[temeculaguy]

BG, you need not take things I write too literally. These are jokes, unfortunately sarcasm and humor are tricky to write, maybe I’m not doing it correctly.

But to your comment, I’m 43, I’m not a boomer. I have no problems finding dates, I just like making jokes and abstract social commentary. But regarding boomers, they are less likley to use the internet for social networking and men more likely than women so that is why you saw an imbalance. Socially those women tend to behave a little more conservatively, they are from a different time. When they were younger it was rare to find them making out with girls, piercing their naughty bits or having sex with more than one person at a time. But when those women become grandmas, look out. My jokes were pointed at the fact that when women my age get older, when the lower back tattoo/implants/something naughty pierced/sexually liberated crowd gets old, it will be different social environment than it is today. The part about leading a healthy life and planning my finances so I can enjoy my golden years, that was not a joke. Of course my version of “enjoy my golden years” is predicated on my belief that in 20 or 30 years, casual sex will be rampant amongst the elderly.

But this is a severe thread-jack and I’m obviously losing my touch if I have explain my jokes.

[temeculaguy]

BG, you need not take things I write too literally. These are jokes, unfortunately sarcasm and humor are tricky to write, maybe I’m not doing it correctly.

But to your comment, I’m 43, I’m not a boomer. I have no problems finding dates, I just like making jokes and abstract social commentary. But regarding boomers, they are less likley to use the internet for social networking and men more likely than women so that is why you saw an imbalance. Socially those women tend to behave a little more conservatively, they are from a different time. When they were younger it was rare to find them making out with girls, piercing their naughty bits or having sex with more than one person at a time. But when those women become grandmas, look out. My jokes were pointed at the fact that when women my age get older, when the lower back tattoo/implants/something naughty pierced/sexually liberated crowd gets old, it will be different social environment than it is today. The part about leading a healthy life and planning my finances so I can enjoy my golden years, that was not a joke. Of course my version of “enjoy my golden years” is predicated on my belief that in 20 or 30 years, casual sex will be rampant amongst the elderly.

But this is a severe thread-jack and I’m obviously losing my touch if I have explain my jokes.

[temeculaguy]

BG, you need not take things I write too literally. These are jokes, unfortunately sarcasm and humor are tricky to write, maybe I’m not doing it correctly.

But to your comment, I’m 43, I’m not a boomer. I have no problems finding dates, I just like making jokes and abstract social commentary. But regarding boomers, they are less likley to use the internet for social networking and men more likely than women so that is why you saw an imbalance. Socially those women tend to behave a little more conservatively, they are from a different time. When they were younger it was rare to find them making out with girls, piercing their naughty bits or having sex with more than one person at a time. But when those women become grandmas, look out. My jokes were pointed at the fact that when women my age get older, when the lower back tattoo/implants/something naughty pierced/sexually liberated crowd gets old, it will be different social environment than it is today. The part about leading a healthy life and planning my finances so I can enjoy my golden years, that was not a joke. Of course my version of “enjoy my golden years” is predicated on my belief that in 20 or 30 years, casual sex will be rampant amongst the elderly.

But this is a severe thread-jack and I’m obviously losing my touch if I have explain my jokes.

[temeculaguy]

BG, you need not take things I write too literally. These are jokes, unfortunately sarcasm and humor are tricky to write, maybe I’m not doing it correctly.

But to your comment, I’m 43, I’m not a boomer. I have no problems finding dates, I just like making jokes and abstract social commentary. But regarding boomers, they are less likley to use the internet for social networking and men more likely than women so that is why you saw an imbalance. Socially those women tend to behave a little more conservatively, they are from a different time. When they were younger it was rare to find them making out with girls, piercing their naughty bits or having sex with more than one person at a time. But when those women become grandmas, look out. My jokes were pointed at the fact that when women my age get older, when the lower back tattoo/implants/something naughty pierced/sexually liberated crowd gets old, it will be different social environment than it is today. The part about leading a healthy life and planning my finances so I can enjoy my golden years, that was not a joke. Of course my version of “enjoy my golden years” is predicated on my belief that in 20 or 30 years, casual sex will be rampant amongst the elderly.

