Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
UCGal
ParticipantIt is one thing to make a cold, calculated gamble that the credit hit is worth the credit hit and underwater-ness.
It is another thing to intentionally trash a house.
At that point – it’s not “their” house anymore – it’s the banks. They’ve stopped paying. Yet they are going to “trash” it. That is vandalism.
I’m with TG on this. What they are doing may be legal. But it isn’t ethical.
ParticipantIt is one thing to make a cold, calculated gamble that the credit hit is worth the credit hit and underwater-ness.
It is another thing to intentionally trash a house.
At that point – it’s not “their” house anymore – it’s the banks. They’ve stopped paying. Yet they are going to “trash” it. That is vandalism.
I’m with TG on this. What they are doing may be legal. But it isn’t ethical.
Participant[quote=4plexowner]1. what about the fact that 25% of our workforce (Baby Boomers) are going to try to retire over the next ten years?
many of them will try to downsize by selling their houses
ie, more shadow inventory
[/quote]
On the downsizing at retirement thing. I don’t think it happens quite that way. I live in a 45 year old neighborhood – on my street there has been *some* turnover as the people who bought in the 60’s got older… but to a large extent they’ve sold to their children. (And I’m one of those adult children who bought from the parents.) Just on my block – we have 6 households that grew up, moved away, came back and bought their parents house when the parents wanted to downsize. We have additional households where the original owners are STILL in the house. A few have taken in boarders. I would estimate that over half of our block is retired – and bought more than 25 years ago. Especially in the single story homes.
These retired folks have paid off their houses, they’ve locked in their prop 13 rate. No reason to move till they’re ready for a nursing home or cemetary.
Participant[quote=4plexowner]1. what about the fact that 25% of our workforce (Baby Boomers) are going to try to retire over the next ten years?
many of them will try to downsize by selling their houses
ie, more shadow inventory
[/quote]
On the downsizing at retirement thing. I don’t think it happens quite that way. I live in a 45 year old neighborhood – on my street there has been *some* turnover as the people who bought in the 60’s got older… but to a large extent they’ve sold to their children. (And I’m one of those adult children who bought from the parents.) Just on my block – we have 6 households that grew up, moved away, came back and bought their parents house when the parents wanted to downsize. We have additional households where the original owners are STILL in the house. A few have taken in boarders. I would estimate that over half of our block is retired – and bought more than 25 years ago. Especially in the single story homes.
These retired folks have paid off their houses, they’ve locked in their prop 13 rate. No reason to move till they’re ready for a nursing home or cemetary.
Participant[quote=4plexowner]1. what about the fact that 25% of our workforce (Baby Boomers) are going to try to retire over the next ten years?
many of them will try to downsize by selling their houses
ie, more shadow inventory
[/quote]
On the downsizing at retirement thing. I don’t think it happens quite that way. I live in a 45 year old neighborhood – on my street there has been *some* turnover as the people who bought in the 60’s got older… but to a large extent they’ve sold to their children. (And I’m one of those adult children who bought from the parents.) Just on my block – we have 6 households that grew up, moved away, came back and bought their parents house when the parents wanted to downsize. We have additional households where the original owners are STILL in the house. A few have taken in boarders. I would estimate that over half of our block is retired – and bought more than 25 years ago. Especially in the single story homes.
These retired folks have paid off their houses, they’ve locked in their prop 13 rate. No reason to move till they’re ready for a nursing home or cemetary.
Participant[quote=4plexowner]1. what about the fact that 25% of our workforce (Baby Boomers) are going to try to retire over the next ten years?
many of them will try to downsize by selling their houses
ie, more shadow inventory
[/quote]
On the downsizing at retirement thing. I don’t think it happens quite that way. I live in a 45 year old neighborhood – on my street there has been *some* turnover as the people who bought in the 60’s got older… but to a large extent they’ve sold to their children. (And I’m one of those adult children who bought from the parents.) Just on my block – we have 6 households that grew up, moved away, came back and bought their parents house when the parents wanted to downsize. We have additional households where the original owners are STILL in the house. A few have taken in boarders. I would estimate that over half of our block is retired – and bought more than 25 years ago. Especially in the single story homes.
