[flu]

I don’t know. You need to think hard *AND* be clever.

[flu]

I think we definitely need more housing for population growth. Population growth *is good* for San Diego.

[flu]

.

[flu]

[quote=FlyerInHi]SK, sometimes I write too fast and don’t think. Doing all of that on iPad and multitasking tasking also.

I was just surprised that CV had only 20% all cash compared to 30% for the region (I remember something about dataquick reporting that). But you gave a good explanation – prices are higher in CV and it’s harder for investors to make money on rentals.[/quote]

There might be another angle to it…People might throw in all cash offers to get the house. But during escrow, there’s nothing preventing them from trying to get a loan while in escrow (so long closing isn’t contingent on the loan). Afterall, at closing, no one cares where the money came from as long as it’s there. Of course the only people who can play this game are people with money to begin with.

[flu]

It’s quite simple what some people are doing…

1. Go in with cash offer.
2. While in escrow, tell seller you’re going to get a loan, but closing is not contigent on loan.

Buyer won’t care so long as you close on time. Everything looks like cash at the end anyway. The only thing you’re doing is removing loan contigency…Only works with strong buyers…

As far as foreigners. They might not have a loan domestically, but nothing says they aren’t getting the loans abroad….

[flu]

Introducing Verizon’s new $50/month “Friends, Family, and Government” sharing plan… including unlimited voice and data backup…..

Verizon…”Can you hear me now?”….Why, yes, apparently loud and clear…..

[flu]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Do Won Chang? Is that the dude that wrote the “Do Won Won”?[/quote]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Won_Chang

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forever_21

[flu]

http://www.laweekly.com/2013-05-23/news/villaraigosa-job-search/

When Villaraigosa’s mayoral run ends June 30 due to term limits, he could use not just a job but one that affords him the multimillionaire lifestyle to which he’s become accustomed as a flamboyant public servant. His concerned allies have even determined how much Villaraigosa should earn: About $750,000 a year to replicate the life of luxury hotels, nomadic air travel, taxpayer-supplied Getty House mayoral mansion, thousand-dollar seats at sporting and entertainment events, SUV with Los Angeles Police Department security detail attached and innumerable evenings over fine food and wine paid for by wealthy friends and supporters.

Close associates and City Hall insiders, on and off the record, concur that Villaraigosa, the highest-paid mayor in the country, at $232,735 a year, is broke — and has next to nothing lined up. And the clock is ticking. In five weeks he’ll be shown the door at Getty House, the historic mansion in tony Windsor Square, which Villaraigosa surrounded two years ago with a controversial “security wall.”

Villaraigosa’s years of legally required “statements of economic interests” from 2001 through 2012 verify that, aside from a few thousand dollars he annually collects from a modest rental home he owns in Moreno Valley, he has no revenue streams, no financial investments. No stocks. No bonds. (The Weekly could not determine how much public pension Villaraigosa will collect, or when. Through a spokeswoman, Thomas Moutes, head of the Los Angeles City Employees’ Retirement System, said LACERS has “no records” regarding this public information.)

Villaraigosa has been paid a total of $1,682,937 as mayor, a serious chunk of which, for the past several years, has gone to his ex-wife and children in alimony and child support. He has risen to the 1 percent, in practice if not in fact, by relying heavily on other people’s money. Taxpayers, private groups and foundations have footed huge travel bills, as Villaraigosa spent fully 42 percent of his official city working hours, according to his own calendar, out of town between Sept. 1 and Dec. 16 last year. His personal schedule also reflects, on the eve of his departure, a onetime man of the people who regularly sits down with billionaires such as Eli Broad and Forever 21 founder Do Won Chang — but rarely with activists or ordinary people who know firsthand what’s happening in L.A.’s communities.

Moron…Good riddance…

[flu]

[quote=bearishgurl]

Professional drivers aren’t the ones falling asleep at the wheel. They’re the easiest and most polite to drive alongside….And then there are the wackos in low-to-the-ground Miatas, etc who deliberately cut the professional drivers off who are playing Russian roulette with everyone on the road (including themselves) by their erratic show-off behavior.
[/quote]

…Sorry that I cut you off this morning. But them lexus drivers need to know slower traffic yield right (that’s —-> way)…

[flu]

[quote=spdrun]First of all, property is still a good investment in many areas. A few West Coast cities and DC with mini-bubbles are the exception not the norm. Secondly, if paying off early helps you to qualify for financing on a “second home” that’s a rental, I say have at it.

Lastly, having a $400,000 home that you only pay taxes, utilities and repair costs, can rent out at 7-8% profit, and quit your job to bum around Thailand on the proceeds would be niiiiiice. Basically, being in the position to scream “FUCK YOU, I’M OUTTA HERE FOR A YEAR, TRY AND STOP ME, YOU DUMB DONKEY-PENIS!!!” in your boss’s face is a beautiful thing.[/quote]

I agree with your first point.

Regarding your second point, I don’t think this makes sense. People who have invested with borrowed funds can confirm that the lowest loan rate is always found on the owner occupied home. Usually, investment property loans are at least .25-5% higher. Also, it can be can be harder to be qualify an investment property for a loan, because it will depend on other factors (for example, owner occupancy for an attached home in a complex). It seems like if someone has funds to pay off either their primary or rental, it would make more sense to pay off the rental first and keep the mortgage on primary, which would have the lower interest rate. Regarding taxes, I don’t think it matters which deduction you take (schedule A or C).

Also, I don’t follow your last point. I think the original person was talking about a primary home, not an investment property. For practical purposes, money sunk into your primary (until you sell it, or turn it into an investment property) doesn’t produce income. Most people aren’t interested in time-sharing their primary home with a stranger even if they aren’t occupying it full time.

[Author]

Posts