patrick.net

Prolly not a good idea to go the roach clusters of monied ex pat Californians that are 'popular' like Austin or Nashville. It's still a big country, and one should always explore boots on the ground with a rental before jumping into the outer space of conjecture. A live appearance in some places can be pretty sobering vs. the wishful thinking fantasy.

When we took our vacation to Washington State last spring, we traveled through a lot of open country. When you get the Bend, it's like California-Junior, suddenly rushed, crowded, jaggy, due to all the Californians that have moved there and run up the prices and downgraded the laid back culture. I was surprised at how very nice the people were outside of Bend, though, really nice. They still pump your gas for you up there.

Yeah, I felt like a rentier magnate out there, incredibly Covid depressed towns and communities everywhere along the routes, albeit magnificent and beautiful in many areas.

SunnyvaleCA says

Have you tried living outside California during the summer? The heat, humidity, and the never-ending swarm of insects might be worth the problems of California. In the last two years, I've vacationed (scouted) Florida in January. Weather was great! Very few bugs! My feeling is that I need to visit in June through September — I'll probably never want to go back again!

I've lived in the PNW, East Coast and Rocky Mountain states. I've visited Atlanta, Charlotte and Orland in August before, so I know what it's like. Nashville won't be quite as bad, but still hot and humid of course but for a shorter period of time than locations farther south. I know there will be more bugs and probably allergies, but those things pale in comparison with the authoritarianism happening in CA.

Look, I love CA weather and beauty. Absolutely love it. I would never leave if not for how the Left is destroying this state and infringing on human rights. I can deal with Left wingers around me being stupid, but it severely crosses a line when they want to force unnecessary experimental shots (KNOWN TO BE HIGH RISK) into our bodies without any science or logic to back it up.

RedStar says

Have you looked into Eastern Idaho? Its still affordable but cold. We bought in Twin Falls and the current renters are waiting for their home to be built this summer.

Too cold, snowy and remote. Not our jam even though I like Idaho as a state.

SunnyvaleCA says

Have you tried living outside California during the summer? The heat, humidity, and the never-ending swarm of insects might be worth the problems of California

porkchopexpress says

We're not picking this high school simply because of its rating, but because of its strong music programs

SunnyvaleCA says

Although a high school might be very highly rated, it might not be great for your kids. Specific school programs, the friends they make, and the vibe of a school are more important than the school's reputation or goal-seeking on arbitrary benchmarks. In today's woke college admissions, going to a highly-rated school means your kids will be penalized in the college admissions process.

Yes. Local knowledge that can only be had from local experience, will be acquired by renting for a couple of years. Such knowledge will be invaluable when it comes to a making a decision to lock-in on a long term commitment.

GreaterNYCDude says

porkchopexpress says

I make the money and she lives in her bubble world as a housewife and mother.

Then wait before buying. Even if its just six to twelve months to know the lay of the land. I know a guy came out east for a job, similar situation... he was breadwinner, etc., wife started missing Cali after about six months and wanted to move back west... It happens.

Besides you've implied your kids are high school aged. 4 years +/- and schools will no longer be a major determining factor.

Good luck with this one.

Thanks. So many factors can play into someone missing Cali and wanting to move back, but the #1 reason I've heard of is family. The wife misses her family back in CA and is homesick. I don't have that problem...zero family here and we've never lived near family. The ONLY thing we'll miss is the weather.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Yes. Local knowledge that can only be had from local experience, will be acquired by renting for a couple of years. Such knowledge will be invaluable when it comes to a making a decision to lock-in on a long term commitment.

Yep, can't argue with that. As another poster said, one way to ease the pain of moving into a rental and then moving again into a purchased house is to whittle down your belongings so that moving isn't such a bitch. I like that idea. Or if I could find this option, rent a furnished home.

I agree, renting for a year or two is logical.

Yes, you take the risk that prices will rise further, but also there is also the possibility that prices will fall, especially if interest rates shoot up.

I've been pretty happy renting the whole time I've had this site, and the savings from renting in CA allowed me to retire 10 years early. Though that is now under threat from inflation and the stock market. I suppose the game is never over.