These retired folks have paid off their houses, they’ve locked in their prop 13 rate. No reason to move till they’re ready for a nursing home or cemetary.
Participant[quote=4plexowner]1. what about the fact that 25% of our workforce (Baby Boomers) are going to try to retire over the next ten years?
many of them will try to downsize by selling their houses
ie, more shadow inventory
[/quote]
On the downsizing at retirement thing. I don’t think it happens quite that way. I live in a 45 year old neighborhood – on my street there has been *some* turnover as the people who bought in the 60’s got older… but to a large extent they’ve sold to their children. (And I’m one of those adult children who bought from the parents.) Just on my block – we have 6 households that grew up, moved away, came back and bought their parents house when the parents wanted to downsize. We have additional households where the original owners are STILL in the house. A few have taken in boarders. I would estimate that over half of our block is retired – and bought more than 25 years ago. Especially in the single story homes.
These retired folks have paid off their houses, they’ve locked in their prop 13 rate. No reason to move till they’re ready for a nursing home or cemetary.
ParticipantNot a realtor – but I am a homeowner.
Some people buy, not for investment, but to get shelter in an asset they can pay off before they retire. They aren’t planning on selling, so increase in value doesn’t matter to them. They can afford the payment and have either sufficient savings or job security that they are not worried about losing their jobs. They found a house that is a good match for their lifestyle and family.
I put myself in that category. I bought in early 2003 – and saw my house appreciate on paper to a stupid price, then revert back to a somewhat obscene price, IMO. (It’s a 45 year old tract home – it would cost about $500k less than we paid if it were in the midwest or south.) But it suits our family’s needs. So much so that we built a granny flat for my in-laws to live in. It is so customized to our needs that it would take a nuclear blast to get us out of here. I don’t plan on cashing out any paper profits if the housing market goes up… I don’t plan on walking away from my mortgage if the housing market goes down. And I’ve got the resources to pay the mortgage if my job goes away.
If the buyer is on the edge, financialy – buying more than they can comfortably afford – your points are valid. If the buyer is buying for strictly investment purposes – like buying stock, or beanie babies… then your points are well taken.
Some buyers, however, are buying because it suits their family needs long term and it is a long term home for them.
Perhaps they should be buying spending their money on cars instead. Clearly you are bullish on that idea. 😉
ParticipantNot a realtor – but I am a homeowner.
Some people buy, not for investment, but to get shelter in an asset they can pay off before they retire. They aren’t planning on selling, so increase in value doesn’t matter to them. They can afford the payment and have either sufficient savings or job security that they are not worried about losing their jobs. They found a house that is a good match for their lifestyle and family.
I put myself in that category. I bought in early 2003 – and saw my house appreciate on paper to a stupid price, then revert back to a somewhat obscene price, IMO. (It’s a 45 year old tract home – it would cost about $500k less than we paid if it were in the midwest or south.) But it suits our family’s needs. So much so that we built a granny flat for my in-laws to live in. It is so customized to our needs that it would take a nuclear blast to get us out of here. I don’t plan on cashing out any paper profits if the housing market goes up… I don’t plan on walking away from my mortgage if the housing market goes down. And I’ve got the resources to pay the mortgage if my job goes away.
If the buyer is on the edge, financialy – buying more than they can comfortably afford – your points are valid. If the buyer is buying for strictly investment purposes – like buying stock, or beanie babies… then your points are well taken.
Some buyers, however, are buying because it suits their family needs long term and it is a long term home for them.
Perhaps they should be buying spending their money on cars instead. Clearly you are bullish on that idea. 😉
ParticipantNot a realtor – but I am a homeowner.
Some people buy, not for investment, but to get shelter in an asset they can pay off before they retire. They aren’t planning on selling, so increase in value doesn’t matter to them. They can afford the payment and have either sufficient savings or job security that they are not worried about losing their jobs. They found a house that is a good match for their lifestyle and family.