But this is a severe thread-jack and I’m obviously losing my touch if I have explain my jokes.

[temeculaguy]

There is another explanation, you said it sold for about 2% less than your offer. But if your realtor was set to make a 3% commission, then the net offer was actually 1% more than yours. You don’t know the listing agent’s comission if they also became the selling agent. Sometimes if they get both sides of the deal it is lowered, with reo’s, since there is very little work on the seller side, it is sometimes very low. If you asked for any consessions, or if you had fha financing that comes with costs to the seller, that knocks down your net offer. Having the listing agent represent you gives you the advantage of knowing what the other offers are. It isn’t supposed to work that way, but it does. More than likely, the other offer was probably a few hundred more “net” to the bank and the listing agent adjusted their commission to make it so.

Search old posts but I’ve written about this fairly extensively and in my reo buying saga, I failed to win until I went without a realtor. Realtors are great for standard sales, even short sales, but for reo’s that are being dumped quickly by a certain date, you need to go it alone (sorry realtors). There just isn’t anything they can do for you, you can’t be protected from much, it is an “as is” transaction. There are clauses that a realtor can include in a contract, there are things they can request, inspections that can be done, but in the reo “highest net offer by friday” scenarios, those clauses get your offer thrown in the trash, cause the other offer doesn’t have them.

My suggestion is to find your own properties and go straight to the listing agent as soon as possible. Don’t dally around, be able to look at a property and make an offer within 3 hours of it listing, that’s how you win. To do this you may need to stalk properties before they list, read the no trespassing signs, call the number that is listed for emergency contact on the sign and try to get them to hint as to who the listing agent will be (sometimes the emer contact is the future listing agent).

If it makes you feel better, you can pay a realtor or an attorney a fixed fee too look over the paperwork and do it on the side, away from your offer. But just know that any delay can sink you.

[temeculaguy]

There is another explanation, you said it sold for about 2% less than your offer. But if your realtor was set to make a 3% commission, then the net offer was actually 1% more than yours. You don’t know the listing agent’s comission if they also became the selling agent. Sometimes if they get both sides of the deal it is lowered, with reo’s, since there is very little work on the seller side, it is sometimes very low. If you asked for any consessions, or if you had fha financing that comes with costs to the seller, that knocks down your net offer. Having the listing agent represent you gives you the advantage of knowing what the other offers are. It isn’t supposed to work that way, but it does. More than likely, the other offer was probably a few hundred more “net” to the bank and the listing agent adjusted their commission to make it so.

Search old posts but I’ve written about this fairly extensively and in my reo buying saga, I failed to win until I went without a realtor. Realtors are great for standard sales, even short sales, but for reo’s that are being dumped quickly by a certain date, you need to go it alone (sorry realtors). There just isn’t anything they can do for you, you can’t be protected from much, it is an “as is” transaction. There are clauses that a realtor can include in a contract, there are things they can request, inspections that can be done, but in the reo “highest net offer by friday” scenarios, those clauses get your offer thrown in the trash, cause the other offer doesn’t have them.

My suggestion is to find your own properties and go straight to the listing agent as soon as possible. Don’t dally around, be able to look at a property and make an offer within 3 hours of it listing, that’s how you win. To do this you may need to stalk properties before they list, read the no trespassing signs, call the number that is listed for emergency contact on the sign and try to get them to hint as to who the listing agent will be (sometimes the emer contact is the future listing agent).

If it makes you feel better, you can pay a realtor or an attorney a fixed fee too look over the paperwork and do it on the side, away from your offer. But just know that any delay can sink you.

