What do you all think? Wait out the Bay Area market a few more years? We have two kids, jobs here and we are renting a 500 square foot home. Should we buy some crap hole under $400,000 in the area, or move to a place where we could have a nice home for $200,000? Should we invest? Please add your reasons why, and any solid data or links you have to help.

To buy, or not to buy...
By hrhjuliet Follow Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 2:40pm 19,816 views 226 comments
Watch (1) Share
Quote
Permalink Like Dislike « First « Previous Viewing Comments 147-186 of 226 Next » Last » See most liked comments
« First « Previous comments Next comments » Last »
|
hrhjuliet is moderator of this thread. |
Follow
Befriend (3)
28 threads
747 comments
Tarzana, CA
FunTime says
And not to mention every 10 or so years along comes an economic downturn and these 'some people' get to reclaim their rentals.
Follow
Befriend (8)
38 threads
2,004 comments
Pleasanton, CA
Premium
FunTime says
BINGO! God it feels good that someone gets it. Focusing on the monthly and using that as an affordability index is down right silly.
Follow
Befriend (3)
38 threads
801 comments
San Francisco, CA
ptiemann says
I live a fairy tale life and I'll have it my way. I'm not going to borrow money to buy a Lamborghini either. I can't afford it.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,627 comments
RentingForHalfTheCost says
lol---so you came up with exactly zero differences. Well done.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,627 comments
RentingForHalfTheCost says
Ding, ding, ding, ding. Do you see the word collateral in that sentence?
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,627 comments
RentingForHalfTheCost says
Don't be ridiculous. You have to live somewhere so the proper accounting is to compare the cost of renting vs. the cost of buying. And this cost comparison is best done using monthly payments.
It's also useful to look at the local market and the last selling price of the house, but comparing montly payments is not silly.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,627 comments
Realtors Are Liars says
Sure--I agree the lender holds the deed. You own it, but the lender holds the deed.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
If buyers only look at "how much per month?", than prices are absolutely dependent on interest rates, since interest rates affect the monthly payment. Higher interest rates = higher monthly payments -> lower prices to compensate
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,627 comments
wthrfrk80 says
Yep--they are most definitely dependent on interest rates. What history has shown is that this dependence is much weaker than their dependence on unemployment, or wage inflation.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,627 comments
Realtors Are Liars says
I'm not even sure what you are trying to say there. A borrower can sell their house whenever they want--the loan balance is due upon sale, of course.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,627 comments
RentingForHalfTheCost says
I forgot to address this. Carrying insurance is a part of the loan contract. The bank is protecting the asset that is being used as collateral in the loan. It implies no ownership.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
RentingForHalfTheCost says
That sums it up quite well. Well said!
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
FunTime says
It's amazing how eager people are to sign up for voluntary serfdom/slavery in "the land of the free" isn't it?
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Even when the mortgage is paid off, you don't "own" your house. Try missing a few property tax payments and see how much you really "own."
Even when the mortgage is paid off, you're renting the land from Your Local Government.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,627 comments
wthrfrk80 says
Well, yes, in an abstract sense, you don't own anything.
And yes, if you don't live up to your responsibilities such as property tax, income tax, or if you deal drugs out of your house, it can be confiscated.
But, if you live up to your responsibilities, you legally own your house.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
But what does "ownership" even mean if you have to pay someone annually just to keep it? That's not my definition of "ownership."
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,627 comments
wthrfrk80 says
Several things off the top of my head. The owner is entitled to any profit or loss on the sale of the asset. The owner is entitled to make any changes as he/she see fit to the asset (provided said changes aren't against any laws or codes). The owner is responsible for any liabilities due to said asset. Etc, etc.
The government taxes many things--it doesn't mean it owns them.
Follow
Befriend (23)
55 threads
3,789 comments
Scottsdale, AZ
robertoaribas's website
wthrfrk80 says
then don't ever own anything: Your car? nope, if you don't pay the registration and insurance, you can't drive it anyways...
income on your stock investments? Nope, if you don't pay the taxes you get in trouble.
live in a park by begging, and all your problems are solved! Except the stupidity one of course!
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
robertoaribas says
Very true. You don't "own" your car. Even if you do, it rapidly depreciates. The decision to lease a car rather than own can make a lot of sense. Do whatever option is cheaper and/or more convenient.
robertoaribas says
I don't have to pay anyone anything to hold on to a stock. Sure, if I get dividends that's considered "income" and is subject to tax. If I sell the stock, I have to pay tax on the income from capital gains. That's not the same thing as paying someone constantly to avoid having an asset confiscated.
Follow
Befriend
2,826 comments
Monterey, CA
Realtors Are Liars says
Aye, nobody's ever made a profit on a real estate transaction.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Bigsby says
Sure, you can make money speculating on real estate. You can also lose money speculating on real estate. Just like any other kind of speculation.
If I'm going to speculate, I prefer assets that are much more liquid and diversified, like stock index funds.
Comissions are also cheaper than Realtor fees. And index funds don't require re-painting and landscaping. Or property taxes. Or insurance.
And if I lose my job, I can easily take my index funds with me.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,627 comments
wthrfrk80 says
Who said anything about speculating? How about owning a house for 25 years and then selling at a profit?
Follow
Befriend
2,826 comments
Monterey, CA
Realtors Are Liars says
Aye, nobody's ever made a profit on a real estate transaction involving a house.
Learn to make sense.
Follow
Befriend
2,826 comments
Monterey, CA
wthrfrk80 says
You don't say. Hardly the points our resident WUM was making though, are they?
