[UCGal]

[quote=jpinpb]I take issue w/this statement:

“1. Housing is a great long-term investment.

Historically, the value of owner-occupied homes has risen at a fairly low rate, one that pales in comparison with the performance of stocks and bonds. Between 1975 and 2008, the price for houses of comparable quality and size appreciated an average of about 1 percent per year.”

We’ve probably had 2 little bubbles and one big one in that time period and if you sold at peak and bought low, you probably made more than 1 percent. Even if you didn’t sell during the smaller bubbles and sold in 2005/2006, you did fine. Long term doesn’t have to mean your entire life, but holding 30 years in this scenario would have given you some nice gains.[/quote]

I think it depends on WHERE you bought. California does not follow more typical real estate market flows.

I have a friend who bought a house in suburban Philly. He held it for 14 years. He wanted to move to center city to be closer to the “action”… and had to bring $8k to the table when he sold. The house was maintained… but hadn’t appreciated – and transaction costs and a low down payment left him unable to cover transaction costs. Not all area’s in the country bubbled. And if they did, it was at a much lower rate. Coastal CA experienced the extremes of the housing bubble.

But -to your point. My dad bought the house I live in now in 1966 for under $30k. For years it stayed well under $100k. Then CA took off and when we bought it in 2003 – we paid the market price of $600k. Same house, but in the 37 years it had appreciated 2000%.

But not all markets did that. My husband bought a semi-detached house in Philly in the early 80’s for under $10k. (It was a HUD repo and gutted.) He invested about $15k into the house, then another 10k into buying the adjacent lot and building an attached garage. When he sold it in 2001 it sold for $65k. – not quite double in 20 years. Same house in CA would have gone up 4-5 times.

[UCGal]

[quote=jpinpb]I take issue w/this statement:

“1. Housing is a great long-term investment.

Historically, the value of owner-occupied homes has risen at a fairly low rate, one that pales in comparison with the performance of stocks and bonds. Between 1975 and 2008, the price for houses of comparable quality and size appreciated an average of about 1 percent per year.”

We’ve probably had 2 little bubbles and one big one in that time period and if you sold at peak and bought low, you probably made more than 1 percent. Even if you didn’t sell during the smaller bubbles and sold in 2005/2006, you did fine. Long term doesn’t have to mean your entire life, but holding 30 years in this scenario would have given you some nice gains.[/quote]

I think it depends on WHERE you bought. California does not follow more typical real estate market flows.

I have a friend who bought a house in suburban Philly. He held it for 14 years. He wanted to move to center city to be closer to the “action”… and had to bring $8k to the table when he sold. The house was maintained… but hadn’t appreciated – and transaction costs and a low down payment left him unable to cover transaction costs. Not all area’s in the country bubbled. And if they did, it was at a much lower rate. Coastal CA experienced the extremes of the housing bubble.

But -to your point. My dad bought the house I live in now in 1966 for under $30k. For years it stayed well under $100k. Then CA took off and when we bought it in 2003 – we paid the market price of $600k. Same house, but in the 37 years it had appreciated 2000%.

But not all markets did that. My husband bought a semi-detached house in Philly in the early 80’s for under $10k. (It was a HUD repo and gutted.) He invested about $15k into the house, then another 10k into buying the adjacent lot and building an attached garage. When he sold it in 2001 it sold for $65k. – not quite double in 20 years. Same house in CA would have gone up 4-5 times.

[UCGal]

[quote=jpinpb]I take issue w/this statement:

“1. Housing is a great long-term investment.

Historically, the value of owner-occupied homes has risen at a fairly low rate, one that pales in comparison with the performance of stocks and bonds. Between 1975 and 2008, the price for houses of comparable quality and size appreciated an average of about 1 percent per year.”

We’ve probably had 2 little bubbles and one big one in that time period and if you sold at peak and bought low, you probably made more than 1 percent. Even if you didn’t sell during the smaller bubbles and sold in 2005/2006, you did fine. Long term doesn’t have to mean your entire life, but holding 30 years in this scenario would have given you some nice gains.[/quote]

I think it depends on WHERE you bought. California does not follow more typical real estate market flows.