I think coastal California is unusual in having rents so clearly below the cost of owning the same thing. Maybe in TN it does make more sense to buy. You have to do the calculation to get an idea:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/upshot/buy-rent-calculator.html?source=patrick.net

porkchopexpress says

So, I'm stuck between stretching ourselves a bit to buy a $1.4M home in Nashville area,

I have about 3 options for you:

1 - Rent to own, aka lease option. "Buy" a house by leasing it, with a portion of the lease to apply to the purchase price. This may satisfy both you and your wife.. you are"buying" a house, but you aren't on the hook to pay full boat until 5 years from now (or option period to be determined). Then, if its a bad financial decision, you just walk away.

2) Buy something for less money. 1.4 million is a magic out of the air number likely based on some dream house. Choose your budget that is comfortable.. say 600k . Only look at houses in that price range, and adjust other things to achieve that factor.. i.e. location... commute distance, rural vs urban, sq ft, ... long story short pick something that you won't go broke trying to stay in for the next 10 years. Yeah we all want to be imaginary princes with unlimited money.. but you live in reality. Don'
t fuck your entire life because of being dreamy instead of practical.

3) Agree to buy, but rent while you get to know the area.. Since wifey is currently stay at home, agree that you will buy when she gets her new income and starts contributing X / month to downpayment and future mortgage. Tell her you have faith, she is a capable and wonderful woman, and that susanne researched this, and she can do it. (lol) Tell her it doesn't need to be a job working for someone else, and that she can start a work form home business also. Give her options to succeed and get what sounds good as a dream, but takes her work and effort as well as yours to get done. (There is no problem spending a bunch of money on a house if you are investing and saving, and have a big income from her new business!)

Zak says

I have about 3 options for you:

Good options/ideas. I hadn't though about the lease to own option, so that's worth exploring with the benefit of walking away.

As far as the $1.4M, it wasn't some magic # but just based on what I've been seeing. Actually, $1.4M doesn't get you a "dream home" in this area anymore. Having said that, my wife is in agreement that we should stick with our original budget of $1.2M and try to find well under that if we can. If the market crashes, the more expensive homes will lose more money than the cheaper ones, so that's one way to hedge against a crash.

Not for nothing but when I moved to the area I'm in now we rented for two years... at the time my better half lamented that we were getting "priced out" and couldn't save a down payment fast enough.

But we saved some money, learned the area, made friends, etc. All while renting in a "good" school district.

We all know what happened to the hosing market as a whole.... We ended up buying a foreclosure after the bottom fell out. Still live in the same place today.

For those of you who are long timers on this site you may recall my play by play account of what went down.

It wasn't always easy, but it was worth it.

Under normal conditions I would say renting is better when moving somewhere totally new. With that said in current crazy market if I'd had rented when moving to ID I would have gotten fucked with how hot market is, my CA equity seriously devalued by hot market and inflation.

You have some really tough decisions to make.

RC2006 says

Under normal conditions I would say renting is better when moving somewhere totally new. With that said in current crazy market if I'd had rented when moving to ID I would have gotten fucked with how hot market is, my CA equity seriously devalued by hot market and inflation.

You have some really tough decisions to make.

Yeah, but the housing market has got to be pretty close to it's peak right now.

Booger says

Yeah, but the housing market has got to be pretty close to it's peak right now.

You would certainly think so but, this is a time of pure craziness as far as being able to predict anything.

porkchopexpress says

As far as the $1.4M, it wasn't some magic # but just based on what I've been seeing.

If you only look in magic boxes, you will only see magic things...

You can go look at beach houses in la jolla and then exclaim.. "everything is at least 7 million dollars!"

No.

The old rule of thumb is, put 20% down, and buy a house no more than 4x your salary. So if you are pulling in 300k per year, and you have $240,000 as a downpayment, and are ready to take out (and can get) a 980,000 mortgage, then you are in pretty decent financial shape, and why would you be asking on Patnet with that ability to manage your money??

Much more likely is you have a mix of some savings and some debt.. you have $100k - $150k in liquid assets and $400k in your 401k. Then you have $20-50k of credit card debt. (Don't take this the wrong way, I'm just throwing out a profile, and you can correct my advice based on your particulars.) You have a remote software job and make $200k /yr.

