- This topic has 585 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 7 months ago by
equalizer.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 12, 2011 at 8:49 PM #687089April 12, 2011 at 9:29 PM #685950
sdrealtor
Participant[quote=CafeMoto][quote=UCguy]Sigh….
It seems to make more sense to wait at least 2 more years maybe 3 tops….until so we can put 20% (and be under 417K).That is how I am thinking of a middle ground compromise.
How I will come up with that 20%: well, I want to have some cash on hand so I will probably borrow 5% from 401k (30K), preferably from less riskier one (the 403b0, AND make sure I have AT LEAST THAT MUCH left in cash, if not more. So, I need to save ~50K or 25K a year.
We have already reduced the 403b contribution to a minimum (because of no more matching in UCSD), on the other hand I will continue to contribute to my 401k 6% (the company will match 3%) – so I won’t max it out anymore.
The upside of this wait is that in a couple of years it would be hopefully a more normal market, with tighter rules, and lower home prices…I never thought it would take this long though, so who knows how long this still has to unfold….[/quote]
I agree with this decision, it is like jstoesz said; if people that can afford to get in at 550K (but its a huge stretch) stop buying the most house they can afford prices will come down. Not too many households making close to 200k so prices are likely to keep sliding I believe. Wishing you and the piggs who have bought nothing but the best. Your kids and friends will probably enjoy you more as parents not being financially rung.[/quote]
If I’m not mistaken jstoesz now lives somewhere out in the woods in a suburb of Sacramento. If thats what you want out of life so be it. With an income pushing 200K a 550K purchase is far from a stretch, its an no brainer budgetwise unless you are very conservative as many around here are. From personal experience, once your income is above roughly 100K the ratios go out the window. You can afford the things you need and now it is a question of what you want. Above 100K, most folks could comfortably devote close to 50% of their incremental income if that is what they wanted. So the real question is what do you want?
April 12, 2011 at 9:29 PM #686003Participant[quote=CafeMoto][quote=UCguy]Sigh….
It seems to make more sense to wait at least 2 more years maybe 3 tops….until so we can put 20% (and be under 417K).That is how I am thinking of a middle ground compromise.
How I will come up with that 20%: well, I want to have some cash on hand so I will probably borrow 5% from 401k (30K), preferably from less riskier one (the 403b0, AND make sure I have AT LEAST THAT MUCH left in cash, if not more. So, I need to save ~50K or 25K a year.
We have already reduced the 403b contribution to a minimum (because of no more matching in UCSD), on the other hand I will continue to contribute to my 401k 6% (the company will match 3%) – so I won’t max it out anymore.
The upside of this wait is that in a couple of years it would be hopefully a more normal market, with tighter rules, and lower home prices…I never thought it would take this long though, so who knows how long this still has to unfold….[/quote]
I agree with this decision, it is like jstoesz said; if people that can afford to get in at 550K (but its a huge stretch) stop buying the most house they can afford prices will come down. Not too many households making close to 200k so prices are likely to keep sliding I believe. Wishing you and the piggs who have bought nothing but the best. Your kids and friends will probably enjoy you more as parents not being financially rung.[/quote]
If I’m not mistaken jstoesz now lives somewhere out in the woods in a suburb of Sacramento. If thats what you want out of life so be it. With an income pushing 200K a 550K purchase is far from a stretch, its an no brainer budgetwise unless you are very conservative as many around here are. From personal experience, once your income is above roughly 100K the ratios go out the window. You can afford the things you need and now it is a question of what you want. Above 100K, most folks could comfortably devote close to 50% of their incremental income if that is what they wanted. So the real question is what do you want?
April 12, 2011 at 9:29 PM #686627Participant[quote=CafeMoto][quote=UCguy]Sigh….
It seems to make more sense to wait at least 2 more years maybe 3 tops….until so we can put 20% (and be under 417K).That is how I am thinking of a middle ground compromise.
How I will come up with that 20%: well, I want to have some cash on hand so I will probably borrow 5% from 401k (30K), preferably from less riskier one (the 403b0, AND make sure I have AT LEAST THAT MUCH left in cash, if not more. So, I need to save ~50K or 25K a year.
We have already reduced the 403b contribution to a minimum (because of no more matching in UCSD), on the other hand I will continue to contribute to my 401k 6% (the company will match 3%) – so I won’t max it out anymore.