I have a friend who bought a house in suburban Philly. He held it for 14 years. He wanted to move to center city to be closer to the “action”… and had to bring $8k to the table when he sold. The house was maintained… but hadn’t appreciated – and transaction costs and a low down payment left him unable to cover transaction costs. Not all area’s in the country bubbled. And if they did, it was at a much lower rate. Coastal CA experienced the extremes of the housing bubble.

But -to your point. My dad bought the house I live in now in 1966 for under $30k. For years it stayed well under $100k. Then CA took off and when we bought it in 2003 – we paid the market price of $600k. Same house, but in the 37 years it had appreciated 2000%.

But not all markets did that. My husband bought a semi-detached house in Philly in the early 80’s for under $10k. (It was a HUD repo and gutted.) He invested about $15k into the house, then another 10k into buying the adjacent lot and building an attached garage. When he sold it in 2001 it sold for $65k. – not quite double in 20 years. Same house in CA would have gone up 4-5 times.

[UCGal]

[quote=urbanrealtor]Yeah Poway Seller is my sister and Marion is my wife.

Also, Allan is my secret lover.
[/quote]
I just had cranberry juice snorted out my nose reading that and laughing. Ouch.

[UCGal]

[quote=urbanrealtor]Yeah Poway Seller is my sister and Marion is my wife.

Also, Allan is my secret lover.
[/quote]
I just had cranberry juice snorted out my nose reading that and laughing. Ouch.

[UCGal]

[quote=urbanrealtor]Yeah Poway Seller is my sister and Marion is my wife.

Also, Allan is my secret lover.
[/quote]
I just had cranberry juice snorted out my nose reading that and laughing. Ouch.

[UCGal]

[quote=urbanrealtor]Yeah Poway Seller is my sister and Marion is my wife.

Also, Allan is my secret lover.
[/quote]
I just had cranberry juice snorted out my nose reading that and laughing. Ouch.

[UCGal]

[quote=urbanrealtor]Yeah Poway Seller is my sister and Marion is my wife.

Also, Allan is my secret lover.
[/quote]
I just had cranberry juice snorted out my nose reading that and laughing. Ouch.

[UCGal]

Another small point about teachers. My sister (a teacher) has made it abundantly clear to me that there is more to being a subject matter expert to qualify you for teaching. You also have to learn the skill set of teaching – conveying the information in multiple ways – because not all students learn the same way. This is especially true in math. So math teachers not only have to understand the math concepts they are teaching – they have to be able to approach the concept from different directions – and communicate that to the class.

My sister grew up in the same house I did. Math ruled. Our Dad was an engineer. She worked in an engineering environment for years. When she went back to school to learn how to teach – she discovered her skillset was entirely inadequate. She could negotiate contracts with the pentagon, but didn’t have the skillset to teach. She had to get a credential and do a lot more coursework, in addition to her undergrad and masters she already had.

Since so many of us are engineers – I’m sure we’ve all had those “a-ha” moments in college where a hard topic suddenly clicked and the light bulb went off. It was because the teacher had found the way to explain that it worked for YOU… your classmate may have gotten it with a different explanation. Teaching is about showing multiple ways to solve something. Different students respond to different approaches.

I’m good at math. I’m a decent engineer. I’d be horrible as a teacher for so many reasons. I’m impatient. I’m not the best communicator. I want to solve the problems rather than teach others how to solve them. And so I sit in a cubicle in Sorrento Mesa rather than in front of a classroom. I picked the correct career path for me. My sister is a very good teacher… and I am a witness that she works as hard or harder than me.

I don’t begrudge teachers. There’s a lot more to it than you realize.

