- This topic has 665 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 8 months ago by
scaredyclassic.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 5, 2011 at 12:10 PM #684745April 5, 2011 at 12:14 PM #683573
Ren
Participant[quote=Scarlett]It is. Best of luck! I couldn’t imagine doing the commute from Temecula every day, especially since having kids. Are you a doctor? (just a guess, since you mentioned 3 yrs).[/quote]
Thank you. I’m a contract technical writer, wife is a… hard to describe. Also white collar office grunt.
2 more years is the time we have before Ren Jr starts kindergarten, when I want to put him in a Carlsbad district.
April 5, 2011 at 12:14 PM #683626Participant[quote=Scarlett]It is. Best of luck! I couldn’t imagine doing the commute from Temecula every day, especially since having kids. Are you a doctor? (just a guess, since you mentioned 3 yrs).[/quote]
Thank you. I’m a contract technical writer, wife is a… hard to describe. Also white collar office grunt.
2 more years is the time we have before Ren Jr starts kindergarten, when I want to put him in a Carlsbad district.
April 5, 2011 at 12:14 PM #684257Participant[quote=Scarlett]It is. Best of luck! I couldn’t imagine doing the commute from Temecula every day, especially since having kids. Are you a doctor? (just a guess, since you mentioned 3 yrs).[/quote]
Thank you. I’m a contract technical writer, wife is a… hard to describe. Also white collar office grunt.
2 more years is the time we have before Ren Jr starts kindergarten, when I want to put him in a Carlsbad district.
April 5, 2011 at 12:14 PM #684397Participant[quote=Scarlett]It is. Best of luck! I couldn’t imagine doing the commute from Temecula every day, especially since having kids. Are you a doctor? (just a guess, since you mentioned 3 yrs).[/quote]
Thank you. I’m a contract technical writer, wife is a… hard to describe. Also white collar office grunt.
2 more years is the time we have before Ren Jr starts kindergarten, when I want to put him in a Carlsbad district.
April 5, 2011 at 12:14 PM #684750Participant[quote=Scarlett]It is. Best of luck! I couldn’t imagine doing the commute from Temecula every day, especially since having kids. Are you a doctor? (just a guess, since you mentioned 3 yrs).[/quote]
Thank you. I’m a contract technical writer, wife is a… hard to describe. Also white collar office grunt.
2 more years is the time we have before Ren Jr starts kindergarten, when I want to put him in a Carlsbad district.
April 5, 2011 at 12:39 PM #683578CA renter
Participant[quote=davelj][quote=Scarlett]Back in the 1950 and 1960, the median home price was roughly just below TWO times the median household income – which was then predominantly ONE income.
Nowadays, the median home price is roughly THREE times the median household income – which is at least 1.5 full-time incomes, if not close to TWO incomes. In San Diego that ratio is probably even larger.
[/quote]As has been pointed out here before, this is largely a matter of choice. The size of the average house in the U.S. has more than doubled since 1960. So, people CHOOSE to spend more today on housing than they used to – wisely or not, mind you. I’m quite certain that if you cut your housing (size) expectations in half (to live like those folks in the ’50s and ’60s)… the ratios will follow accordingly. But I’m betting you have no interest in doing so… what with the Jones’ big house and all…[/quote]
Dave,
You’ve often made these snarky comments, assuming that you know what people think they “deserve” out of life. You’ve made this comment to me as well, though you have no idea what we are looking for, nor do you know what our resources are. Sorry, buy you’re out of line on this.
In our case, we are looking for homes in older neighborhoods, homes that are comparable in size and quality to what we grew up in. We don’t drive fancy cars (drive our cars into the ground, and buy the next one for cash), and don’t wear fancy clothing, go on exotic vacations, etc. We are extremely simple people looking for a house near work, for all the reasons Scarlett mentioned above.
People in my husband’s profession — with the same employer, doing the same job (actually fewer requirements back then) — were able to buy “normal” homes near work on a single income a couple of decades ago. Now, people who work there are not able to buy those *same* homes on two incomes. When you add in the increased costs in healthcare, childcare, education, etc., people are much worse off today than they were decades ago.