Given that, if you liquify your non-401k holdings, pay off your debt, and come up with a down payment lets say you are at $100k. That gets you a 20% down payment on 500k. That would put you in like the top 10% of net worth earners and savers in the US... That is NOTHING to sneeze at, but looking at a 1.2 Million dollar house you would be 2x overprice from what you would reasonably be able to afford, and could reasonably be expected top struggle.

On a 980,000 mortgage, your monthly is 4235 at 3.28% 30 yr fixed PLUS Insurance and Taxes. 1% taxes on 1.2 million is an extra 12,000 per year, or $1000/month, and insurance is probably another 500-700 so grand total monthly of about 6k .. If you're making $200k, with a 12% 401k deduction, and 30% federal taxes lets assume 0% tax in tennesse (no idea), your take home is 138k about, BEFORE any other benefits with costs like healthcare, etc.. so that's a bit over , but lets call it $10k/month takehome.

with $6000/mo PITI, you are left with $4000/month for your family of 4... I hope you've been putting money away in a 529 for your kids college as well... but at this point, you would be spending 60% of your takehome on housing..

Oh wait.. if you DON'T have that $280k downpayment, you are now getting a 2nd mortgage. And you are paying PMI..SO maybe you are looking at another $500/mo loan for an 80/10, plus another 300 for PMI... (don't know) .. That puts your monthly nut at almost $7k, or 70% of your takehome..

IF it goes up... whoa.. ok.. but IF it does.. that MUST mean inflation is really kicking in, so expect your remaining $4k per month to be losing purchasing power. You presumably have a good job at $200k, but I doubt you will be getting 10% raises yearly (I could be wrong!) But in the event it does, you could have an appreciating asset that now requires maintenance.So get ready for home depot trips and learning experiences with your sons, or expensive contractors. Expect maintenace to run .5% to 1% so another 6-12k per year... yup.. you could be up to 80% of your take home by stretching..

If it goes down, ... well, you can stay there as long as you keep your job, and maybe that's what you wanted to spend your money on... Money is for spending after all.. But you will likely be Stuck (with a capital S). You MAY be able to contact the county recorder and have your property tax basis lowered to a new valuation, but there you are counting on paperwork and bureaucracy to help you.. It has never helped me in my experience...

Now, this might be no big deal.. Maybe you are making $400k/year instead of $200k/yr. But if that's the case.. I don't think you would be on here saying 1.4M is a stretch, and you need to limit to 1.2M... and Patnet.. what do you think I should do...

Glitter in the eyes is easy to get. Hard work and building sweat equity takes that: hard work. Start small and cramped and build some character with your boys putting some sweat equity into a small house and converting it to a spacious living arrangement. Tennessee laws are WAAAY more lax than CA doing add on construction. If you are remote, why do you give a shit aboutr being in neighborhood X ??? Your kids want some music school program??? This would be a GREAT time to show them the budget process to buy a house, and have them start doing some music gigs to see how much you earn playing music, and how well that pays a mortgage downpayment.... They can help contribute to your Tennessee fund if that's where you want to land... It will be eye opening for them for sure, and hint that music is a nice past time, but building your life decisions around it is maybe saved for when you are financially stable and able.

sorry for being a bit harsh.. i know I am.. but it sounds a bit like your wife and kids have you by the balls and you need to wake up from a bit of dreaming and put some numbers down on paper with realistic affordability.. Adult up ?? Being a responsible man means leading the house and saying no sometimes.. Trust me your kids will respect you more for showing them how to say no under pressure when it really is for their benefit as well as the whole family. Use my numbers above and just do a sanity check. Let the numbers tell you what you can afford, not a dream of what someone else already accomplished with their hard work in a house in Tennessee...

Zak says

Now, this might be no big deal.. Maybe you are making $400k/year instead of $200k/yr. But if that's the case.. I don't think you would be on here saying 1.4M is a stretch, and you need to limit to 1.2M... and Patnet.. what do you think I should do...

