patrick.net

CA peak was 2009. The housing crash got all the assholes out. Things were affordable and you could get to work in a reasonable amount of time.

Now it’s just traffic and homeless and illegals and a bunch of liberal idiots who don’t know how to fix it. So glad I got out.

We live in a country that has transspecific bathrooms, but no parking for pregnant mothers or people with young children.

Everyone does what they want but I would never pay cash in Atlanta. Atlanta’s average annual appreciation rate is 2.2%. When a house is paid with cash, it’s the same as putting $200K-$400K in the bank for 2.2% interest.

The appreciation rate only matters for a rent/buy comparison. Once you decide to buy, what matters when deciding to pay cash or not is the mortgage interest rate versus what could realistically get by investing the money you would have put on the house. Also consider mortgage costs like origination fee, points, and any mortgage insurance. If you having a house built or are buying a builder spec home, the builder will usually give a discount to a cash buyer. I know someone will say "Tax Deduction" but on a $200k-$400k house that deduction is unlikely to beat the new high standard deduction, especially as the loan ages.

Does SF seem gayer than it was 2 years ago?

anon_f8264 says

veryone does what they want but I would never pay cash in Atlanta. Atlanta’s average annual appreciation rate is 2.2%. When a house is paid with cash, it’s the same as putting $200K-$400K in the bank for 2.2% interest.

You have to consider the mortgage rates (among other things) to determine how much cash to put down, i.e. compare the interest rate to other investment opportunities. The RE appreciate rate is not the relevant number here.

P.S. Just saw that HeadSet has already commented on this.

Sad ain’t it? How liberalism ruins basic family needs in favor of sexual deviants.
Heart wrenching
TwoScoopsPlissken says

We live in a country that has transspecific bathrooms, but no parking for pregnant mothers or people with young children.

anon_f8264 says

Everyone does what they want but I would never pay cash in Atlanta. Atlanta’s average annual appreciation rate is 2.2%. When a house is paid with cash, it’s the same as putting $200K-$400K in the bank for 2.2% interest.

Unless you are going to invest that money instead and live on the streets. You also have to factor in no rent, but of course, maintenance.

joshuatrio says

You'll have oppressive heat in the summer time, but there are plenty of pools and water parks to compensate. When I lived in Monterey, I wore a hoodie 95% of the year because it was cold most of the time. Only a few days a year where it actually warmed over 70/80.

I won't move there if the homes were free. It's in the 70's and 80's out here in North San Diego County, in the middle of winter.
Actually, homes here are free. Because they appreciate at a greater rate than mortgage interest rates. What a deal.

many people here are so bad with investing.

BorderPatrol says

many MOST people here EVERYWHERE are so bad with investing.

Cleaned that one up a bit.

HeadSet says

Everyone does what they want but I would never pay cash in Atlanta. Atlanta’s average annual appreciation rate is 2.2%. When a house is paid with cash, it’s the same as putting $200K-$400K in the bank for 2.2% interest.

The appreciation rate only matters for a rent/buy comparison. Once you decide to buy, what matters when deciding to pay cash or not is the mortgage interest rate versus what could realistically get by investing the money you would have put on the house. Also consider mortgage costs like origination fee, points, and any mortgage insurance. If you having a house built or are buying a builder spec home, the builder will usually give a discount to a cash buyer. I know someone will say "Tax Deduction" but on a $200k-$400k house that deduction is unlikely to beat the new high standard deduction, especially as the loan ages.

I personally feel like none of it matters. A renter, renting for less than owning will blow the savings difference in 95% of those situations. Most owners, in 95% of situations will blow their equity in some fashion or another. It's been said before, but I'll beat this dead horse again, your home isn't an investment. People need to stop talking like it is. A few will get lucky. But most see their equity increase and then cash out that equity and buy a boat or something stupid. Poof, equity gone.

I own and would tell others to. But at some point in my retirement years I want to rent homes for 2-3 years at a time after I unload all my junk and just have a couch and a bed to move essentially. That way I can live in the Virgin Islands for a couple years. Head out to Hawaii for some years. You get my drift. People have to stop saying A is better then B when both scenarios usually end in X for the average person. X = Shit FYI.

