[patb]

[quote=svelte]Great stories, WH.

Especially about the kid. Sometimes I think that people make too much on the effect of foreclosure on kids.

Remembering back in my childhood, I did not care at all whether we rented or bought or whatever. As long as I had a place to lay my head, store my clothes and play with my toys I was happy.

My parents seemed very happy (and stressed!) when we bought our first home when I was 10, but to me it was just another home. We could have rented for all I cared.[/quote]

Myparents lost a house when i was a kid, but i was too young to remember it.

[patb]

[quote=AN][quote=Arraya]If this was a movie it would be titled “desperately seeking inflation” I don’t think inflation can easily be metered out when fighting the strongest deflationary pressures in history. If your paying attention they are trying like hell to inflate.[/quote]
I tend to side with the rule maker in the long run. If they want inflation, they can create inflation. They seem to be trying to create inflation at a manageable rate. But if they want, they can start printing quadrillion of $ and give out tax credit like there’s no tomorrow. That would be more than enough to create hyperinflation. In another word, they’re not trying very hard to create inflation. They could do much much much more to create inflation.[/quote]

If they want Inflation, Interest rates will also
rise in nominal terms.

So lets say we have 100% annual inflation, High but
not Psycho high. What happens, all those Option ARMS and IO loans in California that are still good?
DO they stay good?

Who wants to buy a house with a 140% mortgage?

And don’t think we won’t see rates rise, we are a creditor nation, the chinese don’t want to see their Trillion wiped out.

We are far more likely to end up in Stagflation then
Hyper INflation.

[patb]

[quote=AN][quote=Arraya]If this was a movie it would be titled “desperately seeking inflation” I don’t think inflation can easily be metered out when fighting the strongest deflationary pressures in history. If your paying attention they are trying like hell to inflate.[/quote]
I tend to side with the rule maker in the long run. If they want inflation, they can create inflation. They seem to be trying to create inflation at a manageable rate. But if they want, they can start printing quadrillion of $ and give out tax credit like there’s no tomorrow. That would be more than enough to create hyperinflation. In another word, they’re not trying very hard to create inflation. They could do much much much more to create inflation.[/quote]

If they want Inflation, Interest rates will also
rise in nominal terms.

So lets say we have 100% annual inflation, High but
not Psycho high. What happens, all those Option ARMS and IO loans in California that are still good?
DO they stay good?

Who wants to buy a house with a 140% mortgage?

And don’t think we won’t see rates rise, we are a creditor nation, the chinese don’t want to see their Trillion wiped out.

We are far more likely to end up in Stagflation then
Hyper INflation.

[patb]

[quote=AN][quote=Arraya]If this was a movie it would be titled “desperately seeking inflation” I don’t think inflation can easily be metered out when fighting the strongest deflationary pressures in history. If your paying attention they are trying like hell to inflate.[/quote]
I tend to side with the rule maker in the long run. If they want inflation, they can create inflation. They seem to be trying to create inflation at a manageable rate. But if they want, they can start printing quadrillion of $ and give out tax credit like there’s no tomorrow. That would be more than enough to create hyperinflation. In another word, they’re not trying very hard to create inflation. They could do much much much more to create inflation.[/quote]

If they want Inflation, Interest rates will also
rise in nominal terms.

So lets say we have 100% annual inflation, High but
not Psycho high. What happens, all those Option ARMS and IO loans in California that are still good?
DO they stay good?

Who wants to buy a house with a 140% mortgage?

And don’t think we won’t see rates rise, we are a creditor nation, the chinese don’t want to see their Trillion wiped out.

We are far more likely to end up in Stagflation then
Hyper INflation.

[patb]

[quote=AN][quote=Arraya]If this was a movie it would be titled “desperately seeking inflation” I don’t think inflation can easily be metered out when fighting the strongest deflationary pressures in history. If your paying attention they are trying like hell to inflate.[/quote]
I tend to side with the rule maker in the long run. If they want inflation, they can create inflation. They seem to be trying to create inflation at a manageable rate. But if they want, they can start printing quadrillion of $ and give out tax credit like there’s no tomorrow. That would be more than enough to create hyperinflation. In another word, they’re not trying very hard to create inflation. They could do much much much more to create inflation.[/quote]

If they want Inflation, Interest rates will also
rise in nominal terms.

So lets say we have 100% annual inflation, High but
not Psycho high. What happens, all those Option ARMS and IO loans in California that are still good?
DO they stay good?

