patrick.net

Rent for life!

I would keep renting if that were the case...provided renting remains cheaper than buying. Obv if rent pushes past the cost of buying it sort of forces one's hand.

If it continues for that long and nothing changes, I'll go ex-pat and run for the exits. Already got extended family in another country and seeking to get dual citizenship in place. At some point, it'll be time to seek greener pastures..

At some point we will need more space. There is only so much stuff you can cram into 1000 ft2 (with no basement and no garage).

In my area renting a larger place would mean moving out of a manged apartment complex and into a house (bet it a whole house or half of a large duplex). Given that most of the homes for rent are listed by reluctant landlords trying to cover their cost, the additional cost of a larger space pushes me to the buy side of the rent vs. buy dynamic. But I am trying to forestall that day as long as I can given that 1) prices are still disconnected from wages in this area and 2) the longer I wait the better positioned I will be to buy, from a savings perspective.

The free market might have a chance if Ron Paul wins.

Read this:
http://patrick.net/?p=1127889

We currently own a condo, so perhaps our situation isn't quite relevant. However, I'd rather have a house, for many of the usual reasons. But if "things stay the same" - I think you put it well, putting it that way - we'll stay in our condo (which we bought at the very bottom of the last cycle).

Actually, the longer this goes on, the *less* inclined I am to give in and buy a house - the advantages of not dealing with roofs and plumbing become that much clearer. And I find more and more ways to get what I want out of a house, by using the large amounts we save by not having one (e.g. renting a *big* community garden plot and donating to the place to help keep it going, or helping in a friend's yard and bringing along plants that are a little costly).

The way things are going, I think a number of people will just be tired of the whole thing, by the time it is possible to buy for a reasonable price. And that they will find themselves wondering just why they wanted to own something so labor intensive. I'm 48, and I watch my neighbors who are in their late 60s and early 70s, deal with house junk, and I realize that yikes! I won't want to have to do that in 20 years!

This bodes well for people in their 20s who want to buy in the future, if they can avoid debt.

investing well is mostly (and spending many hundreds of thousands of dollars on a house should be analyzed as an investment):

a) being analytic and devising a solid strategy; which includes contingencies when things don't go well (ie having a plan B and plan C not just a plan A).

b) having discipline to follow that strategy even though your emotions scream to break from your well planned strategy

most people are not very good at both a) and b) because they are lazy. they hear the herd talking about how great housing is as an investment without doing the research for themselves and repeat those points over and over ad nauseum like mindless automatons(not making land anymore, population increasing, great schools, tech industry and ipos, great weather, blah blah blah).

but for those that are both analytic and disciplined there's no problem with overpaying for a house, if you know you're overpaying and factor that into the equation.
conversely, there's nothing wrong with renting forever if that's your conclusion after similar careful analysis.

the most successful investors i know are very patient. the worst are the least.

Travis Bickle says

If it continues for that long and nothing changes, I'll go ex-pat and run for the exits.

Ditto. If we are priced out forever, then we'll go to another market. Our savings would go far in other countries.

Then you're going through the same decision-making process that baby-boomers like me had to do 20+ years ago. One should buy assets that appreciate and rent/hire assets that don't. Think of renting as an open-ended, interest-only loan, with no upside for appreciation, no downside for depreciation. While ever house prices had a long-term upside, it made more sense for 18 of the last 21 years to buy rather than to rent, in most developed western economies at least. As always, mostly the latecomers and the greedy get caught. It's not greedy to want to make the right financial decision for yourself and your family. At some point, US residential property will look like a bargain. If your income is relatively secure, you have at least 20% deposit and don't borrow more than you can comfortably afford, it can make good sense. These are old bankers' precepts, they've worked for a very long time, and usually when they get departed from, there's tears all around.

I'll have to agree with Travis. No one stops to consider food in all of this. I hear very little. Food does not grow in the United States for the most part it is barren land.

Barren land meaning you can't find any food just looking for it save a few berries. Food can trap you if you don't grow your own it's obvious. Many can only get so much to eat. With what they have to buy it with.

Or you have the choice to grow. Which takes a lot of work in a hard land. The United States for the most part is not food friendly. FOR THE MOST PART.

Brazil. South America. Places like that you go out and food is most everywhere. You don't have to pay for it or work for it. Or you can through seed in the ground it grows 6 feet high never dies and has 4 growing seasons.

Lot of your people have dissapeared and moved there. They never talk about it here. They actually fear that. It would seem. Shelter is no problem. You take your time in a nice climate building it. Fishing etc.