There is no need for you to always try to turn debates into a volley of personal insults. Can’t you just debate the topic without being snarky and arrogant? I know you’re smart enough to do it, so why fall into the habits of those who can’t hold their own in a debate?
April 5, 2011 at 12:39 PM #683631Participant[quote=davelj][quote=Scarlett]Back in the 1950 and 1960, the median home price was roughly just below TWO times the median household income – which was then predominantly ONE income.
Nowadays, the median home price is roughly THREE times the median household income – which is at least 1.5 full-time incomes, if not close to TWO incomes. In San Diego that ratio is probably even larger.
[/quote]As has been pointed out here before, this is largely a matter of choice. The size of the average house in the U.S. has more than doubled since 1960. So, people CHOOSE to spend more today on housing than they used to – wisely or not, mind you. I’m quite certain that if you cut your housing (size) expectations in half (to live like those folks in the ’50s and ’60s)… the ratios will follow accordingly. But I’m betting you have no interest in doing so… what with the Jones’ big house and all…[/quote]
Dave,
You’ve often made these snarky comments, assuming that you know what people think they “deserve” out of life. You’ve made this comment to me as well, though you have no idea what we are looking for, nor do you know what our resources are. Sorry, buy you’re out of line on this.
In our case, we are looking for homes in older neighborhoods, homes that are comparable in size and quality to what we grew up in. We don’t drive fancy cars (drive our cars into the ground, and buy the next one for cash), and don’t wear fancy clothing, go on exotic vacations, etc. We are extremely simple people looking for a house near work, for all the reasons Scarlett mentioned above.
People in my husband’s profession — with the same employer, doing the same job (actually fewer requirements back then) — were able to buy “normal” homes near work on a single income a couple of decades ago. Now, people who work there are not able to buy those *same* homes on two incomes. When you add in the increased costs in healthcare, childcare, education, etc., people are much worse off today than they were decades ago.
There is no need for you to always try to turn debates into a volley of personal insults. Can’t you just debate the topic without being snarky and arrogant? I know you’re smart enough to do it, so why fall into the habits of those who can’t hold their own in a debate?
April 5, 2011 at 12:39 PM #684262Participant[quote=davelj][quote=Scarlett]Back in the 1950 and 1960, the median home price was roughly just below TWO times the median household income – which was then predominantly ONE income.
Nowadays, the median home price is roughly THREE times the median household income – which is at least 1.5 full-time incomes, if not close to TWO incomes. In San Diego that ratio is probably even larger.
[/quote]As has been pointed out here before, this is largely a matter of choice. The size of the average house in the U.S. has more than doubled since 1960. So, people CHOOSE to spend more today on housing than they used to – wisely or not, mind you. I’m quite certain that if you cut your housing (size) expectations in half (to live like those folks in the ’50s and ’60s)… the ratios will follow accordingly. But I’m betting you have no interest in doing so… what with the Jones’ big house and all…[/quote]
Dave,
You’ve often made these snarky comments, assuming that you know what people think they “deserve” out of life. You’ve made this comment to me as well, though you have no idea what we are looking for, nor do you know what our resources are. Sorry, buy you’re out of line on this.
In our case, we are looking for homes in older neighborhoods, homes that are comparable in size and quality to what we grew up in. We don’t drive fancy cars (drive our cars into the ground, and buy the next one for cash), and don’t wear fancy clothing, go on exotic vacations, etc. We are extremely simple people looking for a house near work, for all the reasons Scarlett mentioned above.
People in my husband’s profession — with the same employer, doing the same job (actually fewer requirements back then) — were able to buy “normal” homes near work on a single income a couple of decades ago. Now, people who work there are not able to buy those *same* homes on two incomes. When you add in the increased costs in healthcare, childcare, education, etc., people are much worse off today than they were decades ago.