WookieMan says

I personally feel like none of it matters. A renter, renting for less than owning will blow the savings difference in 95% of those situations

Yep.

I think that part of the debate of what investing is... people who made money on houses after the crash forget that that was the only time houses made that kind of money. Outside of post major economic crash, this kind of gain does not happen. Buying now, will not really be an investment, maybe family convenience perhaps, but not investment.

Now stocks were and still are the future. Companies work, they make money, their stocks gain value. If you bought good amount of Google, Amazon, apple, back in the days, you'd be all wealthy beyond imagination. Wouldn't need to deal with property management companies, renters, evictions, property taxes, repairs, etc...

anon_f8264 says

Everyone does what they want but I would never pay cash in Atlanta. Atlanta’s average annual appreciation rate is 2.2%. When a house is paid with cash, it’s the same as putting $200K-$400K in the bank for 2.2% interest. Outside of checking and saving accounts this is the least profitable way to use the money. That’s just the same rate of inflation.

I paid $250k cash for my house last year. If I wanted to sell, it's now worth around $300-310k. That's a little better than 2.2% dontcha think? (and if I were to sell, I'd use a flat fee realtor).

FortWayne says

I don't know Atlanta. But in many other states you just want to move into white neighborhoods, and avoid black neighborhoods. It's not like CA, most of the country lives in a very segregated way. Would be interesting to find out about Atlanta.

I'm in the northern ATL, suburbs, white area. It's nice. Every neighborhood has a pool, my kids play outside every day. My neighborhood is armed, and all of us neighbors know each other. If we leave a door unlocked, it's not a big deal. No complaints here. Honestly the best move we ever made.

Beats where I was in Monterey, CA, where landlords were always pounding on neighbors doors to collect rent, homeless people always lighting bonfires on the bike path and harassing tourists. Everyone was so freaking PC in California, and no one actually spoke their mind. Many of my friends in their 50's/60's are still broke as hell, living in a shit shack apartment, working 3 part time jobs to get by, but still think CA is God's gift because of the weather.

It's 68 degrees here in ATL today. No complaints.

I miss the landscape and the surf, but fuck it. I'm 35 and could literally retire here now. I send my kids to private school (despite living in top 10 schools) because I can. Next month, I'm taking my son to Costa Rica to surf. A couple months after I have 3 more vacations lined up. Life is good.

California is a beautiful state. No arguments there. But it's seriously gone down hill in the last 10 years to where it's almost intolerable to consider going back.

On the ATL vs Ca thing - CA can be absolute heaven on earth but ONLY for those who can truly afford it.

If you have say 3.5M in the bank and earn say 500k a year CA is truly great. On these numbers you can live a comfortable life in a comfortable coastal location and life is pretty sweet.

Problem is, most of us don't have those numbers so the choice is either CA flophouse living -which by the way causes you to notice all the other things (i.e. Drugs, street shitting)...

or you move to anywhere USA suburban ATL where you can be comfy and you aren't as bothered by the shitty weather and the neighbor who is a bible literalist and insists cave men were around "for the tail end of the dinosaurs" (which really did happen).

To that end I was lucky and inherited well so at that point the choice was easy. But before then CA sucked.

joshuatrio says

I paid $250k cash for my house last year. If I wanted to sell, it's now worth around $300-310k. That's a little better than 2.2% dontcha think?.

Highly doubt that since Atlanta appreciated only 7.9% last year.
https://www.zillow.com/atlanta-ga/home-values/
Long term, you can bet the house it is 2.2%.

joshuatrio says

Next month, I'm taking my son to Costa Rica to surf. A couple months after I have 3 more vacations lined up. Life is good.

This. This. and more this. I'm basically the same age. My folks took me on a decent amount of vacations, which are some of my best memories I had as a kid. My family could live anywhere in this country, heck probably the world. I have no interest in being in a high COLA area ever. We can take 3 to 4 week long vacations a year and it's nothing really.

anon_fad35 says

Highly doubt that since Atlanta appreciated only 7.9% last year.
https://www.zillow.com/atlanta-ga/home-values/
Long term, you can bet the house it is 2.2%.

I don't know Atlanta at all, but get off zillow if that's where/what you're basing your info off of. You'll end up dumber using that as a source.

anon_7054e says

On the ATL vs Ca thing - CA can be absolute heaven on earth but ONLY for those who can truly afford it.

