[XBoxBoy]

[quote=jrushton]I’ve done some research and found that the 92106 area really only dropped 2.3% since 2007 according to MDA Dataquick reports.[/quote]

Dataquick uses median prices, which is not a very reliable indicator. If more high cost houses are sold the median goes up, but that doesn’t mean prices have risen. Conversely, if more low cost houses are sold the median goes down, but again, that doesn’t mean prices have fallen.

While the rise and fall of prices is different in different zip codes, it’s probably also true that some areas will fall sooner and some later. But during the boom all housing in San Diego rose to high levels of unaffordability. Likewise, I’d bet that all areas will ultimately get hit by falling prices.

Best advice is to do lots of research in any area before you buy, not just look at dataquick’s median prices. And be patient, this housing collapse is definitely not anywhere near over.

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=jrushton]I’ve done some research and found that the 92106 area really only dropped 2.3% since 2007 according to MDA Dataquick reports.[/quote]

Dataquick uses median prices, which is not a very reliable indicator. If more high cost houses are sold the median goes up, but that doesn’t mean prices have risen. Conversely, if more low cost houses are sold the median goes down, but again, that doesn’t mean prices have fallen.

While the rise and fall of prices is different in different zip codes, it’s probably also true that some areas will fall sooner and some later. But during the boom all housing in San Diego rose to high levels of unaffordability. Likewise, I’d bet that all areas will ultimately get hit by falling prices.

Best advice is to do lots of research in any area before you buy, not just look at dataquick’s median prices. And be patient, this housing collapse is definitely not anywhere near over.

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=jrushton]I’ve done some research and found that the 92106 area really only dropped 2.3% since 2007 according to MDA Dataquick reports.[/quote]

Dataquick uses median prices, which is not a very reliable indicator. If more high cost houses are sold the median goes up, but that doesn’t mean prices have risen. Conversely, if more low cost houses are sold the median goes down, but again, that doesn’t mean prices have fallen.

While the rise and fall of prices is different in different zip codes, it’s probably also true that some areas will fall sooner and some later. But during the boom all housing in San Diego rose to high levels of unaffordability. Likewise, I’d bet that all areas will ultimately get hit by falling prices.

Best advice is to do lots of research in any area before you buy, not just look at dataquick’s median prices. And be patient, this housing collapse is definitely not anywhere near over.

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=paramount]How many people on this board give even 5% of their income to charity, is charity even part of your budget?[/quote]

I’d guess that most everyone on this board gives at least 30% or more to that non-optional charity, the government. (and if you count all taxes, I bet many on this board are way past 30%)

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=paramount]How many people on this board give even 5% of their income to charity, is charity even part of your budget?[/quote]

I’d guess that most everyone on this board gives at least 30% or more to that non-optional charity, the government. (and if you count all taxes, I bet many on this board are way past 30%)

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=paramount]How many people on this board give even 5% of their income to charity, is charity even part of your budget?[/quote]

I’d guess that most everyone on this board gives at least 30% or more to that non-optional charity, the government. (and if you count all taxes, I bet many on this board are way past 30%)

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=paramount]How many people on this board give even 5% of their income to charity, is charity even part of your budget?[/quote]

I’d guess that most everyone on this board gives at least 30% or more to that non-optional charity, the government. (and if you count all taxes, I bet many on this board are way past 30%)

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=paramount]How many people on this board give even 5% of their income to charity, is charity even part of your budget?[/quote]

I’d guess that most everyone on this board gives at least 30% or more to that non-optional charity, the government. (and if you count all taxes, I bet many on this board are way past 30%)

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=esmith]If the house can be rented for 2500, buying does not make sense. If it can be rented for 3500, it’s a toss up.[/quote]

Provided the home doesn’t lose value or gain value.

But the point is not the details of the calculation, but the probably loss due to depreciation of the homes value overwhelms the tax savings very quickly. My numbers could easily be off, doesn’t matter, the probably loss on an 800k home in N County is gonna clobber those tax savings.

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=esmith]If the house can be rented for 2500, buying does not make sense. If it can be rented for 3500, it’s a toss up.[/quote]

Provided the home doesn’t lose value or gain value.