[temeculaguy]

There is another explanation, you said it sold for about 2% less than your offer. But if your realtor was set to make a 3% commission, then the net offer was actually 1% more than yours. You don’t know the listing agent’s comission if they also became the selling agent. Sometimes if they get both sides of the deal it is lowered, with reo’s, since there is very little work on the seller side, it is sometimes very low. If you asked for any consessions, or if you had fha financing that comes with costs to the seller, that knocks down your net offer. Having the listing agent represent you gives you the advantage of knowing what the other offers are. It isn’t supposed to work that way, but it does. More than likely, the other offer was probably a few hundred more “net” to the bank and the listing agent adjusted their commission to make it so.

Search old posts but I’ve written about this fairly extensively and in my reo buying saga, I failed to win until I went without a realtor. Realtors are great for standard sales, even short sales, but for reo’s that are being dumped quickly by a certain date, you need to go it alone (sorry realtors). There just isn’t anything they can do for you, you can’t be protected from much, it is an “as is” transaction. There are clauses that a realtor can include in a contract, there are things they can request, inspections that can be done, but in the reo “highest net offer by friday” scenarios, those clauses get your offer thrown in the trash, cause the other offer doesn’t have them.

My suggestion is to find your own properties and go straight to the listing agent as soon as possible. Don’t dally around, be able to look at a property and make an offer within 3 hours of it listing, that’s how you win. To do this you may need to stalk properties before they list, read the no trespassing signs, call the number that is listed for emergency contact on the sign and try to get them to hint as to who the listing agent will be (sometimes the emer contact is the future listing agent).

If it makes you feel better, you can pay a realtor or an attorney a fixed fee too look over the paperwork and do it on the side, away from your offer. But just know that any delay can sink you.

[temeculaguy]

There is another explanation, you said it sold for about 2% less than your offer. But if your realtor was set to make a 3% commission, then the net offer was actually 1% more than yours. You don’t know the listing agent’s comission if they also became the selling agent. Sometimes if they get both sides of the deal it is lowered, with reo’s, since there is very little work on the seller side, it is sometimes very low. If you asked for any consessions, or if you had fha financing that comes with costs to the seller, that knocks down your net offer. Having the listing agent represent you gives you the advantage of knowing what the other offers are. It isn’t supposed to work that way, but it does. More than likely, the other offer was probably a few hundred more “net” to the bank and the listing agent adjusted their commission to make it so.

Search old posts but I’ve written about this fairly extensively and in my reo buying saga, I failed to win until I went without a realtor. Realtors are great for standard sales, even short sales, but for reo’s that are being dumped quickly by a certain date, you need to go it alone (sorry realtors). There just isn’t anything they can do for you, you can’t be protected from much, it is an “as is” transaction. There are clauses that a realtor can include in a contract, there are things they can request, inspections that can be done, but in the reo “highest net offer by friday” scenarios, those clauses get your offer thrown in the trash, cause the other offer doesn’t have them.

My suggestion is to find your own properties and go straight to the listing agent as soon as possible. Don’t dally around, be able to look at a property and make an offer within 3 hours of it listing, that’s how you win. To do this you may need to stalk properties before they list, read the no trespassing signs, call the number that is listed for emergency contact on the sign and try to get them to hint as to who the listing agent will be (sometimes the emer contact is the future listing agent).

If it makes you feel better, you can pay a realtor or an attorney a fixed fee too look over the paperwork and do it on the side, away from your offer. But just know that any delay can sink you.

[temeculaguy]

There is another explanation, you said it sold for about 2% less than your offer. But if your realtor was set to make a 3% commission, then the net offer was actually 1% more than yours. You don’t know the listing agent’s comission if they also became the selling agent. Sometimes if they get both sides of the deal it is lowered, with reo’s, since there is very little work on the seller side, it is sometimes very low. If you asked for any consessions, or if you had fha financing that comes with costs to the seller, that knocks down your net offer. Having the listing agent represent you gives you the advantage of knowing what the other offers are. It isn’t supposed to work that way, but it does. More than likely, the other offer was probably a few hundred more “net” to the bank and the listing agent adjusted their commission to make it so.