I'm more in this category. I'm very conservative financially, so I'm being a little dramatic when I say that $1.4M would be a stretch for me. In all honesty, it would be fine by normal people's standards, and I have the 20% down and closing costs to cover it.

I do appreciate your detailed analysis and your numbers align with what I've calculated as well. I'm more worried about prices plummeting by 20% or more because they're so ridiculous right now, and either being trapped in a decent house vs having been able to get a kick-ass house for the same price or cheaper in a year or two.

porkchopexpress says

I'm very conservative financially, so I'm being dramatic when I say that $1.4M would be a stretch for me.

If you're making 400k per year, then why do you want to move to Tennesse and set up roots? I get escaping vax mandate in school, but why don't you try moving to puerto rico and then italy and then Bali and doing some remote work there.. Doubt the wife would mind , especially if you have no house to tie you down here in CA...

Puerto Rico is a no visa move... US territory, AND you are EXEMPT from US income tax. The tax rate is set up as below:
https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/puerto-rico/individual/taxes-on-personal-income?source=patrick.net

So if you can claim self-employed providing services, you are golden!

Zak says

porkchopexpress says

I'm very conservative financially, so I'm being dramatic when I say that $1.4M would be a stretch for me.

If you're making 400k per year, then why do you want to move to Tennesse and set up roots? I get escaping vax mandate in school, but why don't you try moving to puerto rico and then italy and then Bali and doing some remote work there.. Doubt the wife would mind , especially if you have no house to tie you down here in CA...

Puerto Rico is a no visa move... US territory, AND you are EXEMPT from US income tax. The tax rate is set up as below:
https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/puerto-rico/individual/taxes-on-personal-income?source=patrick.net

So if you can claim self-employed providing services, you are golden!

I have high school kids who need to set themselves up for a future in the US. If I were older and just me and my wife, perhaps.

Why TN? I want to stay in the US. TN has no state income tax, low property tax, pro 2A. The weather is relatively normal with four seasons. It's a music-centered area, which both my sons are really into since they play in bands and orchestra. Great schools and colleges. The scenery is beautiful and driving distance to many things. Nashville is a great city. We do have some family there.

Patrick says

I've been pretty happy renting the whole time I've had this site, and the savings from renting in CA allowed me to retire 10 years early.

It never occured to me you were a renter. I figured you had bought in the late 1990s or something, when prices weren't quite so out of control.

Calculating "savings from renting" is a tricky one. I suppose you figure that the money you save every month is invested in the stock market or something, instead of being "invested" in your home. For my situation, I bought a shack in February 2002, which is now worth about 3x as much.
However, the S&P 500 has gone up about 4x in that same time. The house has taxes and maintenance, but it also means I don't have to rent a place. Buying and selling the house has much higher commission than the $7 my stock broker charges. If I paid outright for the house in 2002 verses putting the full house price into the stock market, I'm guessing the stock market would be somewhat ahead.

But I didn't have all the cash at the time, so a complicating investment factor is the cheap mortgage rate for the house that isn't available when I buy stocks on margin. So I'm getting a 3x increase on the full purchase price of the house minus the interest I paid on the mortgage verses the S&P 500 gain I would realize by dollar-cost-averaging stock purchase over the last 20 years. With that comparison, the government-promoted mortgage wins out and, I'm thinking that all the stars aligned to make the house the somewhat better deal.

One big downside of the house, though, is lack of flexibility. Change jobs and that nice 3 mile commute (sometime on foot!) becomes a 20 mile commute or costly relocation of selling and buying a different house closer to work.

SunnyvaleCA says

So I'm getting a 3x increase on the full purchase price of the house minus the interest I paid on the mortgage verses the S&P 500 gain I would realize by dollar-cost-averaging stock purchase over the last 20 years.

Yes.