And since when does it have to be either or? The two things aren't opposite sides of the same coin. Last time I checked, you are allowed to own a house and stick money in Vanguard.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
tatupu70 says
Can I be sure I will make a profit after owning a house for 25 years, after inflation? Even with property taxes, mortgage interest, insurance, and maintenance?
If so, great. If not, it's just speculation. Better to diversify my speculation than put all my speculative eggs in one basket.
A lot can happen in 25 years. What if I lose my job and have to move? What if the area sees massive job losses and the RE market tanks? What if interest rates go up and I have to lower the selling price for the "howmuchamonthers"?
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
A house is NOT an investment. It's a place to live. Rent vs. Buy depends on which option is cheaper.
Owning stocks and bonds for the long term is investing. Real estate is speculation, unless you're a landlord getting a steady return on investment in the form of rents.
Follow
Befriend
2,826 comments
Monterey, CA
wthrfrk80 says
Err, well of course it's speculation - you are talking 25 years in the future! The same applies to sticking your money in stocks - nobody knows what will be happening then. And yes, you may spread your risk, but if you rent for 25 years, and rent at a high cost if you live in NY, then you are going to blow through one hell of a lot of money with nothing to show for it.
The fact is that for a lot of people buying a house is a pretty logical decision to make. Your problem is that you live in NY and others on here in the BA.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
I don't live in the Bay Area. Where I live (Corning, NY) housing is very cheap. But it's for good reason. There are only a few major employers, and if even one of them moves away or shuts down, it's a huge hit to the RE market. The market is pricing in the risk.
I'm NOT saying it's always bad to buy. If you have a stable job in a stable industry, and the cost of buying is reasonable compared to renting, it makes sense to buy.
Follow
Befriend
2,826 comments
Monterey, CA
wthrfrk80 says
Presumably it's investing only if you make a nice profit when you cash in your stocks. Anyway, I don't quite see how buying a house on the down is speculating whereas buying stocks when they are on a high is investing. RE has gone up in the long-term just as stocks have. When you enter and exit the market is the more important issue.
Follow
Befriend
2,826 comments
Monterey, CA
wthrfrk80 says
And again, most people don't know how stable their jobs will be into the (long-term) future, but that doesn't necessarily matter as long as you make reasonable financial decisions when you own. Plenty of people have lost jobs but have still made a killing from their houses whilst others have lost everything. That's what happens in life.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Bigsby says
So you're admitting if I "make a killing" or "lose everything" on real estate, it's mostly luck? Here's an idea: how about not gambling in the RE market to begin with? If RE prices in Your Town are so volitile that you can "make a killing" or "lose everything" buying RE, maybe the smarter thing is to rent? Let the landlord take all of the risk.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,627 comments
Realtors Are Liars says
I've done it 3 times in the past.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Bigsby says
I buy stocks for the steady cash flow in the form of dividends and share buybacks. Not constant buying and selling (i.e. speculating).
RE is not "down." If anything, it's just getting back to the historical mean (nationwide average). Google "Case-Schiller housing index."
Yes, stocks are overvalued. Sucks doesn't it? Cash is losing value thanks to the Fed, so everyone is "yield chasing" in riskier assets instead. The Fed holds the cards in this game.
Follow
Befriend
2,826 comments
Monterey, CA
wthrfrk80 says
Housing is down compared to what it was, and at or near historical norms in many parts of the US. And if constant buying and selling = speculating, then how on earth does buying and living in a house for 25 years translate into speculating while sitting on stocks doesn't???
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Bigsby says
Ok, point taken. Living in a house for 25 years is not speculating.
If only it were possible to live in the same place for 25 years. Seems like the world changes too much for that.
Follow
Befriend
2,826 comments
Monterey, CA
wthrfrk80 says
Where am I saying it's just luck? I said no such thing. I simply said some people have come out ahead and some people have lost out (especially recently). Historically though, far more people have come out ahead in their RE purchases.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
And there's absolutely no gaurantee that you will sell your house at a profit after 25 years, after taking inflation into account. During that 25 years, that house "investment" generated "negative dividends" in for form of:
1) Mortgage interest
2) Property Taxes
3) Insurance
4) Maintenance
The benefit of the house comes from money saved on rent. You don't want to overpay for that rental savings.
If house prices are cheap relative to rents, you should buy. If house prices are expensive relative to rents, you should rent. See Patrick's rent vs. buy calculator to see which option causes the least loss of money (yes, they BOTH result in a LOSS of money, not just the rental option!)
Follow
Befriend (1)
11 threads
224 comments
San Francisco, CA
This thread is getting a little ridiculous.
Raise your hand if you think that most people should rent (ie., not buy) for their entire lives.
I'm not talking investing or speculating, or trying to make a profit in any way - I am referring to the very basic need for SHELTER.
I am not talking about people who have a pile of cash they need to put somewhere and are wondering/debating whether real estate or the stock market or bonds are a better bet. Or people who already own a house - mortgage or no - and have money left over.
I am not sure if that is what some posters are suggesting, or if they are merely saying that no one should buy right now, that it would be better if everyone help off on buying for a few years (or longer).
The idea that everyone, or most of the population should rent is mighty appealing to the folks at the top of the financial food chain. How about selling all those foreclosures in bulk to a small percentage of the population so everyone else can rent? Oh yeah, they're trying that.
Serfs and manors anyone?
-
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,627 comments
wthrfrk80 says
You almost certainly will come out behind after taking inflation into account. Owning real estate solely for capital appreciation is a horrible investment. Which is why pretty much nobody does it.
Follow
Befriend
2,826 comments
Monterey, CA
wthrfrk80 says
I didn't say there was any guarantee.