If you have say 3.5M in the bank and earn say 500k a year CA is truly great. On these numbers you can live a comfortable life in a comfortable coastal location and life is pretty sweet.

Problem is, most of us don't have those numbers so the choice is either CA flophouse living -which by the way causes you to notice all the other things (i.e. Drugs, street shitting)...

or you move to anywhere USA suburban ATL where you can be comfy and you aren't as bothered by the shitty weather and the neighbor who is a bible literalist and insists cave men were around "for the tail end of the dinosaurs" (which really did happen).

To that end I was lucky and inherited well so at that point the choice was easy. But before then CA sucked.

Only partly true. Yeah with a lot of money you can lock yourself in inside your mansion and backyards, but if you want city life or frequent the parks you still have to physically go into the city and the shit and the crazies do not care whether you have money or not. I'd say it could be one of the best places but it definitely loses its top position due to its dirt and piss poor government/management.

anon_7054e says

If you have say 3.5M in the bank and earn say 500k a year CA is truly great. On these numbers you can live a comfortable life in a comfortable coastal location and life is pretty sweet.

Problem is, most of us don't have those numbers so the choice is either CA flophouse living -which by the way causes you to notice all the other things (i.e. Drugs, street shitting)...

or you move to anywhere USA suburban ATL where you can be comfy and you aren't as bothered by the shitty weather and the neighbor who is a bible literalist and insists cave men were around "for the tail end of the dinosaurs" (which really did happen).

Lol.. OK. I could afford CA. I just didn't want to tie myself to a 1950's shit shack that needed a full remodel. Plus, the large majority of people I worked with out there were check to check. Everyone was house/rent/bill/debt poor. Everyone out there pretended like things were perfect, and they lived in utopia - yet, no one wanted to acknowledge the thousands of homeless, the gangbangers in the next town over, the influx of illegals, the druggies with needles hanging out of their arms. Sorry man, I don't see any of that down here.

The weather down here isn't bad. Summer is hot as hell, but at least it's hot enough where I can take my shirt off, get a tan, and swim outside. My neighbors are atheists, and those that go to church are incredibly polite.

anon_fad35 says

Highly doubt that since Atlanta appreciated only 7.9% last year.
https://www.zillow.com/atlanta-ga/home-values/
Long term, you can bet the house it is 2.2%.

Those numbers are off. Homes in my area sit on the market for no less than a week, and have bumped up significantly in the good neighborhoods/districts.

why spend engineer time on developing complex algorithm to ESTIMATE last year's appreciation rate when they could just simply COMPuTE it using existing sales data? and if they computed it, wouldn't it be the same as everyone else's number? are there many different ways of calculating the median home prices that some get it right some get it wrong? i can see why estimating a home can be difficult, but why is CALCuLATING the median so complex that Zillow, the biggest internet RE site gets it wrong?

7.9% is the computed rate and it is as accurate as can be. considering the median price is $217, $250K is not that much higher. so close to median price, close to median appreciation rate of 7.9%.

and yes paying cash for the home was a very, very bad idea due to the area's low appreciation rate.

how long home stay listed can't be used to figure out the appreciation rate. an online report can.

there is zero report claiming Atlanta went up 20%+ (for it to go from $250K to $300K+) but there are a lot of 8-10%.

i'll believe the reports i read online over some wild claims.

joshuatrio says

Those numbers are off. Homes in my area sit on the market for no less than a week, and have bumped up significantly in the good neighborhoods/districts.

BorderPatrol says

and yes paying cash for the home was a very, very bad idea due to the area's low appreciation rate.

Actually, the "bad idea" would have been to finance for 15-30 years, where I would have paid over $80-150k in interest.

Argue all you want, but it is what it is. I could sell my place within a week at the rate homes are going around here and would pocket $50k after realtor fees (after only a year of owning). Many of my neighbors are in the same boat. Certain neighborhoods/school districts/and homes (primary 4 bedrooms) go significantly faster (and for more) due to the demand.

When/if I decide to move, I'll rent it out. I have no overhead.

