Scripps Ranch…What say you…

[joec]

I highly doubt mortgages are assumable now, however, that doesn’t mean that if rates were 9%, they won’t come up with some financial instrument to have you continue to own the home and paying the mortgage directly, but also have the buyer pay some escrow to pay you back in a separate note, or some such thing. Stuff like this wouldn’t surprise me at all.

Also, for people who own homes in the clear, you can also be the lender directly and you can “sell” your home to a buyer and he will pay you back with a note directly. This was done in the early 80s…If your “buyer” defaulted, you get your old house back.

My gut feeling and as we’ve seen a ton already so far, all the bears are fighting a battle where the government is completely not on the side of housing prices collapsing (they actually have fallen quite a bit in many areas already). There is talk of further stimulus from the talking heads (Gross/Pimco) that the government has to do this or that. Unfortunately, our government is very much “bought” and look who is those positions?
That said, there are worst things than buying a place to live in if you can afford it.

One thing not discussed much now is that other than the Roth IRA, there also aren’t many tax free vehicles out there. (529s, Coverdell…)

That 500k tax free on home sale may not relevant in the next 5 years or 10 years, but over 30 years and after housing stabilizes where it moves up with inflation again, that could be a nice perk for folks to consider, especially if higher taxes are coming.

[sdrealtor]

while I’ve never done it and dont understand it< I've heard people talk about doing a "wrap" which is a creative way of assuming a mortgage without actually assuming it.

[sdrealtor]

while I’ve never done it and dont understand it< I've heard people talk about doing a "wrap" which is a creative way of assuming a mortgage without actually assuming it.

[sdrealtor]

while I’ve never done it and dont understand it< I've heard people talk about doing a "wrap" which is a creative way of assuming a mortgage without actually assuming it.

[sdrealtor]

while I’ve never done it and dont understand it< I've heard people talk about doing a "wrap" which is a creative way of assuming a mortgage without actually assuming it.

[sdrealtor]

while I’ve never done it and dont understand it< I've heard people talk about doing a "wrap" which is a creative way of assuming a mortgage without actually assuming it.

[CA renter]

[quote=joec]Homes are selling because for a lot of folks, they are buying the homes to live it.

If there is a very long, slow dragged out down period, people are just buying homes and living in them. You can wait 3 years, 5 years, 10 years or 20 years for this housing thing to play itself out, but no one knows when the true bottom will be and if the numbers work for you compared to rent, maybe it’s not the worst thing to buy. Unlike rent, in 15 or 30 years (depending on your loan terms), you’ll actually own the place and will have no housing expense (other than prop taxes and maintenance).

I know we did. Unlike stocks, unfortunately, you have to have a place to live and some folks simply get tired of renting with all the downsides of that.

Wasn’t there an article here about interest rates also not really affecting housing prices much in the 80s? Personally, I don’t buy that higher rates will insanely drive housing prices to collapse since it didn’t in the past and folks will probably find ways around it (perhaps creative financing where they assume your low 4-5% loan through some other contract) and everyone moves on their merry way…

Here’s the first link that google came out with on interest rates and housing prices I found. Some blog, but there are other graphs out there I think showing no huge correlation:

http://tiny.cc/iile3%5B/quote%5D

1. DTI ratios weren’t as high then as they are now.

2. Baby Boomers were in their peak buying years. As we move forward, they will be in their peak selling years.

3. We didn’t have the kind of public and private debt then that we do now. We are **maxed out** on debt. There is no more upward room.

4. Back then, there were real wage increases. Wages have zero traction today. We take what we can get, even if it’s 25-50% less that what we were making five years ago.

If housing prices go up from here, it will be due to a currency crisis, not because of a better standard of living or higher wages for Americans, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=joec]Homes are selling because for a lot of folks, they are buying the homes to live it.

If there is a very long, slow dragged out down period, people are just buying homes and living in them. You can wait 3 years, 5 years, 10 years or 20 years for this housing thing to play itself out, but no one knows when the true bottom will be and if the numbers work for you compared to rent, maybe it’s not the worst thing to buy. Unlike rent, in 15 or 30 years (depending on your loan terms), you’ll actually own the place and will have no housing expense (other than prop taxes and maintenance).