Who wants to buy a house with a 140% mortgage?

And don’t think we won’t see rates rise, we are a creditor nation, the chinese don’t want to see their Trillion wiped out.

We are far more likely to end up in Stagflation then
Hyper INflation.

[patb]

[quote=AN][quote=Arraya]If this was a movie it would be titled “desperately seeking inflation” I don’t think inflation can easily be metered out when fighting the strongest deflationary pressures in history. If your paying attention they are trying like hell to inflate.[/quote]
I tend to side with the rule maker in the long run. If they want inflation, they can create inflation. They seem to be trying to create inflation at a manageable rate. But if they want, they can start printing quadrillion of $ and give out tax credit like there’s no tomorrow. That would be more than enough to create hyperinflation. In another word, they’re not trying very hard to create inflation. They could do much much much more to create inflation.[/quote]

If they want Inflation, Interest rates will also
rise in nominal terms.

So lets say we have 100% annual inflation, High but
not Psycho high. What happens, all those Option ARMS and IO loans in California that are still good?
DO they stay good?

Who wants to buy a house with a 140% mortgage?

And don’t think we won’t see rates rise, we are a creditor nation, the chinese don’t want to see their Trillion wiped out.

We are far more likely to end up in Stagflation then
Hyper INflation.

[patb]

[quote=temeculaguy]Ignoring all debate about inflation/deflation and the out of state landlord issue, the basic fundamental of a 500k house that draws 2k in rent makes it not pencil out, no matter where it is or where the owner is. 250x rent multipliers should be avoided when 100-150x rent multipliers are abundant. If the OP mentioned a place that costs 200k-300k and pulled 2k rent, then we would have a real discussion on our hands.

I got a phone call this weekend from a friend asking my opinion if he should buy his $1500 a month rental from his landlord for 160k, I told him “absolutely, do it yesterday.” I didn’t ask if he was going to rent it out in the future, what he thought about hyperinflation, unemployment, or any other marcoeconomic issues. Simple questions is all that is needed, will it cost the same or less than rent?

It’s simple, ignore the taxes and insurance, ignore the maintenance and vacancy, also ignore the income tax deduction and the downpayment. Just use the purchase price with todays rates for a 30 yr fixed on a basic loan calculator to see where it pencils out, you can get into the details later.

500k=2700 mo -700 mo =bad
160k=850 mo +650 mo =good

Don’t pay 500k for a place you can rent for 2k, simple.[/quote]

F’ing A Well Told Bubba.

That was why I told the Poster to Send me $1000/Month and I’d send them a beautiful portrait
of Hawaii to look at.

[patb]

[quote=temeculaguy]Ignoring all debate about inflation/deflation and the out of state landlord issue, the basic fundamental of a 500k house that draws 2k in rent makes it not pencil out, no matter where it is or where the owner is. 250x rent multipliers should be avoided when 100-150x rent multipliers are abundant. If the OP mentioned a place that costs 200k-300k and pulled 2k rent, then we would have a real discussion on our hands.

I got a phone call this weekend from a friend asking my opinion if he should buy his $1500 a month rental from his landlord for 160k, I told him “absolutely, do it yesterday.” I didn’t ask if he was going to rent it out in the future, what he thought about hyperinflation, unemployment, or any other marcoeconomic issues. Simple questions is all that is needed, will it cost the same or less than rent?

It’s simple, ignore the taxes and insurance, ignore the maintenance and vacancy, also ignore the income tax deduction and the downpayment. Just use the purchase price with todays rates for a 30 yr fixed on a basic loan calculator to see where it pencils out, you can get into the details later.

500k=2700 mo -700 mo =bad
160k=850 mo +650 mo =good

Don’t pay 500k for a place you can rent for 2k, simple.[/quote]

F’ing A Well Told Bubba.

That was why I told the Poster to Send me $1000/Month and I’d send them a beautiful portrait
of Hawaii to look at.

[patb]

[quote=temeculaguy]Ignoring all debate about inflation/deflation and the out of state landlord issue, the basic fundamental of a 500k house that draws 2k in rent makes it not pencil out, no matter where it is or where the owner is. 250x rent multipliers should be avoided when 100-150x rent multipliers are abundant. If the OP mentioned a place that costs 200k-300k and pulled 2k rent, then we would have a real discussion on our hands.