It is not a simple back of the envelope transaction-calculation because the "cost" is the downpayment and the PITI (and maintenance) over time. To determine the ROI the stream of payments should be discounted by the amount of rent that would have been paid for the duration. It's too complicated for me. (* tangential comment at end)

There's another factor that folks overlook involving the commute cost. I had so many coworkers in the SF Bay Area who were super commuters from faraway places like Stockton, Modesto, Hollister, Los Banos, etc. It was all about getting a larger house for less money. Whenever they talked about "how much house they got" for what they spent/borrowed, I wanted to tell them that their super-high commute cost (fuel, wear and tear and rapid depreciation on their vehicles) was part of that "cheap housing" cost (this is to say nothing about the 4-5 hours of their lives wasted sitting in their car, - a lot of collateral damage to their families including some divorces). But I never said it because there's already too much Snark and Preachiness in our Left Coast Enclave. Instead I kept my thoughts to myself.

(*) Patrick and others have pointed out on this thread and others about the massive "ownership premium" folks will pay who buy now, for the "privilege" of owning a crapshack in our region. It's insane. I see it on the real estate websites like Zillow all the time. The monthly cost for buying a 50-60 year old crap shack at present will be nearly 2x what they say it would collect for rent. This is insane.

Booger says

Yeah, but the housing market has got to be pretty close to it's peak right now.

Yeah, like in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, now, 2023, etc
It has to crash....any day now....why wont you crash

NuttBoxer says

Save_Ukraine says

WOW. I am sry. My house bought in 2020 appreciated by 400K already. Imagine the equity gain if you'd bought in 2011 in the greater SD area.

I don't consider bubbles investments. And I adjust for inflation.

Did you sell and collect the $400k?

When will you admit you're Logan?

Okay, so equity gains in your house doesnt mean anything to you because its not money in the bank?
Sell? Hell no, I dont sell my house just because it appreciated by 400k in 2 years. I like to see my net worth going up but thats about it. We love our house. I dont think I will ever sell, just rent it out in the future, make money with it and live in an even nicer house at some point.

NuttBoxer says

As long as it's cheaper. My rent was $1375 back then, and it's $1600 now. If I bought would have been around $1900 plus maintenance.

Are you jealous that I've saved money and been able to enjoy my life without committing to a huge debt? Or maybe stories like mine are bad for your bottom line... Logan.

Alright, lets see if we get a meaningful conversation going. I kinda doubt it but I'll give it a shot.

Your rent was 1375 in 2011? Location? What type of rental, bedrooms, sqft?
Its now 1600? Same criteria as above or different?
Your mortgage in 2011 would have been 1900? Where, with what DP, what house, details pls.

How does the word jealous even fit into this situation: that you chose not to buy a house in 2011 and missed out during the most epic RE bull run in history?! buddy.....but lets wait for your answers.

B.A.C.A.H. says

(*) Patrick and others have pointed out on this thread and others about the massive "ownership premium" folks will pay who buy now, for the "privilege" of owning a crapshack in our region. It's insane. I see it on the real estate websites like Zillow all the time. The monthly cost for buying a 50-60 year old crap shack at present will be nearly 2x what they say it would collect for rent. This is insane.

Look at rentals sometime. People that paid that much are trying to collect on it, but they won't. Out east of the city where I live I'm seeing places listed for $4,000 - $5,000 a month. Nice enough looking places, some even have pools, but who the fuck is gonna pay La Jolla and Del Mar prices to live out here? From how long I've seen them listed, no one. They'll end up selling at a loss, best case scenario.

I kinda suspected NuttBoxer wont give us any cogent answers :)

Zillow just increased the 'value' of my crap shack by $200K in the past month. Methinks people will take a twenty percent loss on real estate to offset a fifty percent loss on currency and money value.

Ceffer says

Zillow just increased the 'value' of my crap shack by $200K in the past month

I get your point, but not really Zillow. The "value" was increased by the Greater Fools who overpaid for comparables in the neighborhood.

Save_Ukraine says

I kinda suspected NuttBoxer wont give us any cogent answers :)

This isn't my thread, and no one was asking me a question. If you want to be taken seriously, at least admit who you are.

B.A.C.A.H. says

(*) Patrick and others have pointed out on this thread and others about the massive "ownership premium" folks will pay who buy now, for the "privilege" of owning a crapshack in our region. It's insane. I see it on the real estate websites like Zillow all the time. The monthly cost for buying a 50-60 year old crap shack at present will be nearly 2x what they say it would collect for rent. This is insane.