I know we did. Unlike stocks, unfortunately, you have to have a place to live and some folks simply get tired of renting with all the downsides of that.

Wasn’t there an article here about interest rates also not really affecting housing prices much in the 80s? Personally, I don’t buy that higher rates will insanely drive housing prices to collapse since it didn’t in the past and folks will probably find ways around it (perhaps creative financing where they assume your low 4-5% loan through some other contract) and everyone moves on their merry way…

Here’s the first link that google came out with on interest rates and housing prices I found. Some blog, but there are other graphs out there I think showing no huge correlation:

http://tiny.cc/iile3%5B/quote%5D

1. DTI ratios weren’t as high then as they are now.

2. Baby Boomers were in their peak buying years. As we move forward, they will be in their peak selling years.

3. We didn’t have the kind of public and private debt then that we do now. We are **maxed out** on debt. There is no more upward room.

4. Back then, there were real wage increases. Wages have zero traction today. We take what we can get, even if it’s 25-50% less that what we were making five years ago.

If housing prices go up from here, it will be due to a currency crisis, not because of a better standard of living or higher wages for Americans, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=joec]Homes are selling because for a lot of folks, they are buying the homes to live it.

If there is a very long, slow dragged out down period, people are just buying homes and living in them. You can wait 3 years, 5 years, 10 years or 20 years for this housing thing to play itself out, but no one knows when the true bottom will be and if the numbers work for you compared to rent, maybe it’s not the worst thing to buy. Unlike rent, in 15 or 30 years (depending on your loan terms), you’ll actually own the place and will have no housing expense (other than prop taxes and maintenance).

I know we did. Unlike stocks, unfortunately, you have to have a place to live and some folks simply get tired of renting with all the downsides of that.

Wasn’t there an article here about interest rates also not really affecting housing prices much in the 80s? Personally, I don’t buy that higher rates will insanely drive housing prices to collapse since it didn’t in the past and folks will probably find ways around it (perhaps creative financing where they assume your low 4-5% loan through some other contract) and everyone moves on their merry way…

Here’s the first link that google came out with on interest rates and housing prices I found. Some blog, but there are other graphs out there I think showing no huge correlation:

http://tiny.cc/iile3%5B/quote%5D

1. DTI ratios weren’t as high then as they are now.

2. Baby Boomers were in their peak buying years. As we move forward, they will be in their peak selling years.

3. We didn’t have the kind of public and private debt then that we do now. We are **maxed out** on debt. There is no more upward room.

4. Back then, there were real wage increases. Wages have zero traction today. We take what we can get, even if it’s 25-50% less that what we were making five years ago.

If housing prices go up from here, it will be due to a currency crisis, not because of a better standard of living or higher wages for Americans, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=joec]Homes are selling because for a lot of folks, they are buying the homes to live it.

If there is a very long, slow dragged out down period, people are just buying homes and living in them. You can wait 3 years, 5 years, 10 years or 20 years for this housing thing to play itself out, but no one knows when the true bottom will be and if the numbers work for you compared to rent, maybe it’s not the worst thing to buy. Unlike rent, in 15 or 30 years (depending on your loan terms), you’ll actually own the place and will have no housing expense (other than prop taxes and maintenance).

I know we did. Unlike stocks, unfortunately, you have to have a place to live and some folks simply get tired of renting with all the downsides of that.

Wasn’t there an article here about interest rates also not really affecting housing prices much in the 80s? Personally, I don’t buy that higher rates will insanely drive housing prices to collapse since it didn’t in the past and folks will probably find ways around it (perhaps creative financing where they assume your low 4-5% loan through some other contract) and everyone moves on their merry way…

Here’s the first link that google came out with on interest rates and housing prices I found. Some blog, but there are other graphs out there I think showing no huge correlation:

http://tiny.cc/iile3%5B/quote%5D

1. DTI ratios weren’t as high then as they are now.

2. Baby Boomers were in their peak buying years. As we move forward, they will be in their peak selling years.

3. We didn’t have the kind of public and private debt then that we do now. We are **maxed out** on debt. There is no more upward room.