The USA just dosen't have that much going for it compared to certain other places. You have to have everything trucked in. A lot of people live where there is nothing but trees. Which gives you a good indicator of how much they know. Not smart to live amoung the trees. If you want to grow food it's way to much work. Thats why the growers live on the plains. Even then it takes a mighty effort to grow every season. Also there are really no bad seasons in certain places.

Why would you live in a place where you can grow no food? Have to spend 250 a week on food that usually is not enough to feed a family. Once again its not COST. It's what your alloted adjusted to what they will give it to you for. It's a bear trap for sure.

Then there is entertainment of course. I guess you have a lot of it but you have to go to work for someone else as a lackey.

Consider this "there is no freedom in debt". Consider this to "there is no freedom in working for someone else". They can take your jobbie there-by pulling the plug and you lose your shelter, food, auto and or gas. Some think I am a negative person. Thing is its sad to me to see people being used. Thinking they have it made. Schleping around living day to day taking orders dully. Till the shit hits the fan. You have a good day a bad day depending on how someone else thinks or feels about it.

Whats ever tougher than that is seeing men reduced to little children living as bonded servants and debt slaves. Believe it or not a lot of this has to do with gender for me. Watching someone of my gender have to grovel to have a place to live and food. Living in fear they may lose their job. Jumping high when told or given the suggestion. Parroting what they see and hear.

Not able to think for themselves. Having to accept any subconcious suggestion no matter how anti-gravity. Once again because if not they lose everything they have potentially. Crawling all over each other to please those that have them in debt or by paycheck. For a little more or to keep what they have. Its truly sad to watch. They might joke about the wife. Truth is shes in it to. It's the layoff on the whole thing. If you ever did understand or see the behavior of people that did not owe and have to work under someone it might not be so funny.

BMWMan, you bring up a very good question. I myself would continue to rent and invest in other countries. I would divest in anything that is dollar based and continue to invest in commodities. At some point, the dollar would absolutely implode.

The housing boom and bust occurred with super-low interest rates, FHA, etc., so there would continue to be severe booms and busts in a future rigged system. There would be an opportunity for lucky people to make a lot of money, but it would be not so good for many.

ArtimusMaxtor says

Food does not grow in the United States for the most part it is barren land

Are you kidding me?????? Have you ever driven through the midwest?

I would hedge my bets. Dont put all your eggs into hoping for things that are out of your control. At least you have an advantage in that you know the rules so now you just figure out a way to play the game.

at risk of sounding like a broken record. There are areas which have clearly bottomed. You can always buy something and go live there and it's probably cheaper than where your currently renting.
More people are cluing in on this because it's getting more competitive but certainly not too late.

The Tyranny of the Legal Tender Law

http://politics.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474977245005

ArtimusMaxtor says

No one stops to consider food in all of this. I hear very little. Food does not grow in the United States for the most part it is barren land.

Barren land meaning you can't find any food just looking for it save a few berries. Food can trap you if you don't grow your own it's obvious. Many can only get so much to eat. With what they have to buy it with.

You obviously have no idea where your supermarket food comes from, let alone how to grow it. America is often called the Bread Basket of the world, America exports 20% of it food a year. The United States grows 100 billion dollars worth of Crops and 100 billion dollars in livestock. That's 20 billion dollars in crops exported a year. While New Zealand is considered to be the worlds top food exported by GNP (7.5%), there GNP is only 51 billion dollars, making the crops exported worth 3.8 billion dollars, small fries compared to Americas Crop output.

If you wanted to grow your own food you would need a garden about 5,000 sq ft to feed a family of 4 year round on a vegetarian diet. (roughly 71x71 plot). Don't have a yard that big? Build a greenhouse, you can grow enough food in a 110 sq. ft. green house space to feed a person for a year, multiply that by 4, that gives you 440 sq ft, or 21x21. A hydroponic solar heated green house could product 5 times as much food! Barren my ass.

Green houses are really inexpensive to build, they are basically just metal frames with plastic covering them. A hydroponic solar heated green house can get a little more pricey, they are generally made of glass.

Things will change. It can't go on forever, this country is out of money.

And once the banks are healthy enough, all these gimmicks will go away.

If you have $Quartermil saved, consider moving. Lots of places in the country that $250K will cashout a very nice house with some schekles left over. Just reserve your Uhaul early, the demand for one-way rentals out of CA is huge.