[UCGal]

Another small point about teachers. My sister (a teacher) has made it abundantly clear to me that there is more to being a subject matter expert to qualify you for teaching. You also have to learn the skill set of teaching – conveying the information in multiple ways – because not all students learn the same way. This is especially true in math. So math teachers not only have to understand the math concepts they are teaching – they have to be able to approach the concept from different directions – and communicate that to the class.

My sister grew up in the same house I did. Math ruled. Our Dad was an engineer. She worked in an engineering environment for years. When she went back to school to learn how to teach – she discovered her skillset was entirely inadequate. She could negotiate contracts with the pentagon, but didn’t have the skillset to teach. She had to get a credential and do a lot more coursework, in addition to her undergrad and masters she already had.

Since so many of us are engineers – I’m sure we’ve all had those “a-ha” moments in college where a hard topic suddenly clicked and the light bulb went off. It was because the teacher had found the way to explain that it worked for YOU… your classmate may have gotten it with a different explanation. Teaching is about showing multiple ways to solve something. Different students respond to different approaches.

I’m good at math. I’m a decent engineer. I’d be horrible as a teacher for so many reasons. I’m impatient. I’m not the best communicator. I want to solve the problems rather than teach others how to solve them. And so I sit in a cubicle in Sorrento Mesa rather than in front of a classroom. I picked the correct career path for me. My sister is a very good teacher… and I am a witness that she works as hard or harder than me.

I don’t begrudge teachers. There’s a lot more to it than you realize.

[UCGal]

Another small point about teachers. My sister (a teacher) has made it abundantly clear to me that there is more to being a subject matter expert to qualify you for teaching. You also have to learn the skill set of teaching – conveying the information in multiple ways – because not all students learn the same way. This is especially true in math. So math teachers not only have to understand the math concepts they are teaching – they have to be able to approach the concept from different directions – and communicate that to the class.

My sister grew up in the same house I did. Math ruled. Our Dad was an engineer. She worked in an engineering environment for years. When she went back to school to learn how to teach – she discovered her skillset was entirely inadequate. She could negotiate contracts with the pentagon, but didn’t have the skillset to teach. She had to get a credential and do a lot more coursework, in addition to her undergrad and masters she already had.

Since so many of us are engineers – I’m sure we’ve all had those “a-ha” moments in college where a hard topic suddenly clicked and the light bulb went off. It was because the teacher had found the way to explain that it worked for YOU… your classmate may have gotten it with a different explanation. Teaching is about showing multiple ways to solve something. Different students respond to different approaches.

I’m good at math. I’m a decent engineer. I’d be horrible as a teacher for so many reasons. I’m impatient. I’m not the best communicator. I want to solve the problems rather than teach others how to solve them. And so I sit in a cubicle in Sorrento Mesa rather than in front of a classroom. I picked the correct career path for me. My sister is a very good teacher… and I am a witness that she works as hard or harder than me.

I don’t begrudge teachers. There’s a lot more to it than you realize.

[UCGal]

Another small point about teachers. My sister (a teacher) has made it abundantly clear to me that there is more to being a subject matter expert to qualify you for teaching. You also have to learn the skill set of teaching – conveying the information in multiple ways – because not all students learn the same way. This is especially true in math. So math teachers not only have to understand the math concepts they are teaching – they have to be able to approach the concept from different directions – and communicate that to the class.

My sister grew up in the same house I did. Math ruled. Our Dad was an engineer. She worked in an engineering environment for years. When she went back to school to learn how to teach – she discovered her skillset was entirely inadequate. She could negotiate contracts with the pentagon, but didn’t have the skillset to teach. She had to get a credential and do a lot more coursework, in addition to her undergrad and masters she already had.

Since so many of us are engineers – I’m sure we’ve all had those “a-ha” moments in college where a hard topic suddenly clicked and the light bulb went off. It was because the teacher had found the way to explain that it worked for YOU… your classmate may have gotten it with a different explanation. Teaching is about showing multiple ways to solve something. Different students respond to different approaches.

