stuck at work and knowing that grandma will be spoiling them rotten in my absence.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=scaredycat]TG, day care is that expensive, esp. in pricey places, esp. if you want quality. live-in is cheaper, if you’re ok with committing tax fraud and employing illegals, which may not be a good idea.

i’d put 0 in the college fund, make the kids borrow, all the money you save will displace grants. saving for college is a ripoff.

I would eat cheaper food. try generic gin, it’s good. and oatmeal. I can eat and get drunk for pennies a day.[/quote]

Scardey, you may be right, I’m probably a bit out of touch with the day care thing. When I did employ the household help, I used an agency and got a green card and college educated nanny. She still didn’t speak english, but we all learned spanish, luckily the kids school was a short walk as she didn’t drive. The point is, look for alternatives, weigh options, open your mind a little and you might find ways to cut corners to make ends meet. I’ve spent a few years on these boards defending my chosen town, but truth be told, I’m here entirely because of one reason, free child care. The grandmas live in Temecula, Tg lives in temecula, end of discussion. The bonus is that my mortgage is the same price as other people’s child care bill, I have many blessings to count because of that, but mostly I am thankful because looking backwards over my career as a parent, grandmas are the the bomb, I envy my kids relationship with their grandmas that I never had and I’ve done some some smart things in my life but they all pale in comparison to living within walking distance to both my kids grandmas. Nothing feels better than getting stuck at work and knowing that grandma will be spoiling them rotten in my absence.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=scaredycat]TG, day care is that expensive, esp. in pricey places, esp. if you want quality. live-in is cheaper, if you’re ok with committing tax fraud and employing illegals, which may not be a good idea.

i’d put 0 in the college fund, make the kids borrow, all the money you save will displace grants. saving for college is a ripoff.

I would eat cheaper food. try generic gin, it’s good. and oatmeal. I can eat and get drunk for pennies a day.[/quote]

Scardey, you may be right, I’m probably a bit out of touch with the day care thing. When I did employ the household help, I used an agency and got a green card and college educated nanny. She still didn’t speak english, but we all learned spanish, luckily the kids school was a short walk as she didn’t drive. The point is, look for alternatives, weigh options, open your mind a little and you might find ways to cut corners to make ends meet. I’ve spent a few years on these boards defending my chosen town, but truth be told, I’m here entirely because of one reason, free child care. The grandmas live in Temecula, Tg lives in temecula, end of discussion. The bonus is that my mortgage is the same price as other people’s child care bill, I have many blessings to count because of that, but mostly I am thankful because looking backwards over my career as a parent, grandmas are the the bomb, I envy my kids relationship with their grandmas that I never had and I’ve done some some smart things in my life but they all pale in comparison to living within walking distance to both my kids grandmas. Nothing feels better than getting stuck at work and knowing that grandma will be spoiling them rotten in my absence.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=scaredycat]TG, day care is that expensive, esp. in pricey places, esp. if you want quality. live-in is cheaper, if you’re ok with committing tax fraud and employing illegals, which may not be a good idea.

i’d put 0 in the college fund, make the kids borrow, all the money you save will displace grants. saving for college is a ripoff.

I would eat cheaper food. try generic gin, it’s good. and oatmeal. I can eat and get drunk for pennies a day.[/quote]

Scardey, you may be right, I’m probably a bit out of touch with the day care thing. When I did employ the household help, I used an agency and got a green card and college educated nanny. She still didn’t speak english, but we all learned spanish, luckily the kids school was a short walk as she didn’t drive. The point is, look for alternatives, weigh options, open your mind a little and you might find ways to cut corners to make ends meet. I’ve spent a few years on these boards defending my chosen town, but truth be told, I’m here entirely because of one reason, free child care. The grandmas live in Temecula, Tg lives in temecula, end of discussion. The bonus is that my mortgage is the same price as other people’s child care bill, I have many blessings to count because of that, but mostly I am thankful because looking backwards over my career as a parent, grandmas are the the bomb, I envy my kids relationship with their grandmas that I never had and I’ve done some some smart things in my life but they all pale in comparison to living within walking distance to both my kids grandmas. Nothing feels better than getting stuck at work and knowing that grandma will be spoiling them rotten in my absence.

