Menu

Home › Forums › Housing › You’d have to be an idiot to buy a house

Viewing 15 posts - 361 through 375 (of 431 total)
1 2 3 … 24 25 26 27 28 29
  • Author
    Posts
  • March 16, 2009 at 4:46 PM #367871
    an
    Participant

    scaredycat, based on everything you’ve said, I highly recommend you to wait until housing have not only bottom out but start going up again. I’d say, wait until you see 2 y-o-y of appreciation before you buy. Since housing does move slow, you’ll be buying in the middle of the next appreciation cycle. That way, the chance of you “losing” paper money is minimal. Personally, I think that’s 6-8 years away though.

    March 16, 2009 at 4:48 PM #367259
    Nor-LA-SD-guy
    Participant

    [quote=scaredycat]sometimes i think we become insensitive to how big numbers are we are dealing with, and, sometimes, minimizing what ca be large losses. We think, well, it’ll only go down another 10%, maybe $40,000, or 20% maybe…. Well, dang, you know, that’sa lot of money.because prices and gains have been so big, it can be difficult to wrap yourself around some different potentially new reality. i know for me, with kids, it’s been difficult saving $70,000 over the last 7 years. not horrifically painful, but definitely a bit of a struggle. It’d be a bummer to lose it all in a couple years and not see it come back for a decade. so when people say, oh, only another 20% downside, I think, wtf! i’d prefer to have a positive net worth than a negative one. it took a while to climb out of the hole of student loan debt and some credit card debt late last decade…it’s just difficult for a saver like myself to be casual about what i perceive as faily large paper losses; just doesn’t feel like it’s worth it to have saved upa long time to have the privilege of losing it all on paper…[/quote]

    Gee I guess it really must be impossible to ever pop up 20% in the next one or two years,

    If there was to be even a slight recovery I think homes could go to cost of production fairly easily , would that be a pop of 20% in the TV, ???? There may be some debate on that but I think it would.

    March 16, 2009 at 4:48 PM #367548
    Nor-LA-SD-guy
    Participant

    [quote=scaredycat]sometimes i think we become insensitive to how big numbers are we are dealing with, and, sometimes, minimizing what ca be large losses. We think, well, it’ll only go down another 10%, maybe $40,000, or 20% maybe…. Well, dang, you know, that’sa lot of money.because prices and gains have been so big, it can be difficult to wrap yourself around some different potentially new reality. i know for me, with kids, it’s been difficult saving $70,000 over the last 7 years. not horrifically painful, but definitely a bit of a struggle. It’d be a bummer to lose it all in a couple years and not see it come back for a decade. so when people say, oh, only another 20% downside, I think, wtf! i’d prefer to have a positive net worth than a negative one. it took a while to climb out of the hole of student loan debt and some credit card debt late last decade…it’s just difficult for a saver like myself to be casual about what i perceive as faily large paper losses; just doesn’t feel like it’s worth it to have saved upa long time to have the privilege of losing it all on paper…[/quote]

    Gee I guess it really must be impossible to ever pop up 20% in the next one or two years,

    If there was to be even a slight recovery I think homes could go to cost of production fairly easily , would that be a pop of 20% in the TV, ???? There may be some debate on that but I think it would.

    March 16, 2009 at 4:48 PM #367714
    Nor-LA-SD-guy
    Participant

    [quote=scaredycat]sometimes i think we become insensitive to how big numbers are we are dealing with, and, sometimes, minimizing what ca be large losses. We think, well, it’ll only go down another 10%, maybe $40,000, or 20% maybe…. Well, dang, you know, that’sa lot of money.because prices and gains have been so big, it can be difficult to wrap yourself around some different potentially new reality. i know for me, with kids, it’s been difficult saving $70,000 over the last 7 years. not horrifically painful, but definitely a bit of a struggle. It’d be a bummer to lose it all in a couple years and not see it come back for a decade. so when people say, oh, only another 20% downside, I think, wtf! i’d prefer to have a positive net worth than a negative one. it took a while to climb out of the hole of student loan debt and some credit card debt late last decade…it’s just difficult for a saver like myself to be casual about what i perceive as faily large paper losses; just doesn’t feel like it’s worth it to have saved upa long time to have the privilege of losing it all on paper…[/quote]

    Gee I guess it really must be impossible to ever pop up 20% in the next one or two years,

    If there was to be even a slight recovery I think homes could go to cost of production fairly easily , would that be a pop of 20% in the TV, ???? There may be some debate on that but I think it would.

