[no_such_reality]

Those are payout odds; the odds of hitting two singles and a five are 5 in 54872 or roughly 1 in 10974.

You also won’t be able to make your second bet as it needs to be $5250. The biggest inside bet I’ve seen for table limits is MGM at $1000.

As a high roller, you might be able to get an exception provided you front the bankroll.

[no_such_reality]

Most of those medians look like the necessary Orange County down payment.

[no_such_reality]

Let’s get down to brass tacks.

Take the home, pay the nearly 49.9% (probably about 47% effective) income tax on it, financing the $1.6 million into a mortgage.

Sell it, pay the 5% commission and net something?

Or just take the $1.6M cash and pay probably north of 45% effective income tax, netting close $900K.

Which is better? If you turn to sell that place, will you get anywhere near the $3.2?

[no_such_reality]

[quote=CA renter][quote=no_such_reality]Yes you can, you can move all sorts of places where investors aren’t competing with you for housing.

Below eight mile in Detroit is one. Go have your pick of housing.[/quote]

“Even though the city has more than 3 strikes against it. For some reason people like living in Detroit. Many have moved, but several hundred thousand have stayed behind. The most damming part of investing in Detroit, Mi is too many real estate investors are in Detroit. All investors want a good quality section 8 tenant, but there are only so many vouchers out there. The city now has a ton of nice rehabbed homes, but a smaller pool of high quality tenants to choose from. You really have to know marketing in Detroit if you want to survive. Because if you run out of cash, you run out of luck….”

http://maximillionrich.hubpages.com/hub/Detroit-the-best-and-worst-place-to-invest-in-real-estate%5B/quote%5D

You need to read better, the first comment is 3 years old on that.

There were investors everywhere. And BP invests in the greater D area. But I’m talking south of 8 mile. They’ll basically give you many homes if you’ll just take it.

[no_such_reality]

It depends where they are at. If they wanted an old money area, they’re foolish. If they wanted a desirable gentrified area, their window was a few years ago when prices were 50% off peak.

You can see this in the downtown area of Huntington Beach by the pier.

Neighboring properties, one getting foreclosed at $800K while the neighbor trying to sell for $1.6M:
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/317-7th-St-Huntington-Beach-CA-92648/69246918_zpid/

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/319-7th-St-Huntington-Beach-CA-92648/69246917_zpid/

And I think I actually toured those when they were rebuilt in 2007, and $1.6M seems low.

Corona del Mar, you see a lot of chasing the market. Things like this, 35%-40% of post peak asking.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/612-Iris-Ave-Corona-Del-Mar-CA-92625/25497382_zpid/

Or this, 40% off peak asking. http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/415-Heliotrope-Ave-Corona-Del-Mar-CA-92625/25498210_zpid/

Or this, chasing from $2.995M in 2009 to $1.8M when it sold last year.

Or this one, 20% off of the 2004 price. http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/2616-Ocean-Blvd-Corona-Del-Mar-CA-92625/51673450_zpid/

And make what you will of the 2008 asking of $5.5M only to sell in 2010 for $2.875M

And finally, one last crack pipe hit. Listing for $20M in 2010 but finally selling in 2012 for $9.5M.
And having it listed pretty much the whole time.
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/210-Hazel-Dr-Corona-Del-Mar-CA-92625/25139714_zpid/

They still made out like bandits though with 6X their 1997 price.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=SK in CV]After the explosion it was flat compared to the explosion year. But the increase from FY 2008 through FY 2015 includes the last pre-explosion year. At least that’s what I think I figured. If I remember correctly what I looked at, the pre-explosion year compared to the 1st year with a significant increase was around 27% higher over a 7 year period.

Corrected. Total outlays FY 2008 were $2,982B. Projected FY 2014 is $3,618B, increase of $636B or 21.32% of $2,982. Divided by 6 years is 3.55% average increase over the 6 year period.[/quote]

Actually, the explosion years for 2002-2007. Then in 2008, we just WFN.

From the 2000-’01 budget of $1.789 to the 2012-’13 budge of $3.803T, we’ve increased 6.5% a year.

If you look at the WFN year, the amount jumps to 8.8%.

As for historically, there’s a number of particulars that disrupt an average. i.e. WWII, the Korean War and Truman’s 1952 quadrupling of the defense budget, but largely they kept their budgets balanced keeping the surplus/deficit within 2% over the course of their term. Then the creep started with Kennedy, who over the first two years, cut short, hit 10%, Johnson reigned it back in to 5%, Nixon creeped (no pun intended) to 6%, Ford went off the rails to 16%), Carter, struggled it to 11%.