[outtamojo]

Thanks TG, well said. The happy meal thing brings up a sore point tho- every time I take the kids to Mcdonalds I feel like I got ripped off. Fed 7 year old son, 8 yr old cousin and 3 year old daughter- nothin for me and da wife~ 22 bucks! What did they have, 2 caesar salads, happy meal, drinks, shake, cheesburger- coulda ate at a Chinese sit down place and fed all of us for almost the same. Best
moneysaving tip I can offer: stay the heck away from Starbucks! Agree term is the way to go- I pay 430 a year for half a million. He may have a problem tho if he’s been paying into one of those whole life thingies- you’re kinda trapped. And, having family on another continent is a killer moneywise- I sympathize.

[outtamojo]

Thanks TG, well said. The happy meal thing brings up a sore point tho- every time I take the kids to Mcdonalds I feel like I got ripped off. Fed 7 year old son, 8 yr old cousin and 3 year old daughter- nothin for me and da wife~ 22 bucks! What did they have, 2 caesar salads, happy meal, drinks, shake, cheesburger- coulda ate at a Chinese sit down place and fed all of us for almost the same. Best
moneysaving tip I can offer: stay the heck away from Starbucks! Agree term is the way to go- I pay 430 a year for half a million. He may have a problem tho if he’s been paying into one of those whole life thingies- you’re kinda trapped. And, having family on another continent is a killer moneywise- I sympathize.

[outtamojo]

Thanks TG, well said. The happy meal thing brings up a sore point tho- every time I take the kids to Mcdonalds I feel like I got ripped off. Fed 7 year old son, 8 yr old cousin and 3 year old daughter- nothin for me and da wife~ 22 bucks! What did they have, 2 caesar salads, happy meal, drinks, shake, cheesburger- coulda ate at a Chinese sit down place and fed all of us for almost the same. Best
moneysaving tip I can offer: stay the heck away from Starbucks! Agree term is the way to go- I pay 430 a year for half a million. He may have a problem tho if he’s been paying into one of those whole life thingies- you’re kinda trapped. And, having family on another continent is a killer moneywise- I sympathize.

[outtamojo]

Thanks TG, well said. The happy meal thing brings up a sore point tho- every time I take the kids to Mcdonalds I feel like I got ripped off. Fed 7 year old son, 8 yr old cousin and 3 year old daughter- nothin for me and da wife~ 22 bucks! What did they have, 2 caesar salads, happy meal, drinks, shake, cheesburger- coulda ate at a Chinese sit down place and fed all of us for almost the same. Best
moneysaving tip I can offer: stay the heck away from Starbucks! Agree term is the way to go- I pay 430 a year for half a million. He may have a problem tho if he’s been paying into one of those whole life thingies- you’re kinda trapped. And, having family on another continent is a killer moneywise- I sympathize.

[outtamojo]

Thanks TG, well said. The happy meal thing brings up a sore point tho- every time I take the kids to Mcdonalds I feel like I got ripped off. Fed 7 year old son, 8 yr old cousin and 3 year old daughter- nothin for me and da wife~ 22 bucks! What did they have, 2 caesar salads, happy meal, drinks, shake, cheesburger- coulda ate at a Chinese sit down place and fed all of us for almost the same. Best
moneysaving tip I can offer: stay the heck away from Starbucks! Agree term is the way to go- I pay 430 a year for half a million. He may have a problem tho if he’s been paying into one of those whole life thingies- you’re kinda trapped. And, having family on another continent is a killer moneywise- I sympathize.