There is no need for you to always try to turn debates into a volley of personal insults. Can’t you just debate the topic without being snarky and arrogant? I know you’re smart enough to do it, so why fall into the habits of those who can’t hold their own in a debate?
April 5, 2011 at 12:39 PM #684402Participant[quote=davelj][quote=Scarlett]Back in the 1950 and 1960, the median home price was roughly just below TWO times the median household income – which was then predominantly ONE income.
Nowadays, the median home price is roughly THREE times the median household income – which is at least 1.5 full-time incomes, if not close to TWO incomes. In San Diego that ratio is probably even larger.
[/quote]As has been pointed out here before, this is largely a matter of choice. The size of the average house in the U.S. has more than doubled since 1960. So, people CHOOSE to spend more today on housing than they used to – wisely or not, mind you. I’m quite certain that if you cut your housing (size) expectations in half (to live like those folks in the ’50s and ’60s)… the ratios will follow accordingly. But I’m betting you have no interest in doing so… what with the Jones’ big house and all…[/quote]
Dave,
You’ve often made these snarky comments, assuming that you know what people think they “deserve” out of life. You’ve made this comment to me as well, though you have no idea what we are looking for, nor do you know what our resources are. Sorry, buy you’re out of line on this.
In our case, we are looking for homes in older neighborhoods, homes that are comparable in size and quality to what we grew up in. We don’t drive fancy cars (drive our cars into the ground, and buy the next one for cash), and don’t wear fancy clothing, go on exotic vacations, etc. We are extremely simple people looking for a house near work, for all the reasons Scarlett mentioned above.
People in my husband’s profession — with the same employer, doing the same job (actually fewer requirements back then) — were able to buy “normal” homes near work on a single income a couple of decades ago. Now, people who work there are not able to buy those *same* homes on two incomes. When you add in the increased costs in healthcare, childcare, education, etc., people are much worse off today than they were decades ago.
There is no need for you to always try to turn debates into a volley of personal insults. Can’t you just debate the topic without being snarky and arrogant? I know you’re smart enough to do it, so why fall into the habits of those who can’t hold their own in a debate?
April 5, 2011 at 12:39 PM #684755Participant[quote=davelj][quote=Scarlett]Back in the 1950 and 1960, the median home price was roughly just below TWO times the median household income – which was then predominantly ONE income.
Nowadays, the median home price is roughly THREE times the median household income – which is at least 1.5 full-time incomes, if not close to TWO incomes. In San Diego that ratio is probably even larger.
[/quote]As has been pointed out here before, this is largely a matter of choice. The size of the average house in the U.S. has more than doubled since 1960. So, people CHOOSE to spend more today on housing than they used to – wisely or not, mind you. I’m quite certain that if you cut your housing (size) expectations in half (to live like those folks in the ’50s and ’60s)… the ratios will follow accordingly. But I’m betting you have no interest in doing so… what with the Jones’ big house and all…[/quote]
Dave,
You’ve often made these snarky comments, assuming that you know what people think they “deserve” out of life. You’ve made this comment to me as well, though you have no idea what we are looking for, nor do you know what our resources are. Sorry, buy you’re out of line on this.
In our case, we are looking for homes in older neighborhoods, homes that are comparable in size and quality to what we grew up in. We don’t drive fancy cars (drive our cars into the ground, and buy the next one for cash), and don’t wear fancy clothing, go on exotic vacations, etc. We are extremely simple people looking for a house near work, for all the reasons Scarlett mentioned above.
People in my husband’s profession — with the same employer, doing the same job (actually fewer requirements back then) — were able to buy “normal” homes near work on a single income a couple of decades ago. Now, people who work there are not able to buy those *same* homes on two incomes. When you add in the increased costs in healthcare, childcare, education, etc., people are much worse off today than they were decades ago.
There is no need for you to always try to turn debates into a volley of personal insults. Can’t you just debate the topic without being snarky and arrogant? I know you’re smart enough to do it, so why fall into the habits of those who can’t hold their own in a debate?