For years I was paying less in rent than my landlord was paying in PITI+HOA. And HOA was not trivial because it was a condo, not SFH. One year the HOA management company was replaced by different one which "found shortfall" and promptly jacked up monthly HOA fee by $400 (not to $400, by $400!). I, of course, didn't chip in a single red cent.

Eric Holder says

For years I was paying less in rent than my landlord was paying in PITI+HOA. And HOA was not trivial because it was a condo, not SFH. One year the HOA management company was replaced by different one which "found shortfall" and promptly jacked up monthly HOA fee by $400 (not to $400, by $400!). I, of course, didn't chip in a single red cent.

Thank you, landlord, for the Housing Subsidy.

Personally, the #1 decision to make is whether or not you're willing to jab your kids. EVERYTHING else revolves around that. Let us know when you've made that decision.

B.A.C.A.H. says

super commuters from faraway places like Stockton, Modesto, Hollister, Los Banos ... commute cost ... hours wasted

I know a few of these people. Car or train costs are probably drops in the bucket compared to the "savings" of the cheaper house. But the time and aggravation of the commute has to be brutal. If you're actually really "working" at your job, that's 50 or 60 hours a week. Add another 10 to 20 hours of commute and you're basically doing nothing but work and sleep for 5 days a week.

Another problem is that those far-away locations tend to crash hard if the housing market goes down. Massive defaulting during the 2009 housing downturn. I suspect the brand new residential neighborhoods are nice enough, but the older downtowns are probably horrible.

Eric Holder says

For years I was paying less in rent than my landlord was paying in PITI+HOA.

I think there are two types of landlords in that situation:

(1) Some landlords believe that real estate is the path to easy riches and being a landlord is great passive income. This could certainly work in some parts of the country, but you can't follow that advise blindly. If you buy a house and the taxes and mortgage interest exceed the cost of renting, you're "throwing away" more money than you would with rent. The main gamble is in home appreciation. If I'm gambling on appreciation, I'd rather choose some stocks. The maintenance and repairs on a 60 year old shack are nothing to sneeze at, either; especially so if not owner-occupied.

(2) Some landlords fall for the sunk cost fallacy or are under the spell of other bad economic models. In my neighborhood, there are a bunch of rentals owned by retired people who moved away 2 or more decades ago. It's not like they are keeping the house because they plan to move back. I suspect that the thinking here is that since they only paid $27k for the house (!!!) in the 1960s, they are making a windfall investment profit by collecting $50k/year (minus $10k/year expenses). Sure, but how much could $2MM investments make every year? Couldn't you find a stock that pays a 1% dividend? The benefits of remaining a landlord is that you don't take a huge long-term capital gain by selling and that Prop 13 means your property taxes are very very low. But you're still only making 1% (at best) on the current value of your shack!

I think "Save_Ukraine" is in category (1). It seems to be working for him so far. Great! If he sells right now he'll lose much/most of his gains to real estate cartel fees. If he holds 10 years, he'll be getting less benefit from this short-term price spurt. Let's check back in 10 years.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Eric Holder says

For years I was paying less in rent than my landlord was paying in PITI+HOA. And HOA was not trivial because it was a condo, not SFH. One year the HOA management company was replaced by different one which "found shortfall" and promptly jacked up monthly HOA fee by $400 (not to $400, by $400!). I, of course, didn't chip in a single red cent.

Thank you, landlord, for the Housing Subsidy.

I remembered what the toal HOA fee has become after $400 increase: $750.

Save_Ukraine says

NuttBoxer says

As long as it's cheaper. My rent was $1375 back then, and it's $1600 now. If I bought would have been around $1900 plus maintenance.

Are you jealous that I've saved money and been able to enjoy my life without committing to a huge debt? Or maybe stories like mine are bad for your bottom line... Logan.

Alright, lets see if we get a meaningful conversation going. I kinda doubt it but I'll give it a shot.

Your rent was 1375 in 2011? Location? What type of rental, bedrooms, sqft?
Its now 1600? Same criteria as above or different?
Your mortgage in 2011 would have been 1900? Where, with what DP, what house, details pls.