Search old posts but I’ve written about this fairly extensively and in my reo buying saga, I failed to win until I went without a realtor. Realtors are great for standard sales, even short sales, but for reo’s that are being dumped quickly by a certain date, you need to go it alone (sorry realtors). There just isn’t anything they can do for you, you can’t be protected from much, it is an “as is” transaction. There are clauses that a realtor can include in a contract, there are things they can request, inspections that can be done, but in the reo “highest net offer by friday” scenarios, those clauses get your offer thrown in the trash, cause the other offer doesn’t have them.

My suggestion is to find your own properties and go straight to the listing agent as soon as possible. Don’t dally around, be able to look at a property and make an offer within 3 hours of it listing, that’s how you win. To do this you may need to stalk properties before they list, read the no trespassing signs, call the number that is listed for emergency contact on the sign and try to get them to hint as to who the listing agent will be (sometimes the emer contact is the future listing agent).

If it makes you feel better, you can pay a realtor or an attorney a fixed fee too look over the paperwork and do it on the side, away from your offer. But just know that any delay can sink you.

[temeculaguy]

How did this get from minnesota to socialized medicine?

To the original post, 500k wont do it, I’ve been working on my own retirement numbers and it’s somewhere between 1 and 2 million. That’s social security, 401k, annuities, investments, everything. Regardless of where you are, hell I’m in temecula, so it’s minnesota prices anyway. That retirement formula leads to 10k+ per month with zero rent or mortgage. That’s easy street, everything else is a gamble. But i get the theme of wanting to be able to have your mortgage be a small part of your budget, you don’t always need snow in order to get that, but you aren’t usually going to live on the beach, just pick the sacrifices of least sacrifice to you personally.

If you think you are going to die soon, then take a different track, live where you want. personally, I could live in S.D. but ever since viagra/ciallis came out I’ve adjusted my strategy. I figure I need to save 50% of my income so I am richer as I age. With the current medications and the fact that the odds totally tilt in a man’s favor every day over 40 as far as the population of singles go. It’s going to be pandemonium. By 70, it’s like 3-1 women to men, I gave up sugar a few years ago, I exercise every day. I fully plan on wearing out my prescription drug coverage.

Since we have hit all the other topics on this thread, here are my votes. Yes on socialized medicine. Yes on sweden ( is that where they have legalized prostitution or is that denmark?) Then yes on denmark. No on Minnesota, the vikings situation alone is reason enough to take a “wait and see” approach. No on Sac and Encanto. Yes on Big bear, Mammoth or Tahoe, mostly because they have a summer and a winter, the winter only places suck. I can’t remember any of the other issues because it was a long thread, except the communist manifesto and atlas shrugged were both incomplete because neither mentions porn or the effect of real motivation. I understand the academia of political ideology, but idealogy gets lost in what actually motivates people. Someone is not motivated to go to school for 8 years to help their fellow man. They are motivated because in the end, they will get paid enough to drive a 6 series and then women will show them their breasts. That my friend is why communism failed.

[temeculaguy]

How did this get from minnesota to socialized medicine?

To the original post, 500k wont do it, I’ve been working on my own retirement numbers and it’s somewhere between 1 and 2 million. That’s social security, 401k, annuities, investments, everything. Regardless of where you are, hell I’m in temecula, so it’s minnesota prices anyway. That retirement formula leads to 10k+ per month with zero rent or mortgage. That’s easy street, everything else is a gamble. But i get the theme of wanting to be able to have your mortgage be a small part of your budget, you don’t always need snow in order to get that, but you aren’t usually going to live on the beach, just pick the sacrifices of least sacrifice to you personally.

If you think you are going to die soon, then take a different track, live where you want. personally, I could live in S.D. but ever since viagra/ciallis came out I’ve adjusted my strategy. I figure I need to save 50% of my income so I am richer as I age. With the current medications and the fact that the odds totally tilt in a man’s favor every day over 40 as far as the population of singles go. It’s going to be pandemonium. By 70, it’s like 3-1 women to men, I gave up sugar a few years ago, I exercise every day. I fully plan on wearing out my prescription drug coverage.