BTW, despite what Mark Furhman and half the retired LAPD and LAFD would tell you, E. Washington and N. Idaho are not good places for relocation.

Dan8267 says

Travis Bickle says

If it continues for that long and nothing changes, I'll go ex-pat and run for the exits.

Ditto. If we are priced out forever, then we'll go to another market. Our savings would go far in other countries.

Well, that is the final contingency. I would move to Las Vegas if it made sense as a retirement option. I love that city already, and if cost is the deciding factor, thats a desireable option(for me).

EastCoastBubbleBoy says

At some point we will need more space. There is only so much stuff you can cram into 1000 ft2 (with no basement and no garage).

In my area renting a larger place would mean moving out of a manged apartment complex and into a house (bet it a whole house or half of a large duplex). Given that most of the homes for rent are listed by reluctant landlords trying to cover their cost, the additional cost of a larger space pushes me to the buy side of the rent vs. buy dynamic. But I am trying to forestall that day as long as I can given that 1) prices are still disconnected from wages in this area and 2) the longer I wait the better positioned I will be to buy, from a savings perspective.

This is a much easier decision that you think. The obvious is to sell off excess stuff. I'm a collector and have boxes stacked in an area of my loft that has become my defacto storage area. If I knew that I'd always be living like this...or even for some non short term amount of time....I'd sell off my stuff, keeping what I need to live rather than decorative, luxury, and other items I don't ever actually have use for.

I do find that most people are super emotionally resistant to doing this though....hence the proliferation of storage lockers at ridiculous monthly rates.

Spokaneman says

If you have $Quartermil saved, consider moving. Lots of places in the country that $250K will cashout a very nice house with some schekles left over. Just reserve your Uhaul early, the demand for one-way rentals out of CA is huge.

BTW, despite what Mark Furhman and half the retired LAPD and LAFD would tell you, E. Washington and N. Idaho are not good places for relocation.

Why those places?

In Las Vegas

$80K buys you a safe new build(built within the past decade) townhome or small home in an outlying area.
$120K buys you a safe new build 2000 sq ft home
$200-250K buys you a luxury 2500 sq ft home in the better parts of Henderson.

You have access to some of the countries best restaurants, world class entertainment, and all the ammenities of a large city. You also have the ability to do everything on the cheap if you want. Theres literally no where else in the country where you can have a decent dinner for two, a few drinks, and live entertainment for under $50. But you can in Las Vegas.

My point is, don't come to N. Idaho.

Back in the good old days when Californians were Equity rich and could sell their place in CA, N. Idaho particularly became a haven for CA retirees. Drove the price of real-estate out of sight (by our standards). Lake property, historically priced to where wage earners could afford it, tripled and quadrupled in just a few years time.

Spokaneman says

My point is, don't come to N. Idaho.

Back in the good old days when Californians were Equity rich and could sell their place in CA, N. Idaho particularly became a haven for CA retirees. Drove the price of real-estate out of sight (by our standards). Lake property, historically priced to where wage earners could afford it, tripled and quadrupled in just a few years time.

if prices can't be supported by local economy it's a bubble. The only was those prices are sustainable is to recruit more greater fools from California.

We had the same thing happen here. People in silicon valley confused cheap with good value and bought a bunch of houses in the desert. Now it's ground zero of the housing crash.

I just came back from Las Vegas.

A friend bought a 1600sf house in LV for cheap. He asked me if I would move to LV. After some thought I said "may be" but "no". After I got back, and after further thought, I wouldnt buy in socal either. I just read an article about a house that was bought in 1901 for $1000 and this month it was sold for $900k. Wow, it seems alot of profit. But the article analyzed the costs of ownership, dealing with leaking plumbing, and eventually, it was just about even with inflation.

Houseownership is about 70% in America. In europe, say Germany, it is about 40%. Dont fall for "American Dream" promoted by the real estate industry.

I had owned and I had rented. I concluded that it is better to rent.

Of course things will change, that's the only constant in life. Like everyone else, you just have to play the cards you've been dealt and hope for the best. I am at the tail end of the baby boom generation and as a young person it seemed like things were out of my reach too. While it's good and necessary to look at the big picture it's also important not to lose sight of the small one - our daily individual lives where we all live. I bought my first house at the height of a bubble over 20 yrs ago but I was busy and preoccupied and frankly didn't pay any attention to whether my house value had gone down or not. When I did decide to move a few years later I sold for a small profit and have invested and reinvested the money ever since. I probably saved myself a lot of stress b/c I paid no attention to the larger picture. You can do the same. If you want a house and need more room, go for it - as long as you can comfortably afford the payments you'll be fine. Once you buy, tune out all the negative info about the economy. Instead of seeing home buyers as 'loan-owners' consider the fact that they are actually 'asset-creaters'; Nobody ever created an asset paying rent. In reality, despite all the negative news about the housing market, most people who've purchased houses have created assets for themselves. Anyway - good luck - and no I'm not in anyway involved in the RE industry - I'm an engineer and small business owner and this is my opinion.