The upside of this wait is that in a couple of years it would be hopefully a more normal market, with tighter rules, and lower home prices…I never thought it would take this long though, so who knows how long this still has to unfold….[/quote]
I agree with this decision, it is like jstoesz said; if people that can afford to get in at 550K (but its a huge stretch) stop buying the most house they can afford prices will come down. Not too many households making close to 200k so prices are likely to keep sliding I believe. Wishing you and the piggs who have bought nothing but the best. Your kids and friends will probably enjoy you more as parents not being financially rung.[/quote]
If I’m not mistaken jstoesz now lives somewhere out in the woods in a suburb of Sacramento. If thats what you want out of life so be it. With an income pushing 200K a 550K purchase is far from a stretch, its an no brainer budgetwise unless you are very conservative as many around here are. From personal experience, once your income is above roughly 100K the ratios go out the window. You can afford the things you need and now it is a question of what you want. Above 100K, most folks could comfortably devote close to 50% of their incremental income if that is what they wanted. So the real question is what do you want?
April 12, 2011 at 9:29 PM #686769Participant[quote=CafeMoto][quote=UCguy]Sigh….
It seems to make more sense to wait at least 2 more years maybe 3 tops….until so we can put 20% (and be under 417K).That is how I am thinking of a middle ground compromise.
How I will come up with that 20%: well, I want to have some cash on hand so I will probably borrow 5% from 401k (30K), preferably from less riskier one (the 403b0, AND make sure I have AT LEAST THAT MUCH left in cash, if not more. So, I need to save ~50K or 25K a year.
We have already reduced the 403b contribution to a minimum (because of no more matching in UCSD), on the other hand I will continue to contribute to my 401k 6% (the company will match 3%) – so I won’t max it out anymore.
The upside of this wait is that in a couple of years it would be hopefully a more normal market, with tighter rules, and lower home prices…I never thought it would take this long though, so who knows how long this still has to unfold….[/quote]
I agree with this decision, it is like jstoesz said; if people that can afford to get in at 550K (but its a huge stretch) stop buying the most house they can afford prices will come down. Not too many households making close to 200k so prices are likely to keep sliding I believe. Wishing you and the piggs who have bought nothing but the best. Your kids and friends will probably enjoy you more as parents not being financially rung.[/quote]
If I’m not mistaken jstoesz now lives somewhere out in the woods in a suburb of Sacramento. If thats what you want out of life so be it. With an income pushing 200K a 550K purchase is far from a stretch, its an no brainer budgetwise unless you are very conservative as many around here are. From personal experience, once your income is above roughly 100K the ratios go out the window. You can afford the things you need and now it is a question of what you want. Above 100K, most folks could comfortably devote close to 50% of their incremental income if that is what they wanted. So the real question is what do you want?
April 12, 2011 at 9:29 PM #687118Participant[quote=CafeMoto][quote=UCguy]Sigh….
It seems to make more sense to wait at least 2 more years maybe 3 tops….until so we can put 20% (and be under 417K).That is how I am thinking of a middle ground compromise.
How I will come up with that 20%: well, I want to have some cash on hand so I will probably borrow 5% from 401k (30K), preferably from less riskier one (the 403b0, AND make sure I have AT LEAST THAT MUCH left in cash, if not more. So, I need to save ~50K or 25K a year.
We have already reduced the 403b contribution to a minimum (because of no more matching in UCSD), on the other hand I will continue to contribute to my 401k 6% (the company will match 3%) – so I won’t max it out anymore.
The upside of this wait is that in a couple of years it would be hopefully a more normal market, with tighter rules, and lower home prices…I never thought it would take this long though, so who knows how long this still has to unfold….[/quote]
I agree with this decision, it is like jstoesz said; if people that can afford to get in at 550K (but its a huge stretch) stop buying the most house they can afford prices will come down. Not too many households making close to 200k so prices are likely to keep sliding I believe. Wishing you and the piggs who have bought nothing but the best. Your kids and friends will probably enjoy you more as parents not being financially rung.[/quote]
If I’m not mistaken jstoesz now lives somewhere out in the woods in a suburb of Sacramento. If thats what you want out of life so be it. With an income pushing 200K a 550K purchase is far from a stretch, its an no brainer budgetwise unless you are very conservative as many around here are. From personal experience, once your income is above roughly 100K the ratios go out the window. You can afford the things you need and now it is a question of what you want. Above 100K, most folks could comfortably devote close to 50% of their incremental income if that is what they wanted. So the real question is what do you want?
April 12, 2011 at 9:46 PM #685955jstoesz
Participant[quote=sdrealtor][quote=CafeMoto][quote=UCguy]Sigh….