I got a phone call this weekend from a friend asking my opinion if he should buy his $1500 a month rental from his landlord for 160k, I told him “absolutely, do it yesterday.” I didn’t ask if he was going to rent it out in the future, what he thought about hyperinflation, unemployment, or any other marcoeconomic issues. Simple questions is all that is needed, will it cost the same or less than rent?

It’s simple, ignore the taxes and insurance, ignore the maintenance and vacancy, also ignore the income tax deduction and the downpayment. Just use the purchase price with todays rates for a 30 yr fixed on a basic loan calculator to see where it pencils out, you can get into the details later.

500k=2700 mo -700 mo =bad
160k=850 mo +650 mo =good

Don’t pay 500k for a place you can rent for 2k, simple.[/quote]

F’ing A Well Told Bubba.

That was why I told the Poster to Send me $1000/Month and I’d send them a beautiful portrait
of Hawaii to look at.

[patb]

[quote=temeculaguy]Ignoring all debate about inflation/deflation and the out of state landlord issue, the basic fundamental of a 500k house that draws 2k in rent makes it not pencil out, no matter where it is or where the owner is. 250x rent multipliers should be avoided when 100-150x rent multipliers are abundant. If the OP mentioned a place that costs 200k-300k and pulled 2k rent, then we would have a real discussion on our hands.

I got a phone call this weekend from a friend asking my opinion if he should buy his $1500 a month rental from his landlord for 160k, I told him “absolutely, do it yesterday.” I didn’t ask if he was going to rent it out in the future, what he thought about hyperinflation, unemployment, or any other marcoeconomic issues. Simple questions is all that is needed, will it cost the same or less than rent?

It’s simple, ignore the taxes and insurance, ignore the maintenance and vacancy, also ignore the income tax deduction and the downpayment. Just use the purchase price with todays rates for a 30 yr fixed on a basic loan calculator to see where it pencils out, you can get into the details later.

500k=2700 mo -700 mo =bad
160k=850 mo +650 mo =good

Don’t pay 500k for a place you can rent for 2k, simple.[/quote]

F’ing A Well Told Bubba.

That was why I told the Poster to Send me $1000/Month and I’d send them a beautiful portrait
of Hawaii to look at.

[patb]

[quote=temeculaguy]Ignoring all debate about inflation/deflation and the out of state landlord issue, the basic fundamental of a 500k house that draws 2k in rent makes it not pencil out, no matter where it is or where the owner is. 250x rent multipliers should be avoided when 100-150x rent multipliers are abundant. If the OP mentioned a place that costs 200k-300k and pulled 2k rent, then we would have a real discussion on our hands.

I got a phone call this weekend from a friend asking my opinion if he should buy his $1500 a month rental from his landlord for 160k, I told him “absolutely, do it yesterday.” I didn’t ask if he was going to rent it out in the future, what he thought about hyperinflation, unemployment, or any other marcoeconomic issues. Simple questions is all that is needed, will it cost the same or less than rent?

It’s simple, ignore the taxes and insurance, ignore the maintenance and vacancy, also ignore the income tax deduction and the downpayment. Just use the purchase price with todays rates for a 30 yr fixed on a basic loan calculator to see where it pencils out, you can get into the details later.

500k=2700 mo -700 mo =bad
160k=850 mo +650 mo =good

Don’t pay 500k for a place you can rent for 2k, simple.[/quote]

F’ing A Well Told Bubba.

That was why I told the Poster to Send me $1000/Month and I’d send them a beautiful portrait
of Hawaii to look at.

[patb]

[quote=surveyor]$500k

Obviously the op believes that appreciation will occur over the next few years.

.[/quote]

obviously the OP is smoking crack.

California has a 50% state budget deficit.

California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.

So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?

[patb]

[quote=surveyor]$500k

Obviously the op believes that appreciation will occur over the next few years.

.[/quote]

obviously the OP is smoking crack.

California has a 50% state budget deficit.

California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.

So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?

[patb]

[quote=surveyor]$500k

Obviously the op believes that appreciation will occur over the next few years.

.[/quote]

obviously the OP is smoking crack.

California has a 50% state budget deficit.

California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.

So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?

[patb]

[quote=surveyor]$500k

Obviously the op believes that appreciation will occur over the next few years.

.[/quote]

obviously the OP is smoking crack.

California has a 50% state budget deficit.

California has a couple million surplus dwelling units.

So what’s the thing that’s going to drive property values?

[Author]

Posts