How does the word jealous even fit into this situation: that you chose not to buy a house in 2011 and missed out during the most epic RE bull run in history?! buddy.....but lets wait for your answers.

Still no cogent answer @NuttBoxer ?
Takes a while to "craft" answers?

WineHorror1 says

Personally, the #1 decision to make is whether or not you're willing to jab your kids. EVERYTHING else revolves around that. Let us know when you've made that decision.

I’m not willing. Ever.

With regards to RE, you are relatively cushioned from price fluctuations if you own outright AND prices move in synchrony across the USA. The price of your home drops 30%. So does the place you are looking to move to. Prices do not move in synchrony in the real world. When I lived on the east side of Seattle, everyone thought we dodged the 2007 meltdown for a while.

If you don’t own outright, but have a mortgage, up until your equity becomes zero in a meltdown, you are OK if you are looking to move. The home you bought for $750,000 that was Zillowed to be worth $1,000,000 is back down to $750,000, but so is that $1,000,000 home you were looking to buy in Tejas. You’ve basically been renting your home from the bank.

But if that home you got a 30-year fixed mortgage on that you bought for $750,000, putting $150,000 down drops to $500,000, rut-roh.

The renter who has kept powder dry can watch and try to market time the falling knife purchase.

porkchopexpress says

WineHorror1 says

Personally, the #1 decision to make is whether or not you're willing to jab your kids. EVERYTHING else revolves around that. Let us know when you've made that decision.

I’m not willing. Ever.

Than 100% you are moving to Nashville. Now, buy or rent. Someone above mentioned living well beneath your means. Plan to stay in the home you purchase for 10 years and even if housing goes down, it sounds like you could absorb a loss. See, easy peazy.../sarc

As I see it the move to Nashville gives you a change of scene, which reading between the lines, is needed. To paraphrase Hamlet... "To buy or not to buy? That is the question."

Your kids are high school aged now, so in the next decade they should be on their own.

So ask yourself, how long would you reasonably live there? Until the kids are out of high school? Out of college / trade school? Until you and your wife retire?

If this is a short term thing (live in Nashville for a while, enjoy the scene, get your kids through high-school, then move somewhere else) then buying would have more downside risk, because if prices start to decline, you may be "stuck" in a house you can't unload right away.

Conversly if this is a longer term move (as best you can tell) then settling down isn't a bad thing, but I'd still wait at least a few months to get the lay of the land.... but that's just me.

I don't think saying "a bunch of people on the internet said we shouldn't buy right away" will win you the argument but saying... "let's wait six months just to be sure we like the area as much as we think we will" may do the trick. Prices may go up a bit if you wait, but they won't double in the next six months. Besides that will allow you to get a better handle on your budget, since the cost of living is completely different in that part of the world as compared to SoCal.

Good luck.

I'm not at the stage in life with high schoolers, but if you've got them in local schools for 4 years or less, I'd get a townhome. 3 Bed, 3 bath with den/office. I prefer and have suggested rural, but why not get something mostly maintenance free and enjoy the remaining years your kids will be with you? If you like the place stay or rent it out if it's a desirable area and you no longer want to stay after the kids are out. Easier to sell a townhome if you don't like the area. Higher "floor" as far as possible losses with a townhome as well. 10% drop on $1.2M home is different than a 10% drop on a $500k townhome. Visiting is different that living there so who knows.

Either way the time will fly and next thing you know you're sitting in a $1.5M big house with just your spouse. With under 4 years left with kids in the house (unless they boomerang) I'd be super hesitant in dropping that much in a new area. I'd get a newish townhome and then a 1-2 bed in the Caribbean or FL. When it gets cold(ish) fly down for a week or so.

My folks would go to FL for 2 weeks often once I had my DL. 16-18 years old I had a 3,500sf house to myself for a month at least every year once my sister went off to college.

Whatever you may buy, just don't make it an anchor would be additional advice given your timeline. I'd go as modest as the wife is chill with, save some money and then reevaluate once the kids are out. I'd still buy though. CA is unique, but most areas it just makes more sense to buy without prop 13 type legislation.