It seems to make more sense to wait at least 2 more years maybe 3 tops….until so we can put 20% (and be under 417K).That is how I am thinking of a middle ground compromise.
How I will come up with that 20%: well, I want to have some cash on hand so I will probably borrow 5% from 401k (30K), preferably from less riskier one (the 403b0, AND make sure I have AT LEAST THAT MUCH left in cash, if not more. So, I need to save ~50K or 25K a year.
We have already reduced the 403b contribution to a minimum (because of no more matching in UCSD), on the other hand I will continue to contribute to my 401k 6% (the company will match 3%) – so I won’t max it out anymore.
The upside of this wait is that in a couple of years it would be hopefully a more normal market, with tighter rules, and lower home prices…I never thought it would take this long though, so who knows how long this still has to unfold….[/quote]
I agree with this decision, it is like jstoesz said; if people that can afford to get in at 550K (but its a huge stretch) stop buying the most house they can afford prices will come down. Not too many households making close to 200k so prices are likely to keep sliding I believe. Wishing you and the piggs who have bought nothing but the best. Your kids and friends will probably enjoy you more as parents not being financially rung.[/quote]
If I’m not mistaken jstoesz now lives somewhere out in the woods in a suburb of Sacramento. If thats what you want out of life so be it. With an income pushing 200K a 550K purchase is far from a stretch, its an no brainer budgetwise unless you are very conservative as many around here are. From personal experience, once your income is above roughly 100K the ratios go out the window. You can afford the things you need and now it is a question of what you want. Above 100K, most folks could comfortably devote close to 50% of their incremental income if that is what they wanted. So the real question is what do you want?[/quote]
Haha! sdr, you are correct…
Now I must brag to defend my lifestyle choices to all the citi-its/tour-ons (sound it out) of SD!
Last weekend, I spent Saturday skiing 2 feet of Utah quality champagne powder (45 mins from my door) and rounded it out with 10 pitches of glorious sierra trad climbing on sunday (30 mins from my door) while working on my sun tan. So if you want to defend you smog filled traffic jam existence in the over priced crap holdem of sd suburbs…well color me skeptical!
And make no mistake, this is a normal weekend for me…I am Yosemite bond next weekend for a short route up the backside of half dome!
April 12, 2011 at 9:46 PM #686008Participant[quote=sdrealtor][quote=CafeMoto][quote=UCguy]Sigh….
It seems to make more sense to wait at least 2 more years maybe 3 tops….until so we can put 20% (and be under 417K).That is how I am thinking of a middle ground compromise.
How I will come up with that 20%: well, I want to have some cash on hand so I will probably borrow 5% from 401k (30K), preferably from less riskier one (the 403b0, AND make sure I have AT LEAST THAT MUCH left in cash, if not more. So, I need to save ~50K or 25K a year.
We have already reduced the 403b contribution to a minimum (because of no more matching in UCSD), on the other hand I will continue to contribute to my 401k 6% (the company will match 3%) – so I won’t max it out anymore.
The upside of this wait is that in a couple of years it would be hopefully a more normal market, with tighter rules, and lower home prices…I never thought it would take this long though, so who knows how long this still has to unfold….[/quote]
I agree with this decision, it is like jstoesz said; if people that can afford to get in at 550K (but its a huge stretch) stop buying the most house they can afford prices will come down. Not too many households making close to 200k so prices are likely to keep sliding I believe. Wishing you and the piggs who have bought nothing but the best. Your kids and friends will probably enjoy you more as parents not being financially rung.[/quote]
If I’m not mistaken jstoesz now lives somewhere out in the woods in a suburb of Sacramento. If thats what you want out of life so be it. With an income pushing 200K a 550K purchase is far from a stretch, its an no brainer budgetwise unless you are very conservative as many around here are. From personal experience, once your income is above roughly 100K the ratios go out the window. You can afford the things you need and now it is a question of what you want. Above 100K, most folks could comfortably devote close to 50% of their incremental income if that is what they wanted. So the real question is what do you want?[/quote]
Haha! sdr, you are correct…
Now I must brag to defend my lifestyle choices to all the citi-its/tour-ons (sound it out) of SD!
Last weekend, I spent Saturday skiing 2 feet of Utah quality champagne powder (45 mins from my door) and rounded it out with 10 pitches of glorious sierra trad climbing on sunday (30 mins from my door) while working on my sun tan. So if you want to defend you smog filled traffic jam existence in the over priced crap holdem of sd suburbs…well color me skeptical!