I put myself in that category. I bought in early 2003 – and saw my house appreciate on paper to a stupid price, then revert back to a somewhat obscene price, IMO. (It’s a 45 year old tract home – it would cost about $500k less than we paid if it were in the midwest or south.) But it suits our family’s needs. So much so that we built a granny flat for my in-laws to live in. It is so customized to our needs that it would take a nuclear blast to get us out of here. I don’t plan on cashing out any paper profits if the housing market goes up… I don’t plan on walking away from my mortgage if the housing market goes down. And I’ve got the resources to pay the mortgage if my job goes away.
If the buyer is on the edge, financialy – buying more than they can comfortably afford – your points are valid. If the buyer is buying for strictly investment purposes – like buying stock, or beanie babies… then your points are well taken.
Some buyers, however, are buying because it suits their family needs long term and it is a long term home for them.
Perhaps they should be buying spending their money on cars instead. Clearly you are bullish on that idea. 😉
ParticipantNot a realtor – but I am a homeowner.
Some people buy, not for investment, but to get shelter in an asset they can pay off before they retire. They aren’t planning on selling, so increase in value doesn’t matter to them. They can afford the payment and have either sufficient savings or job security that they are not worried about losing their jobs. They found a house that is a good match for their lifestyle and family.
I put myself in that category. I bought in early 2003 – and saw my house appreciate on paper to a stupid price, then revert back to a somewhat obscene price, IMO. (It’s a 45 year old tract home – it would cost about $500k less than we paid if it were in the midwest or south.) But it suits our family’s needs. So much so that we built a granny flat for my in-laws to live in. It is so customized to our needs that it would take a nuclear blast to get us out of here. I don’t plan on cashing out any paper profits if the housing market goes up… I don’t plan on walking away from my mortgage if the housing market goes down. And I’ve got the resources to pay the mortgage if my job goes away.
If the buyer is on the edge, financialy – buying more than they can comfortably afford – your points are valid. If the buyer is buying for strictly investment purposes – like buying stock, or beanie babies… then your points are well taken.
Some buyers, however, are buying because it suits their family needs long term and it is a long term home for them.
Perhaps they should be buying spending their money on cars instead. Clearly you are bullish on that idea. 😉
ParticipantNot a realtor – but I am a homeowner.
Some people buy, not for investment, but to get shelter in an asset they can pay off before they retire. They aren’t planning on selling, so increase in value doesn’t matter to them. They can afford the payment and have either sufficient savings or job security that they are not worried about losing their jobs. They found a house that is a good match for their lifestyle and family.
I put myself in that category. I bought in early 2003 – and saw my house appreciate on paper to a stupid price, then revert back to a somewhat obscene price, IMO. (It’s a 45 year old tract home – it would cost about $500k less than we paid if it were in the midwest or south.) But it suits our family’s needs. So much so that we built a granny flat for my in-laws to live in. It is so customized to our needs that it would take a nuclear blast to get us out of here. I don’t plan on cashing out any paper profits if the housing market goes up… I don’t plan on walking away from my mortgage if the housing market goes down. And I’ve got the resources to pay the mortgage if my job goes away.
If the buyer is on the edge, financialy – buying more than they can comfortably afford – your points are valid. If the buyer is buying for strictly investment purposes – like buying stock, or beanie babies… then your points are well taken.
Some buyers, however, are buying because it suits their family needs long term and it is a long term home for them.
Perhaps they should be buying spending their money on cars instead. Clearly you are bullish on that idea. 😉
ParticipantOx – In the article you linked there was one that was affordable – Tony Curtis’ islands in Nova Scotia. Only 245k (canadian $). That’s way less than an Escondido avocado ranch. LOL.
ParticipantOx – In the article you linked there was one that was affordable – Tony Curtis’ islands in Nova Scotia. Only 245k (canadian $). That’s way less than an Escondido avocado ranch. LOL.
-
AuthorPosts