While the system is indeed rigged its successful at being rigged mainly because Americans are so eager and willing to play along. Even after the largest housing bust in history most Americans- especially those in places like the Bay Area- are still lapping up the kool aid. In order for any real change to happen Americans in general need a major overhaul in the way they view and handle financial decisions.

I'd say that for most Americans their No.1 financial concern is a house. Second is probably either a car or their children's educations. Somewhere down the list comes retirement. The fact of the matter is that retirement needs to absolutely be at the top of that list. You'll need at least one million dollars in retirement- not including the value of your house- in order to have a meager salary of around 40k per year if you live in a metro area. Double that for expensive metros. What good is a house if when you retire all you can afford to eat is cat food? Besides- we're all gonna' wind up in retirement homes anyway and personally I want a retirement home with an indoor heated pool and a theater. Besides- the average retirement home costs around $75,000 a year these days. So if you don't save for retirement you're pretty much screwed and your house or whatever value it has won't save you either.

The American Dream was just a handy catch phrase. What is that supposed to mean anyway? Is owning a house really a dream? Is that all there is to it? If so there are PLENTY of dirt-cheap houses just about anywhere in the USA that you can easily buy. The American Dream is and always was a load of crap. Sure- it helped coerce people into buying little wooden boxes so they could feel "secure" and better about themselves as if there's some unwritten societal expectation all must follow.

Lastly, as I previously mentioned we're sort of thinking of buying. I'll fully admit I feel prices are still stupid. But in the end its about what you can actually afford and what your financial situation is. If we were making- say 100k between us there would be no way in hell I'd buy here. If we didn't have significant savings already we would also not buy. We've saved money the old-fashioned way: We simply socked money away and lived cheap. Everyone needs to do some serious analysis of their finances and then perhaps consider talking to a financial adviser before making a major financial decision of any kind.

One more thing. BMWman, as mentioned before I too wrench and like having a yard. As also mentioned the house we rent has a yard and a garage. We're paying a lot less for the house than most apartments on the Peninsula. So its not like you too couldn't do something like this. Does it mean commuting a bit further? Sure. Is it worth it to have a space to do the things I want to do and be able to work on the projects I have in a space that allows me to to it? For me- yes. It sounds like this is very important to you. So perhaps if you feel that strongly about it perhaps you might consider at least looking at what it would cost to rent a place in the east bay or another area removed from Silicon Valley. Just sayin'...

edvard2 says

I'd say that for most Americans their No.1 financial concern is a house.
Second is probably either a car or their children's educations.
Somewhere down the list comes retirement.

The fact of the matter is that retirement needs to absolutely be at the top of that list. You'll need at least one million dollars in retirement- not including the value of your house- in order to have a meager salary of around 40k per year if you live in a metro area.

yep. people are short sighted and have very badly mis-prioritized their finances.

for anyone with common sense retirement nest egg is the biggest priority, much higher than buying a house.

the sad thing is the folks with money will be taken advantage of to help the idiots.

There are reasons to believe we will not return to the model you are all idolizing. The cheap housing, simple mortgage model was created out of the depression and flourished during the Baby Boomer years. That was reliant on cheap oil, good jobs and a constantly growing economy. Those days are gone.

The good news: Housing will get cheaper. Unfortunately, not on our schedule. And the pricing slide is likely to be bumpy with false bottoms along the way.

Fundamentally, our way of life is likely to change which will impact housing dramatically. No one has mentioned Oil in this thread... and the price of oil directly and dramatically impacts our entire economy (including housing).

Try this on: How much is a house in Las Vegas worth if you Oil becomes extremely expensive? That house is worthless at $200/barrel oil because you can't afford to drive a car to it... can you air condition that house? Hoover does NOT supply all the electricity... petroleum still rules.

Food is reliant on Oil as well... it is transported relatively long distances... and fertilizer is petroleum based.

Whether you believe in "peak oil" or not, energy is going to be more expensive. More than 2 Billion people (in China and India) are starting to buy cars. Do you really think we can pump fast enough? And what if "Peak Oil" is true? We are all F'ed then!