And make no mistake, this is a normal weekend for me…I am Yosemite bond next weekend for a short route up the backside of half dome!
April 12, 2011 at 9:46 PM #686632Participant[quote=sdrealtor][quote=CafeMoto][quote=UCguy]Sigh….
It seems to make more sense to wait at least 2 more years maybe 3 tops….until so we can put 20% (and be under 417K).That is how I am thinking of a middle ground compromise.
How I will come up with that 20%: well, I want to have some cash on hand so I will probably borrow 5% from 401k (30K), preferably from less riskier one (the 403b0, AND make sure I have AT LEAST THAT MUCH left in cash, if not more. So, I need to save ~50K or 25K a year.
We have already reduced the 403b contribution to a minimum (because of no more matching in UCSD), on the other hand I will continue to contribute to my 401k 6% (the company will match 3%) – so I won’t max it out anymore.
The upside of this wait is that in a couple of years it would be hopefully a more normal market, with tighter rules, and lower home prices…I never thought it would take this long though, so who knows how long this still has to unfold….[/quote]
I agree with this decision, it is like jstoesz said; if people that can afford to get in at 550K (but its a huge stretch) stop buying the most house they can afford prices will come down. Not too many households making close to 200k so prices are likely to keep sliding I believe. Wishing you and the piggs who have bought nothing but the best. Your kids and friends will probably enjoy you more as parents not being financially rung.[/quote]
If I’m not mistaken jstoesz now lives somewhere out in the woods in a suburb of Sacramento. If thats what you want out of life so be it. With an income pushing 200K a 550K purchase is far from a stretch, its an no brainer budgetwise unless you are very conservative as many around here are. From personal experience, once your income is above roughly 100K the ratios go out the window. You can afford the things you need and now it is a question of what you want. Above 100K, most folks could comfortably devote close to 50% of their incremental income if that is what they wanted. So the real question is what do you want?[/quote]
Haha! sdr, you are correct…
Now I must brag to defend my lifestyle choices to all the citi-its/tour-ons (sound it out) of SD!
Last weekend, I spent Saturday skiing 2 feet of Utah quality champagne powder (45 mins from my door) and rounded it out with 10 pitches of glorious sierra trad climbing on sunday (30 mins from my door) while working on my sun tan. So if you want to defend you smog filled traffic jam existence in the over priced crap holdem of sd suburbs…well color me skeptical!
And make no mistake, this is a normal weekend for me…I am Yosemite bond next weekend for a short route up the backside of half dome!
April 12, 2011 at 9:46 PM #686774Participant[quote=sdrealtor][quote=CafeMoto][quote=UCguy]Sigh….
It seems to make more sense to wait at least 2 more years maybe 3 tops….until so we can put 20% (and be under 417K).That is how I am thinking of a middle ground compromise.
How I will come up with that 20%: well, I want to have some cash on hand so I will probably borrow 5% from 401k (30K), preferably from less riskier one (the 403b0, AND make sure I have AT LEAST THAT MUCH left in cash, if not more. So, I need to save ~50K or 25K a year.
We have already reduced the 403b contribution to a minimum (because of no more matching in UCSD), on the other hand I will continue to contribute to my 401k 6% (the company will match 3%) – so I won’t max it out anymore.
The upside of this wait is that in a couple of years it would be hopefully a more normal market, with tighter rules, and lower home prices…I never thought it would take this long though, so who knows how long this still has to unfold….[/quote]
I agree with this decision, it is like jstoesz said; if people that can afford to get in at 550K (but its a huge stretch) stop buying the most house they can afford prices will come down. Not too many households making close to 200k so prices are likely to keep sliding I believe. Wishing you and the piggs who have bought nothing but the best. Your kids and friends will probably enjoy you more as parents not being financially rung.[/quote]
If I’m not mistaken jstoesz now lives somewhere out in the woods in a suburb of Sacramento. If thats what you want out of life so be it. With an income pushing 200K a 550K purchase is far from a stretch, its an no brainer budgetwise unless you are very conservative as many around here are. From personal experience, once your income is above roughly 100K the ratios go out the window. You can afford the things you need and now it is a question of what you want. Above 100K, most folks could comfortably devote close to 50% of their incremental income if that is what they wanted. So the real question is what do you want?[/quote]
Haha! sdr, you are correct…
Now I must brag to defend my lifestyle choices to all the citi-its/tour-ons (sound it out) of SD!