But the point is not the details of the calculation, but the probably loss due to depreciation of the homes value overwhelms the tax savings very quickly. My numbers could easily be off, doesn’t matter, the probably loss on an 800k home in N County is gonna clobber those tax savings.

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=esmith]If the house can be rented for 2500, buying does not make sense. If it can be rented for 3500, it’s a toss up.[/quote]

Provided the home doesn’t lose value or gain value.

But the point is not the details of the calculation, but the probably loss due to depreciation of the homes value overwhelms the tax savings very quickly. My numbers could easily be off, doesn’t matter, the probably loss on an 800k home in N County is gonna clobber those tax savings.

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=esmith]If the house can be rented for 2500, buying does not make sense. If it can be rented for 3500, it’s a toss up.[/quote]

Provided the home doesn’t lose value or gain value.

But the point is not the details of the calculation, but the probably loss due to depreciation of the homes value overwhelms the tax savings very quickly. My numbers could easily be off, doesn’t matter, the probably loss on an 800k home in N County is gonna clobber those tax savings.

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=esmith]If the house can be rented for 2500, buying does not make sense. If it can be rented for 3500, it’s a toss up.[/quote]

Provided the home doesn’t lose value or gain value.

But the point is not the details of the calculation, but the probably loss due to depreciation of the homes value overwhelms the tax savings very quickly. My numbers could easily be off, doesn’t matter, the probably loss on an 800k home in N County is gonna clobber those tax savings.

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

Been watching this thread, and maybe I’m wrong, but I get the sneaking suspicion that what ncounty4 really wants to know is why don’t 90% jumbo loans exist any more? (Not why can’t they personally get the loan) If my hunch is correct, here’s my quick stab at that question.

Banks (and mortgage companies) generally don’t hold mortgages these days. Thus they are only willing to make mortgages that they can sell to someone else. Given that neither investors nor the government are interested in buying jumbos, that means they are not available.

Why don’t investors or the government buy jumbos? The government only buys mortgages for political reasons, but helping people who make a good living but aren’t fabulously wealthy campaign contributors isn’t politically very popular right now. And investors don’t want to buy mortgages for the following reasons.

1) Too much risk. No one knows how far down housing prices are going to go.

2) Government interference. There is lots of concern among investors that any loan you write will get changed for political reasons by the government and the person holding the loan will get screwed. As an investor this simple reason would drive me away from owning mortgages.

3) Lots of investors have had their fingers burned by mortgage backed securities in the last couple of years. After being burned like that it takes a while for people to come back into the kitchen.

Bottom line here is that why in the world would anyone want to hold mortgage backed securities at this time and at the current rates? The profit just doesn’t justify the risks. Thus they aren’t available. (Or when available, only scarcely and at higher rates)

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

Been watching this thread, and maybe I’m wrong, but I get the sneaking suspicion that what ncounty4 really wants to know is why don’t 90% jumbo loans exist any more? (Not why can’t they personally get the loan) If my hunch is correct, here’s my quick stab at that question.

Banks (and mortgage companies) generally don’t hold mortgages these days. Thus they are only willing to make mortgages that they can sell to someone else. Given that neither investors nor the government are interested in buying jumbos, that means they are not available.

Why don’t investors or the government buy jumbos? The government only buys mortgages for political reasons, but helping people who make a good living but aren’t fabulously wealthy campaign contributors isn’t politically very popular right now. And investors don’t want to buy mortgages for the following reasons.

1) Too much risk. No one knows how far down housing prices are going to go.

2) Government interference. There is lots of concern among investors that any loan you write will get changed for political reasons by the government and the person holding the loan will get screwed. As an investor this simple reason would drive me away from owning mortgages.

3) Lots of investors have had their fingers burned by mortgage backed securities in the last couple of years. After being burned like that it takes a while for people to come back into the kitchen.

Bottom line here is that why in the world would anyone want to hold mortgage backed securities at this time and at the current rates? The profit just doesn’t justify the risks. Thus they aren’t available. (Or when available, only scarcely and at higher rates)

XBoxBoy

[Author]

Posts