It was Reagan that lead us to the debt crack pipe of 19% of the budget.

Bush 1 continued the spending without the grand vision. Bill controlled spending growth (3% annual, ironically roughly inflation plus population growth) and reap the subsequent economy growth to balance the initial deficits.

Bush II, blundered through to war and subsequent Reaganesque debts then we WFN with 40% deficits. Replacing Eisenhower’s military industrial complex with the lobbyist security complex.

[no_such_reality]

Yes you can, you can move all sorts of places where investors aren’t competing with you for housing.

Below eight mile in Detroit is one. Go have your pick of housing.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]
By chance, flyer is the home/land your MIL paid ~$70K for (in the thirties/forties?) the same home today that is presumably worth $2M? Or did she have it built/enlarged herself?[/quote]

I’m gonna guess it was more like the early 60’s, when the average cost of homes in SD was probably in the $20K range. $70K was an extraordinarily
expensive home then.[/quote]

60s or early 70s. If I remember correctly, before buffet sold his multimillion dollar laguna house there was a prop13 stink about his tax rate being so low because he had bought it in the early 70s. The $4 million property carried a $2200 tax bill in the early 2000s.

He had second property, right behind the first, bought in the mid90s, i.e. the bottom of the market. In the 2000s, worth $2M roughly half the first. It carried 6X the tax burden.

Arguably, that implies that the real appreciation of those laguna homes between the early 70s and mid-90s bottom was somewhere between 6 and 12X, a double to quadruple the rate of inflation since the 2nd house is only half the value of the first.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=bearishgurl]
You must remember that it was *unheard of* for a “boomer” to make even $70K++ annually for a “non-supervisorial” (tech) position, as Gen X/Y does today, as these positions did not exist when boomers were in their “working prime.”[/quote]

Complete and utter bunk. The first of the BB’s turned 65 in 2011! For those non-managerial tech jobs, their peak earning years are 45-54. When was that? The DotCom boom! That was 1990-2000

[no_such_reality]

Well, I really should be putting my time to better use. Hopefully, I’ll correct the current situation and return to more sporadic posting in the near future.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=CA renter]
As for food, you can grow your own food, buy it from a farmer, import it from another country, etc. If a grocery chain (or group of grocery chains) decided to make it illegal for people to grow their own food, buy from farmers, or import it from other places; and/or if they forced people to have to buy food only from their stores, then it would be similar to what’s going on with the housing market and specuvestors. [/quote]

Actually in your example, the grocery store is the specuvestor buying from the farmer.

And no group of investors is capable of forcing anybody to buy their stuff short of a monopoly. There is no monopoly in housing.

And ironically, it’s no different than government taxes, just move if you don’t like it. 🙂

All that said, I think it will be interesting as the big money players exit at some point in the future. Or not, they may turn SoCal into the land of the rentals.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=UCGal][quote=no_such_reality]Well, the right answer is $100.

Yes, that’s right. $100.

If you had a savings account paying 2% over the last five years, you’re exactly breakeven with the official and artificially low inflation rate.[/quote]
But you are ahead of most passbook savings accounts.[/quote]

Yes, and that’s the point. If it was in virtually any savings, MM, or checking account over the last five years, you’re in the hole. If five years ago you grabbed a 4% CD, you’re okay. If you grabbed it in 2008, you’re barely okay (a whole $10 spending money, less taxes on the $21 though) and any time after you’re in the hole. If you grabbed any CDs shorter than 5 years, you’re in the hole.

If you bought the DJIA five years ago, you’re ironically worse off than having bought the 5 year CD and probably soiled your pants in 2009 when you lost nearly half.

[no_such_reality]

What’s the difference between a boiler room and a auction with a reserve?

[no_such_reality]

[quote=SD Realtor]So after the explosion it was flat compared to the explosion or flat compared to pre explosion spending?[/quote]

Compared to Bill Clinton’s budget, we are spending one trillion more than his budget when grown for inflation and population growth.

[no_such_reality]

Well, the right answer is $100.

Yes, that’s right. $100.

If you had a savings account paying 2% over the last five years, you’re exactly breakeven with the official and artificially low inflation rate.

[Author]

Posts