Last weekend, I spent Saturday skiing 2 feet of Utah quality champagne powder (45 mins from my door) and rounded it out with 10 pitches of glorious sierra trad climbing on sunday (30 mins from my door) while working on my sun tan. So if you want to defend you smog filled traffic jam existence in the over priced crap holdem of sd suburbs…well color me skeptical!
And make no mistake, this is a normal weekend for me…I am Yosemite bond next weekend for a short route up the backside of half dome!
April 12, 2011 at 9:46 PM #687123Participant[quote=sdrealtor][quote=CafeMoto][quote=UCguy]Sigh….
It seems to make more sense to wait at least 2 more years maybe 3 tops….until so we can put 20% (and be under 417K).That is how I am thinking of a middle ground compromise.
How I will come up with that 20%: well, I want to have some cash on hand so I will probably borrow 5% from 401k (30K), preferably from less riskier one (the 403b0, AND make sure I have AT LEAST THAT MUCH left in cash, if not more. So, I need to save ~50K or 25K a year.
We have already reduced the 403b contribution to a minimum (because of no more matching in UCSD), on the other hand I will continue to contribute to my 401k 6% (the company will match 3%) – so I won’t max it out anymore.
The upside of this wait is that in a couple of years it would be hopefully a more normal market, with tighter rules, and lower home prices…I never thought it would take this long though, so who knows how long this still has to unfold….[/quote]
I agree with this decision, it is like jstoesz said; if people that can afford to get in at 550K (but its a huge stretch) stop buying the most house they can afford prices will come down. Not too many households making close to 200k so prices are likely to keep sliding I believe. Wishing you and the piggs who have bought nothing but the best. Your kids and friends will probably enjoy you more as parents not being financially rung.[/quote]
If I’m not mistaken jstoesz now lives somewhere out in the woods in a suburb of Sacramento. If thats what you want out of life so be it. With an income pushing 200K a 550K purchase is far from a stretch, its an no brainer budgetwise unless you are very conservative as many around here are. From personal experience, once your income is above roughly 100K the ratios go out the window. You can afford the things you need and now it is a question of what you want. Above 100K, most folks could comfortably devote close to 50% of their incremental income if that is what they wanted. So the real question is what do you want?[/quote]
Haha! sdr, you are correct…
Now I must brag to defend my lifestyle choices to all the citi-its/tour-ons (sound it out) of SD!
Last weekend, I spent Saturday skiing 2 feet of Utah quality champagne powder (45 mins from my door) and rounded it out with 10 pitches of glorious sierra trad climbing on sunday (30 mins from my door) while working on my sun tan. So if you want to defend you smog filled traffic jam existence in the over priced crap holdem of sd suburbs…well color me skeptical!
And make no mistake, this is a normal weekend for me…I am Yosemite bond next weekend for a short route up the backside of half dome!
April 12, 2011 at 10:09 PM #685960an
Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN]Here’s where I got those numbers from: http://www.redfin.com/homes-for-sale#!lat=33.05931449476239&long=-116.85831162388155&market=socal&min_price=500000&v=6&zoomLevel=10%5B/quote%5D
The >$500K listing stats I got from your link are these:
1360 San Diego
1840 NCC
610 NCI
310 East County
230 South County[/quote]
And the total is still similar to my original point.April 12, 2011 at 10:09 PM #686013Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN]Here’s where I got those numbers from: http://www.redfin.com/homes-for-sale#!lat=33.05931449476239&long=-116.85831162388155&market=socal&min_price=500000&v=6&zoomLevel=10%5B/quote%5D
The >$500K listing stats I got from your link are these:
1360 San Diego
1840 NCC
610 NCI
310 East County
230 South County[/quote]
And the total is still similar to my original point.April 12, 2011 at 10:09 PM #686637Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN]Here’s where I got those numbers from: http://www.redfin.com/homes-for-sale#!lat=33.05931449476239&long=-116.85831162388155&market=socal&min_price=500000&v=6&zoomLevel=10%5B/quote%5D
The >$500K listing stats I got from your link are these:
1360 San Diego
1840 NCC
610 NCI
310 East County
230 South County[/quote]
And the total is still similar to my original point.April 12, 2011 at 10:09 PM #686779Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN]Here’s where I got those numbers from: http://www.redfin.com/homes-for-sale#!lat=33.05931449476239&long=-116.85831162388155&market=socal&min_price=500000&v=6&zoomLevel=10%5B/quote%5D
The >$500K listing stats I got from your link are these:
1360 San Diego
1840 NCC
610 NCI
310 East County
230 South County[/quote]
And the total is still similar to my original point. -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.