4. Back then, there were real wage increases. Wages have zero traction today. We take what we can get, even if it’s 25-50% less that what we were making five years ago.

If housing prices go up from here, it will be due to a currency crisis, not because of a better standard of living or higher wages for Americans, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=joec]Homes are selling because for a lot of folks, they are buying the homes to live it.

If there is a very long, slow dragged out down period, people are just buying homes and living in them. You can wait 3 years, 5 years, 10 years or 20 years for this housing thing to play itself out, but no one knows when the true bottom will be and if the numbers work for you compared to rent, maybe it’s not the worst thing to buy. Unlike rent, in 15 or 30 years (depending on your loan terms), you’ll actually own the place and will have no housing expense (other than prop taxes and maintenance).

I know we did. Unlike stocks, unfortunately, you have to have a place to live and some folks simply get tired of renting with all the downsides of that.

Wasn’t there an article here about interest rates also not really affecting housing prices much in the 80s? Personally, I don’t buy that higher rates will insanely drive housing prices to collapse since it didn’t in the past and folks will probably find ways around it (perhaps creative financing where they assume your low 4-5% loan through some other contract) and everyone moves on their merry way…

Here’s the first link that google came out with on interest rates and housing prices I found. Some blog, but there are other graphs out there I think showing no huge correlation:

http://tiny.cc/iile3%5B/quote%5D

1. DTI ratios weren’t as high then as they are now.

2. Baby Boomers were in their peak buying years. As we move forward, they will be in their peak selling years.

3. We didn’t have the kind of public and private debt then that we do now. We are **maxed out** on debt. There is no more upward room.

4. Back then, there were real wage increases. Wages have zero traction today. We take what we can get, even if it’s 25-50% less that what we were making five years ago.

If housing prices go up from here, it will be due to a currency crisis, not because of a better standard of living or higher wages for Americans, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=sdrealtor]Scarlett
9% fixed rates would have an impact I just dont beleive we will see them anytime soon. The other factor is when 30 year rates rise above a certain level (roughly 8%) buyer switch to adjustable products for purchases and skip the 30 yr fixed rates which mitigates some of the impact of higher rates.[/quote]

The reason ARMs were pushed during the bubble was because of the low rates. The lenders were shifting the rate risk (of rising rates) from themselves to the borrowers. In a high-rate environment, you’ll be hard pressed to find a lender who wants to give you an ARM, and it will probably cost a pretty penny to get one, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=sdrealtor]Scarlett
9% fixed rates would have an impact I just dont beleive we will see them anytime soon. The other factor is when 30 year rates rise above a certain level (roughly 8%) buyer switch to adjustable products for purchases and skip the 30 yr fixed rates which mitigates some of the impact of higher rates.[/quote]

The reason ARMs were pushed during the bubble was because of the low rates. The lenders were shifting the rate risk (of rising rates) from themselves to the borrowers. In a high-rate environment, you’ll be hard pressed to find a lender who wants to give you an ARM, and it will probably cost a pretty penny to get one, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=sdrealtor]Scarlett
9% fixed rates would have an impact I just dont beleive we will see them anytime soon. The other factor is when 30 year rates rise above a certain level (roughly 8%) buyer switch to adjustable products for purchases and skip the 30 yr fixed rates which mitigates some of the impact of higher rates.[/quote]

The reason ARMs were pushed during the bubble was because of the low rates. The lenders were shifting the rate risk (of rising rates) from themselves to the borrowers. In a high-rate environment, you’ll be hard pressed to find a lender who wants to give you an ARM, and it will probably cost a pretty penny to get one, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=sdrealtor]Scarlett
9% fixed rates would have an impact I just dont beleive we will see them anytime soon. The other factor is when 30 year rates rise above a certain level (roughly 8%) buyer switch to adjustable products for purchases and skip the 30 yr fixed rates which mitigates some of the impact of higher rates.[/quote]

The reason ARMs were pushed during the bubble was because of the low rates. The lenders were shifting the rate risk (of rising rates) from themselves to the borrowers. In a high-rate environment, you’ll be hard pressed to find a lender who wants to give you an ARM, and it will probably cost a pretty penny to get one, IMHO.

[Author]

Posts