[Arraya]

[quote=sdrealtor]Arraya
Do you think your judgement is clouded by the fact you arent making payments right now and thus have become desensitized to that and can easily project that behavior onto the rest of the US population?[/quote]

haha… You know, sdr, projection may not be the psychological condition at play here, between the two of us. I’d venture to say there is one, though.

I can understand why you would think that, though. Still, It does not take being in the same position to figure out that somebody in an upside down mortgage is a default risk. It’s pretty much a no brainer. The worse the perception of the market, the bigger risk of walking. I’ve helped a few people with there decisions. All they need is a little encouragement. It can be a very freeing experience when the go through with it. I try do good where I can;)

40% upside down in SD is a daunting number, isn’t it.

On that note: Mish had a very interesting post regarding a mass fear and shame campaign by lenders to get people to stay in there homes. People are being psychologically coerced into not walking, much like during the run up of the bubble but with reverse emotional tactics. This has kept strategic walkers at historical norms.

Despite reports that homeowners are increasingly “walking away” from their mortgages, most homeowners continue to make their payments even when they are significantly underwater. This article suggests that most homeowners choose not to strategically default as a result of two emotional forces: 1) the desire to avoid the shame and guilt of foreclosure; and 2) exaggerated anxiety over foreclosure’s perceived consequences. Moreover, these emotional constraints are actively cultivated by the government and other social control agents in order to encourage homeowners to follow social and moral norms related to the honoring of financial obligations – and to ignore market and legal norms under which strategic default might be both viable and the wisest financial decision. Norms governing homeowner behavior stand in sharp contrast to norms governing lenders, who seek to maximize profits or minimize losses irrespective of concerns of morality or social responsibility. This norm asymmetry leads to distributional inequalities in which individual homeowners shoulder a disproportionate burden from the housing collapse.

Interestingly, Latvia had laws which entailed indentured servitude for walking from a mortgage and it back fired, the people revolted. Apparently, the psychological tactics work better for keeping people debt slaves.

[Arraya]

[quote=sdrealtor]Arraya
Do you think your judgement is clouded by the fact you arent making payments right now and thus have become desensitized to that and can easily project that behavior onto the rest of the US population?[/quote]

haha… You know, sdr, projection may not be the psychological condition at play here, between the two of us. I’d venture to say there is one, though.

I can understand why you would think that, though. Still, It does not take being in the same position to figure out that somebody in an upside down mortgage is a default risk. It’s pretty much a no brainer. The worse the perception of the market, the bigger risk of walking. I’ve helped a few people with there decisions. All they need is a little encouragement. It can be a very freeing experience when the go through with it. I try do good where I can;)

40% upside down in SD is a daunting number, isn’t it.

On that note: Mish had a very interesting post regarding a mass fear and shame campaign by lenders to get people to stay in there homes. People are being psychologically coerced into not walking, much like during the run up of the bubble but with reverse emotional tactics. This has kept strategic walkers at historical norms.

Despite reports that homeowners are increasingly “walking away” from their mortgages, most homeowners continue to make their payments even when they are significantly underwater. This article suggests that most homeowners choose not to strategically default as a result of two emotional forces: 1) the desire to avoid the shame and guilt of foreclosure; and 2) exaggerated anxiety over foreclosure’s perceived consequences. Moreover, these emotional constraints are actively cultivated by the government and other social control agents in order to encourage homeowners to follow social and moral norms related to the honoring of financial obligations – and to ignore market and legal norms under which strategic default might be both viable and the wisest financial decision. Norms governing homeowner behavior stand in sharp contrast to norms governing lenders, who seek to maximize profits or minimize losses irrespective of concerns of morality or social responsibility. This norm asymmetry leads to distributional inequalities in which individual homeowners shoulder a disproportionate burden from the housing collapse.

Interestingly, Latvia had laws which entailed indentured servitude for walking from a mortgage and it back fired, the people revolted. Apparently, the psychological tactics work better for keeping people debt slaves.