True Chris and everything else is Oil reliant. Trucks criss cross the country continually. This is a nation built on paper. The people who distribute it and those that labor for it. Which is most everyone. Everything derives off of fractional lending. So most everyone owes. In one way or another. Truth is once again they can print all they want.

When it is the only legal means of trade. The ones that print it have absolute control of resources. The only measure being making sure people don't get to much paper and take all of the goods and material. That other labor they give paper to get to market is not stripped off of the shelves. They can also control by inflation or deflation.

Truth being is the people that give all of the paper out don't like all of this going on now. Because a cheap house means getting less labor out of you for a shorter time. In fact if you check most places will not lend under 40k for a house and never under 25k. Real reason they won't have you hooked and you will be out of it. Paper isn't worth a shit. The house is. Once you realize the assets are more key than the asswipe. You will have a better understanding.

My friend retired as a guard at the Q and sold his house in Berkeley just before the bubble popped. He has a nice SUV and pulls a cool little Airstream around the country. His wife still agrees with the arrangement. They migrate around the USA and have fun. He's only been doing it for several years and may eventually plunk down cash for a place somewhere that has no income tax. He's got plenty of it.
The trick of renting is not complicated. You rent from someone whose reach has exceeded his grasp. He needs a responsible renter who won't flake out and screw him out of rent and wreck the place, etc.
My grandmother rented and I never knew it until I was much older. We visited her in her fantastic houses, one was an old carriage house made of stone with cobble stone driveway and surrounded by woods which were fun to explore. This was in upstate NY. She always had money by the way. She was a businesswoman when few women did. Imagine doing business in the 30's?
Owning something sometimes means you are afraid to not own. Or, it's because you can easily afford it. If you can easily afford the debt and the non appreciation of the asset, buy one. But you're seen as a cash cow by the local governments who are broke and looking for suckers to tax.

Appreciation of an asset never ment a damn to most of the people that are around. Autos well you can stick a fork in that one. Everything else I feel anyway is devalued to 0 by legal tender. Whats left a house. They appreciated. No one sold and took advantage. Thats most people. They understand that believe me. A house for most people is a place to live appreciate or not.

Debt to me isn't good because you can't do what you want. You have to do what others want. Therefore losing control over your life. Going someplace you don't want to be. Debt is bad advice always. I don't really think paper puts anyone in debt myself for the most part. Paper has little value.

It's the asset and the labor involved tied to the asset. If you could look at paper as more like the time and labor involved for the asset, food and material. Auto, gas, you might be better off and have a clear picture of what you have gotten yourself into.

See in THEIR formulations that is how THEY calculate. See they figure labor and man hours for the asset, food, material and gas. Its foolish to do so with paper alone.

TechGromit says

You obviously have no idea where your supermarket food comes from, let alone how to grow it. America is often called the Bread Basket of the world, America exports 20% of it food a year. The United States grows 100 billion dollars worth of Crops and 100 billion dollars in livestock.

Well tech food does not grow in the United States as such.. IF you read this is a barren land then you will understand YOU have to plant. If you do not plant it will not grow. As far as it being the largest supplier I do not buy that. There are other countries that far outdo the United States. New Zealand is a poor example. Unless your talking about sheep. So read if you do not plant here it will not grow. In many countries food just grows and all you have to do is go out and get it. Without planting. It costs nothing. No one has a green house here in America. Ask yourself why. Answer: The people they owe and work for may not or would not like that at all. People here give away a LOT of labor for food. Even if they didn't it is still very difficult to grow here compared to other places.

One other thing I would like to note this WE stuff. America is the bread basket of the world. So proud of that. Deal is you don't get anything from it you have to labor for the food. Everything is considered we like held in common. Like malls proud of that. Like theatres, grocery stores. I guess among people in debt its a source of identification and pride. I dunno. People of this country act like they own all this stuff they don't. The debt merchants do. Most of this country just got in debt to them and helped them build it all. Try going to see them if you lose your jobbie. That may mean you screwed up. Didn't say or think the right things by them possibly. Then take a look around. Things may not look so pretty and proud.

bmwman91 says

The government subsidies for housing via GSE loans, the MID, prop 13, RE agent-favoring MLS system, shadow inventory, squatters and low interest rates are all items on a (probably incomplete) list of things that us would-be buyers wish to see go away in hopes of lowering house prices.