Since we have hit all the other topics on this thread, here are my votes. Yes on socialized medicine. Yes on sweden ( is that where they have legalized prostitution or is that denmark?) Then yes on denmark. No on Minnesota, the vikings situation alone is reason enough to take a “wait and see” approach. No on Sac and Encanto. Yes on Big bear, Mammoth or Tahoe, mostly because they have a summer and a winter, the winter only places suck. I can’t remember any of the other issues because it was a long thread, except the communist manifesto and atlas shrugged were both incomplete because neither mentions porn or the effect of real motivation. I understand the academia of political ideology, but idealogy gets lost in what actually motivates people. Someone is not motivated to go to school for 8 years to help their fellow man. They are motivated because in the end, they will get paid enough to drive a 6 series and then women will show them their breasts. That my friend is why communism failed.

[temeculaguy]

How did this get from minnesota to socialized medicine?

To the original post, 500k wont do it, I’ve been working on my own retirement numbers and it’s somewhere between 1 and 2 million. That’s social security, 401k, annuities, investments, everything. Regardless of where you are, hell I’m in temecula, so it’s minnesota prices anyway. That retirement formula leads to 10k+ per month with zero rent or mortgage. That’s easy street, everything else is a gamble. But i get the theme of wanting to be able to have your mortgage be a small part of your budget, you don’t always need snow in order to get that, but you aren’t usually going to live on the beach, just pick the sacrifices of least sacrifice to you personally.

If you think you are going to die soon, then take a different track, live where you want. personally, I could live in S.D. but ever since viagra/ciallis came out I’ve adjusted my strategy. I figure I need to save 50% of my income so I am richer as I age. With the current medications and the fact that the odds totally tilt in a man’s favor every day over 40 as far as the population of singles go. It’s going to be pandemonium. By 70, it’s like 3-1 women to men, I gave up sugar a few years ago, I exercise every day. I fully plan on wearing out my prescription drug coverage.

Since we have hit all the other topics on this thread, here are my votes. Yes on socialized medicine. Yes on sweden ( is that where they have legalized prostitution or is that denmark?) Then yes on denmark. No on Minnesota, the vikings situation alone is reason enough to take a “wait and see” approach. No on Sac and Encanto. Yes on Big bear, Mammoth or Tahoe, mostly because they have a summer and a winter, the winter only places suck. I can’t remember any of the other issues because it was a long thread, except the communist manifesto and atlas shrugged were both incomplete because neither mentions porn or the effect of real motivation. I understand the academia of political ideology, but idealogy gets lost in what actually motivates people. Someone is not motivated to go to school for 8 years to help their fellow man. They are motivated because in the end, they will get paid enough to drive a 6 series and then women will show them their breasts. That my friend is why communism failed.

[temeculaguy]

How did this get from minnesota to socialized medicine?

To the original post, 500k wont do it, I’ve been working on my own retirement numbers and it’s somewhere between 1 and 2 million. That’s social security, 401k, annuities, investments, everything. Regardless of where you are, hell I’m in temecula, so it’s minnesota prices anyway. That retirement formula leads to 10k+ per month with zero rent or mortgage. That’s easy street, everything else is a gamble. But i get the theme of wanting to be able to have your mortgage be a small part of your budget, you don’t always need snow in order to get that, but you aren’t usually going to live on the beach, just pick the sacrifices of least sacrifice to you personally.

If you think you are going to die soon, then take a different track, live where you want. personally, I could live in S.D. but ever since viagra/ciallis came out I’ve adjusted my strategy. I figure I need to save 50% of my income so I am richer as I age. With the current medications and the fact that the odds totally tilt in a man’s favor every day over 40 as far as the population of singles go. It’s going to be pandemonium. By 70, it’s like 3-1 women to men, I gave up sugar a few years ago, I exercise every day. I fully plan on wearing out my prescription drug coverage.