    March 16, 2009 at 4:48 PM #367750
    Nor-LA-SD-guy
    Participant

    [quote=scaredycat]sometimes i think we become insensitive to how big numbers are we are dealing with, and, sometimes, minimizing what ca be large losses. We think, well, it’ll only go down another 10%, maybe $40,000, or 20% maybe…. Well, dang, you know, that’sa lot of money.because prices and gains have been so big, it can be difficult to wrap yourself around some different potentially new reality. i know for me, with kids, it’s been difficult saving $70,000 over the last 7 years. not horrifically painful, but definitely a bit of a struggle. It’d be a bummer to lose it all in a couple years and not see it come back for a decade. so when people say, oh, only another 20% downside, I think, wtf! i’d prefer to have a positive net worth than a negative one. it took a while to climb out of the hole of student loan debt and some credit card debt late last decade…it’s just difficult for a saver like myself to be casual about what i perceive as faily large paper losses; just doesn’t feel like it’s worth it to have saved upa long time to have the privilege of losing it all on paper…[/quote]

    Gee I guess it really must be impossible to ever pop up 20% in the next one or two years,

    If there was to be even a slight recovery I think homes could go to cost of production fairly easily , would that be a pop of 20% in the TV, ???? There may be some debate on that but I think it would.

    March 16, 2009 at 4:48 PM #367866
    Nor-LA-SD-guy
    Participant

    [quote=scaredycat]sometimes i think we become insensitive to how big numbers are we are dealing with, and, sometimes, minimizing what ca be large losses. We think, well, it’ll only go down another 10%, maybe $40,000, or 20% maybe…. Well, dang, you know, that’sa lot of money.because prices and gains have been so big, it can be difficult to wrap yourself around some different potentially new reality. i know for me, with kids, it’s been difficult saving $70,000 over the last 7 years. not horrifically painful, but definitely a bit of a struggle. It’d be a bummer to lose it all in a couple years and not see it come back for a decade. so when people say, oh, only another 20% downside, I think, wtf! i’d prefer to have a positive net worth than a negative one. it took a while to climb out of the hole of student loan debt and some credit card debt late last decade…it’s just difficult for a saver like myself to be casual about what i perceive as faily large paper losses; just doesn’t feel like it’s worth it to have saved upa long time to have the privilege of losing it all on paper…[/quote]

    Gee I guess it really must be impossible to ever pop up 20% in the next one or two years,

    If there was to be even a slight recovery I think homes could go to cost of production fairly easily , would that be a pop of 20% in the TV, ???? There may be some debate on that but I think it would.

    March 16, 2009 at 4:58 PM #367269
    scaredyclassic
    Participant

    in 8 years, most of my kids will be out of the house probably. if I wait long enough, i guess, i wont even need a house…

    March 16, 2009 at 4:58 PM #367557
    scaredyclassic
    Participant

    in 8 years, most of my kids will be out of the house probably. if I wait long enough, i guess, i wont even need a house…

    March 16, 2009 at 4:58 PM #367724
    scaredyclassic
    Participant

    in 8 years, most of my kids will be out of the house probably. if I wait long enough, i guess, i wont even need a house…

    March 16, 2009 at 4:58 PM #367760
    scaredyclassic
    Participant

    in 8 years, most of my kids will be out of the house probably. if I wait long enough, i guess, i wont even need a house…

    March 16, 2009 at 4:58 PM #367876
    scaredyclassic
    Participant

    in 8 years, most of my kids will be out of the house probably. if I wait long enough, i guess, i wont even need a house…

    March 16, 2009 at 5:03 PM #367279
    Nor-LA-SD-guy
    Participant

    Also Personally I think anyone buying a home they don’t plan to own ten years,
    Well I just don’t think it’s a good Idea to buy a home unless you plan to own it at least ten years.

    March 16, 2009 at 5:03 PM #367567
    Nor-LA-SD-guy
    Participant

    Also Personally I think anyone buying a home they don’t plan to own ten years,
    Well I just don’t think it’s a good Idea to buy a home unless you plan to own it at least ten years.

    March 16, 2009 at 5:03 PM #367734
    Nor-LA-SD-guy
    Participant

    Also Personally I think anyone buying a home they don’t plan to own ten years,
    Well I just don’t think it’s a good Idea to buy a home unless you plan to own it at least ten years.

    March 16, 2009 at 5:03 PM #367770
    Nor-LA-SD-guy
    Participant

    Also Personally I think anyone buying a home they don’t plan to own ten years,
    Well I just don’t think it’s a good Idea to buy a home unless you plan to own it at least ten years.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 15 posts - 361 through 375 (of 431 total)
1 2 3 … 24 25 26 27 28 29
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.