I’m good at math. I’m a decent engineer. I’d be horrible as a teacher for so many reasons. I’m impatient. I’m not the best communicator. I want to solve the problems rather than teach others how to solve them. And so I sit in a cubicle in Sorrento Mesa rather than in front of a classroom. I picked the correct career path for me. My sister is a very good teacher… and I am a witness that she works as hard or harder than me.

I don’t begrudge teachers. There’s a lot more to it than you realize.

[UCGal]

Another small point about teachers. My sister (a teacher) has made it abundantly clear to me that there is more to being a subject matter expert to qualify you for teaching. You also have to learn the skill set of teaching – conveying the information in multiple ways – because not all students learn the same way. This is especially true in math. So math teachers not only have to understand the math concepts they are teaching – they have to be able to approach the concept from different directions – and communicate that to the class.

My sister grew up in the same house I did. Math ruled. Our Dad was an engineer. She worked in an engineering environment for years. When she went back to school to learn how to teach – she discovered her skillset was entirely inadequate. She could negotiate contracts with the pentagon, but didn’t have the skillset to teach. She had to get a credential and do a lot more coursework, in addition to her undergrad and masters she already had.

Since so many of us are engineers – I’m sure we’ve all had those “a-ha” moments in college where a hard topic suddenly clicked and the light bulb went off. It was because the teacher had found the way to explain that it worked for YOU… your classmate may have gotten it with a different explanation. Teaching is about showing multiple ways to solve something. Different students respond to different approaches.

I’m good at math. I’m a decent engineer. I’d be horrible as a teacher for so many reasons. I’m impatient. I’m not the best communicator. I want to solve the problems rather than teach others how to solve them. And so I sit in a cubicle in Sorrento Mesa rather than in front of a classroom. I picked the correct career path for me. My sister is a very good teacher… and I am a witness that she works as hard or harder than me.

I don’t begrudge teachers. There’s a lot more to it than you realize.

[UCGal]

A couple of points.
* Most school districts have longer school years than 9 months. San Diego unified is closer to 10 months. (Gets out mid June, teacher report back mid-August.)

* The OP talked about a high school math/physics teacher. So it’s reasonable to compare education to an engineer. And the 70k salary suggests a masters degree. San Diego Unified posts their salary grades online. It maxes out at 87.6k for a 200day contract – that’s for a teacher with a masters, plus 90 additional academic units, plus max tenure.

(Link to San Diego Unified teacher pay scale:
http://www.sandi.net/20451072011454857/lib/20451072011454857/salaryschedules/teachers.pdf
Note – teachers are on 200 day contracts – see page 9 for annual salaries.)

I’m an engineer. I’ve known well paid engineers who didn’t even have a bachelors degree – worked they’re way up from being a tech or started in some other field and ‘fell into’ software or embedded programming. Some were talented… some more talented than their coworkers who had advanced engineering degrees.

I’ve also know well paid engineers who are NOT worth the salary their paid. I think there are losers and lazy people in every field.

[UCGal]

A couple of points.
* Most school districts have longer school years than 9 months. San Diego unified is closer to 10 months. (Gets out mid June, teacher report back mid-August.)

* The OP talked about a high school math/physics teacher. So it’s reasonable to compare education to an engineer. And the 70k salary suggests a masters degree. San Diego Unified posts their salary grades online. It maxes out at 87.6k for a 200day contract – that’s for a teacher with a masters, plus 90 additional academic units, plus max tenure.

(Link to San Diego Unified teacher pay scale:
http://www.sandi.net/20451072011454857/lib/20451072011454857/salaryschedules/teachers.pdf
Note – teachers are on 200 day contracts – see page 9 for annual salaries.)

I’m an engineer. I’ve known well paid engineers who didn’t even have a bachelors degree – worked they’re way up from being a tech or started in some other field and ‘fell into’ software or embedded programming. Some were talented… some more talented than their coworkers who had advanced engineering degrees.

I’ve also know well paid engineers who are NOT worth the salary their paid. I think there are losers and lazy people in every field.

[Author]

Posts