Since we have hit all the other topics on this thread, here are my votes. Yes on socialized medicine. Yes on sweden ( is that where they have legalized prostitution or is that denmark?) Then yes on denmark. No on Minnesota, the vikings situation alone is reason enough to take a “wait and see” approach. No on Sac and Encanto. Yes on Big bear, Mammoth or Tahoe, mostly because they have a summer and a winter, the winter only places suck. I can’t remember any of the other issues because it was a long thread, except the communist manifesto and atlas shrugged were both incomplete because neither mentions porn or the effect of real motivation. I understand the academia of political ideology, but idealogy gets lost in what actually motivates people. Someone is not motivated to go to school for 8 years to help their fellow man. They are motivated because in the end, they will get paid enough to drive a 6 series and then women will show them their breasts. That my friend is why communism failed.

[temeculaguy]

How did this get from minnesota to socialized medicine?

To the original post, 500k wont do it, I’ve been working on my own retirement numbers and it’s somewhere between 1 and 2 million. That’s social security, 401k, annuities, investments, everything. Regardless of where you are, hell I’m in temecula, so it’s minnesota prices anyway. That retirement formula leads to 10k+ per month with zero rent or mortgage. That’s easy street, everything else is a gamble. But i get the theme of wanting to be able to have your mortgage be a small part of your budget, you don’t always need snow in order to get that, but you aren’t usually going to live on the beach, just pick the sacrifices of least sacrifice to you personally.

If you think you are going to die soon, then take a different track, live where you want. personally, I could live in S.D. but ever since viagra/ciallis came out I’ve adjusted my strategy. I figure I need to save 50% of my income so I am richer as I age. With the current medications and the fact that the odds totally tilt in a man’s favor every day over 40 as far as the population of singles go. It’s going to be pandemonium. By 70, it’s like 3-1 women to men, I gave up sugar a few years ago, I exercise every day. I fully plan on wearing out my prescription drug coverage.

Since we have hit all the other topics on this thread, here are my votes. Yes on socialized medicine. Yes on sweden ( is that where they have legalized prostitution or is that denmark?) Then yes on denmark. No on Minnesota, the vikings situation alone is reason enough to take a “wait and see” approach. No on Sac and Encanto. Yes on Big bear, Mammoth or Tahoe, mostly because they have a summer and a winter, the winter only places suck. I can’t remember any of the other issues because it was a long thread, except the communist manifesto and atlas shrugged were both incomplete because neither mentions porn or the effect of real motivation. I understand the academia of political ideology, but idealogy gets lost in what actually motivates people. Someone is not motivated to go to school for 8 years to help their fellow man. They are motivated because in the end, they will get paid enough to drive a 6 series and then women will show them their breasts. That my friend is why communism failed.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=Effective Demand]Buy a house for the right reasons. its right for you and your family and you can afford it. Dont buy expecting to get rich off the house or expecting the house will protect ,you from the ills of the world.[/quote]

If you combine what ED said above and the collective discussion about potential inflation, you’ll be O.K.

If you buy a house that you cannot afford because you think inflation will alter the situation, you are nothing more than a 2006 bubble buyer with a toxic loan. They were buying a house they couldn’t afford because they thought it’s value would rise indefinately. But if you can afford what you are planning on buying, if it works with or without inflation, you will probably end up in great position 15 years from now when your house payment is the size of your car payment.

Prepare for inflation but don’t count on it! It is the system’s “easy button” but it has consequences that they would prefer to avoid. I think the odds are in favor of it but I wouldn’t make it my entire financial plan, just a component of it.

If we do enter a period of high inflation, lets say 6% a year for 5+ years, wages tend to follow but they also tend to lag. Most people’s wages do not adjust on a monthly basis, it balances out over a decade or so but it usually is a game of catch up.

In the early 1970’s you could buy a house with a 30 yr mortgage and by the mid 1980’s your mortgage was similar to a car payment. But it took 15 years and I’m cherry picking a period of time from the past, who knows what the future will bring.

If hyperinflation actually shows up, then those who own will make out like bandits, but it’s never happened in this country, so i wouldn’t bank on it.

[Author]

Posts