MID, Prop 13, and low interest rates have not prevented prices from falling decades ago, and will not prevent prices from falling today or in the future. I do agree MID should be phased out.

I think squatting would be very appropriate. Unoccupied land is no ones. Universal in many places. Some have rules of years. Truth is someone is not on that land no one has it. Again this is a land of co-op which means laws are held in common not of anything else. They enforce by the people for the people that is what the law is based on for the most part. Common law added. That is also cooperative in being. Law enforcement again is for the benefit of the agents of debt. Land is really no one accept in agreement. It's tricky. But again universal check other countries. Truly this is a freeze plug for debt people. Really the word squatting is on purpose and well guys I know don't do that unless they have mastercard. Look I want you to be free buck up.

''In Israel back when land was never bought or sold. Inheritance is a theologically rich concept that guided Israel's relationship to the land. The basic idea is that the land is Yahweh's land. "The earth is the Lord's," the psalmist could sing (Ps. 24:1). "The land is mine," says Yahweh (Lev. 25:23). Throughout Joshua 13-19, land is first and foremost an inheritance given to Israel by Yahweh. Land is Yahweh's gift to be passed on from generation to generation." Land was never bought and sold in Israel for all you USA Christian country fans. I'm sure Pat Robertson will be the first to tell you when he gets his loans paid off. Not only that in Assyria and the entire Middle East land was never sold. You just picked a spot out a God given right. Enter usury joining fields "same thing as you can imagine". Smart ass grecian law and greed of taxation led to the subdividing of cities of land for booty and tax. The few get their nickles and dimes and jobbies and pay out the nose. LOOK AT YOU NOW.

I'll add one more thing selling land in Israel and the usury there leads me to believe the Jews returning to their homeland was a crock and nothing but a setup and device for war based on some really weak renderings. To take the resources of the middle east and of potentially dangerous people of Israel and get the support of some unknowing otherwise well meaning people.

dodgerfanjohn says

Well, that is the final contingency. I would move to Las Vegas if it made sense as a retirement option. I love that city already, and if cost is the deciding factor, thats a desireable option(for me).

Yeah, but then you'd have to live in Nevada man, Nevada. Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter.

You know, I would almost be OK with Las Vegas. Rock climbing is one of my big things, and with Red Rocks right there, it would be incredible. My issue with the place is that it is a desert. The growth of that city is completely dependent on, what seems to me, unsustainable water procurement practices. No water = no city.

I was looking at Vegas in 2007 (as a programmer I like how it's a night-time city) but man is it isolated from the rest of the planet.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/3105-Biscayne-Springs-Ln-Las-Vegas-NV-89117/7112936_zpid/

is a listing next to a $300,000 place in 2007 -- prices have collapsed by half since then.

But that place is too exposed, I'd want something much more solidly in the fortress.

The problem with Vegas is that there's too many houses and not enough people. Or will be once the people who can't find jobs leave.

Okay, I welcome you're opinions, responses, and/or disagreements. After two years of looking online, a property finally evoked enough interest for me to even want to go look at it. Why? My Father owns one of the units in the same complex. He is a Senior. It's actually a HUD property now, not on the MLS and available currently to investors. The price is 160K. It's a 2 bedroom 2 Bath, 900 square feet. $180 a square foot. There are some nice upgrades such as hardwood floors and tile. A similiar unit just sold for 190K in the same building. The mortgage would be exactly the same as I am paying now in rent. The unit sold for 330k in the bubble, it was 'jingle mail'. Like many people on this blog, there is a possibility prices will drop further..

Move to Ecuador where you can still afford to buy a home, food is cheap and medicial/dental services are great quality, but with prices form the 1950's. That's what I'm doing.

Probably a better plan R Scott, thanks. One part of me is thinking: "You want to buy where 50% + properties are distress sales? (including this one) and if prices do drop more I'm screwed.

bmwman91 says

What Would You Do If Nothing Changed?

Well,nothing is permanent, it has to change. I am saying it is gonna get worse.

Dan8267 says

Travis Bickle says

If it continues for that long and nothing changes, I'll go ex-pat and run for the exits.

I just moved back to the States from Vancouver. By comparison, it makes even San Francisco look like a super bargain. Patrick posted an Economist article yesterday that basically stated that US real estate is under priced. Many countries are still way overpriced. I highly recommend you read it. These were the same guys who predicted this housing crash and seem to have excellent assessments of the global economy.

Ditto. If we are priced out forever, then we'll go to another market. Our savings would go far in other countries.