April 5, 2011 at 3:58 PM #683657sdrealtor
ParticipantCAR
No snark intended but we now live in a place that is very different than it was a few decades ago. Hell its different than it was a decade ago. The profile of relative desireability of the NCC has gone up exponentially since you were a kid. We have discussed this over the years ad naseum. If you are not willing to accept that reality you will have to stay where you, which isn’t exactly a bad place. Nothing that you have described about yourself and your lifestyle entitles you to the house you want. It is all driven by supply and demand.This weekend I met with some new clients in their mid 50’s. They got re-married a few years ago and both have very good incomes bigger than your DH. Her house is owned free and clear. They will rent that one out for a year or two because the income will be great and then sell within the 2 out of 5 years rule. His house is on the edge but rent just about covers PITI. As soon as they can sell without paying anything out of pocket they will get rid of that one. They have enough to buy a couple houses all cash but only want one and will finance because rates are so good. They are looking for pretty much what you are. There are plenty of others just like them. That is your competition. And they have better representation;)
April 5, 2011 at 3:58 PM #683709ParticipantCAR
No snark intended but we now live in a place that is very different than it was a few decades ago. Hell its different than it was a decade ago. The profile of relative desireability of the NCC has gone up exponentially since you were a kid. We have discussed this over the years ad naseum. If you are not willing to accept that reality you will have to stay where you, which isn’t exactly a bad place. Nothing that you have described about yourself and your lifestyle entitles you to the house you want. It is all driven by supply and demand.This weekend I met with some new clients in their mid 50’s. They got re-married a few years ago and both have very good incomes bigger than your DH. Her house is owned free and clear. They will rent that one out for a year or two because the income will be great and then sell within the 2 out of 5 years rule. His house is on the edge but rent just about covers PITI. As soon as they can sell without paying anything out of pocket they will get rid of that one. They have enough to buy a couple houses all cash but only want one and will finance because rates are so good. They are looking for pretty much what you are. There are plenty of others just like them. That is your competition. And they have better representation;)
April 5, 2011 at 3:58 PM #684338ParticipantCAR
No snark intended but we now live in a place that is very different than it was a few decades ago. Hell its different than it was a decade ago. The profile of relative desireability of the NCC has gone up exponentially since you were a kid. We have discussed this over the years ad naseum. If you are not willing to accept that reality you will have to stay where you, which isn’t exactly a bad place. Nothing that you have described about yourself and your lifestyle entitles you to the house you want. It is all driven by supply and demand.This weekend I met with some new clients in their mid 50’s. They got re-married a few years ago and both have very good incomes bigger than your DH. Her house is owned free and clear. They will rent that one out for a year or two because the income will be great and then sell within the 2 out of 5 years rule. His house is on the edge but rent just about covers PITI. As soon as they can sell without paying anything out of pocket they will get rid of that one. They have enough to buy a couple houses all cash but only want one and will finance because rates are so good. They are looking for pretty much what you are. There are plenty of others just like them. That is your competition. And they have better representation;)
April 5, 2011 at 3:58 PM #684479ParticipantCAR
No snark intended but we now live in a place that is very different than it was a few decades ago. Hell its different than it was a decade ago. The profile of relative desireability of the NCC has gone up exponentially since you were a kid. We have discussed this over the years ad naseum. If you are not willing to accept that reality you will have to stay where you, which isn’t exactly a bad place. Nothing that you have described about yourself and your lifestyle entitles you to the house you want. It is all driven by supply and demand.This weekend I met with some new clients in their mid 50’s. They got re-married a few years ago and both have very good incomes bigger than your DH. Her house is owned free and clear. They will rent that one out for a year or two because the income will be great and then sell within the 2 out of 5 years rule. His house is on the edge but rent just about covers PITI. As soon as they can sell without paying anything out of pocket they will get rid of that one. They have enough to buy a couple houses all cash but only want one and will finance because rates are so good. They are looking for pretty much what you are. There are plenty of others just like them. That is your competition. And they have better representation;)
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.