[Arraya]

[quote=sdrealtor]Arraya
Do you think your judgement is clouded by the fact you arent making payments right now and thus have become desensitized to that and can easily project that behavior onto the rest of the US population?[/quote]

haha… You know, sdr, projection may not be the psychological condition at play here, between the two of us. I’d venture to say there is one, though.

I can understand why you would think that, though. Still, It does not take being in the same position to figure out that somebody in an upside down mortgage is a default risk. It’s pretty much a no brainer. The worse the perception of the market, the bigger risk of walking. I’ve helped a few people with there decisions. All they need is a little encouragement. It can be a very freeing experience when the go through with it. I try do good where I can;)

40% upside down in SD is a daunting number, isn’t it.

On that note: Mish had a very interesting post regarding a mass fear and shame campaign by lenders to get people to stay in there homes. People are being psychologically coerced into not walking, much like during the run up of the bubble but with reverse emotional tactics. This has kept strategic walkers at historical norms.

Despite reports that homeowners are increasingly “walking away” from their mortgages, most homeowners continue to make their payments even when they are significantly underwater. This article suggests that most homeowners choose not to strategically default as a result of two emotional forces: 1) the desire to avoid the shame and guilt of foreclosure; and 2) exaggerated anxiety over foreclosure’s perceived consequences. Moreover, these emotional constraints are actively cultivated by the government and other social control agents in order to encourage homeowners to follow social and moral norms related to the honoring of financial obligations – and to ignore market and legal norms under which strategic default might be both viable and the wisest financial decision. Norms governing homeowner behavior stand in sharp contrast to norms governing lenders, who seek to maximize profits or minimize losses irrespective of concerns of morality or social responsibility. This norm asymmetry leads to distributional inequalities in which individual homeowners shoulder a disproportionate burden from the housing collapse.

Interestingly, Latvia had laws which entailed indentured servitude for walking from a mortgage and it back fired, the people revolted. Apparently, the psychological tactics work better for keeping people debt slaves.

[Arraya]

[quote=sdrealtor]Arraya
Do you think your judgement is clouded by the fact you arent making payments right now and thus have become desensitized to that and can easily project that behavior onto the rest of the US population?[/quote]

haha… You know, sdr, projection may not be the psychological condition at play here, between the two of us. I’d venture to say there is one, though.

I can understand why you would think that, though. Still, It does not take being in the same position to figure out that somebody in an upside down mortgage is a default risk. It’s pretty much a no brainer. The worse the perception of the market, the bigger risk of walking. I’ve helped a few people with there decisions. All they need is a little encouragement. It can be a very freeing experience when the go through with it. I try do good where I can;)

40% upside down in SD is a daunting number, isn’t it.

On that note: Mish had a very interesting post regarding a mass fear and shame campaign by lenders to get people to stay in there homes. People are being psychologically coerced into not walking, much like during the run up of the bubble but with reverse emotional tactics. This has kept strategic walkers at historical norms.

Despite reports that homeowners are increasingly “walking away” from their mortgages, most homeowners continue to make their payments even when they are significantly underwater. This article suggests that most homeowners choose not to strategically default as a result of two emotional forces: 1) the desire to avoid the shame and guilt of foreclosure; and 2) exaggerated anxiety over foreclosure’s perceived consequences. Moreover, these emotional constraints are actively cultivated by the government and other social control agents in order to encourage homeowners to follow social and moral norms related to the honoring of financial obligations – and to ignore market and legal norms under which strategic default might be both viable and the wisest financial decision. Norms governing homeowner behavior stand in sharp contrast to norms governing lenders, who seek to maximize profits or minimize losses irrespective of concerns of morality or social responsibility. This norm asymmetry leads to distributional inequalities in which individual homeowners shoulder a disproportionate burden from the housing collapse.

Interestingly, Latvia had laws which entailed indentured servitude for walking from a mortgage and it back fired, the people revolted. Apparently, the psychological tactics work better for keeping people debt slaves.

[Author]

Posts