So, enjoy your liberal utopia while things disintegrate. Keep telling yourself that life is good because of the weather :)

anon_5f0e8 says

there is zero report claiming Atlanta went up 20%+ (for it to go from $250K to $300K+) but there are a lot of 8-10%.

i'll believe the reports i read online over some wild claims.

Without giving you my actual address, here is output from your buddy Zillow.

For the record, I bought at the tail end of 2016. So I have owned for one year and a few months :)

willywonka says

Unless you are going to invest that money instead and live on the streets. You also have to factor in no rent, but of course, maintenance.

Previous owners put a new roof, HVAC and appliances in the house. It needs nothing major.

We re-upped the home warranty ($500/yr), so that if anything major happens to an appliance, HVAC or anything, I don't have to deal with it.

joshuatrio says

I paid $250k cash for my house last year. If I wanted to sell, it's now worth around $300-310k. That's a little better than 2.2% dontcha think? (and if I were to sell, I'd use a flat fee realtor).

I think you are missing the point. I'll use your own numbers and ignore all the fees you aren't talking about like property taxes, HOA, maintenance, insurance, realtor commission, etc.

You paid 250K cash and now the investment is worth 310, so 24% return in one year, nice work. If you had however instead only put 50K (20%) down on the house, your 50K investment would have made 60K, so that's a 120% return - 3% interest.

You could have then taken the 200K you didn't put into your house and instead have put it into the stock market, where it would have made 20% easily last year. So you are talking about how it's a good thing you paid all cash for a house, but people who know what they are doing are laughing at you because you lost 40K last year.

I do agree with all your points about CA sucking though.

NewGuy says

You paid 250K cash and now the investment is worth 310, so 24% return in one year, nice work. If you had however instead only put 50K (20%) down on the house, your 50K investment would have made 60K, so that's a 120% return - 3% interest.

You could have then taken the 200K you didn't put into your house and instead have put it into the stock market, where it would have made 20% easily last year. So you are talking about how it's a good thing you paid all cash for a house, but people who know what they are doing are laughing at you because you lost 40K last year.

I see what you're saying. Makes sense, but practically, I don't think I could have made that happen if I'd wanted to. Plus, I hate banks, and don't want to pay a penny in interest. I also LOVE not have bills. So for me, this was a great move.

It gets old paying $25-36,000 in rent for a DUMP (where we were in CA), where as quality of life wise (especially with a family), this was a no brainer.

We can bicker about numbers all we want, but what the CA people keep wanting to ignore, are that if we had stayed renters in CA, I would have lost that $250k in roughly 8 years of renting (at $30k/yr.). Either that, or would have taken out a 500-750k mortgage for a dump.

I have no idea what your house would sell for, but I'd treat that Zestimates with a large grain of salt. Better off looking at what sold in your neighborhood in the last 6 months and judging from that.

It also presupposes you have the magical ability of jumping forward in time to see what the stock market looks like.

joshuatrio says

I paid $250k cash for my house last year. If I wanted to sell, it's now worth around $300-310k. That's a little better than 2.2% dontcha think? (and if I were to sell, I'd use a flat fee realtor).

I think the point that you are missing is that even taking your numbers and ignoring relator fees, maintenance, HOA, property taxes, etc. You paid 250K and 1 year later your house is worth 310, so you made 24%, good job.

But if you had instead only put 20% (50K) down on a 15 year mortgage. You would have made (60K / 50K) = 120% - 3% mortgage interest. Then you could have invested your other $200K in the stock market, where you could have made another 20% last year, or 40K. Or if you're so big on Atlanta real estate, you could have bought 4 more 250K houses with 50K down each and made even more money.

So you brag like paying all cash was a good thing because Atlanta real estate is booming, but people who know what they are doing are laughing at you because you lost at least 40K.

I agree with all your points about CA sucking though.

NewGuy says

You paid 250K cash and now the investment is worth 310, so 24% return in one year, nice work. If you had however instead only put 50K (20%) down on the house, your 50K investment would have made 60K, so that's a 120% return - 3% interest.

Monday morning quarterback. nobody knew in 2016 what the stock market would do in 2017. if it had followed the pattern of the two previous years, the return would have been only a few points, at best. at 3% mortgage interest, it would have been a break even, if the market crashed, like all the Dems predicted in 2016, he would have LOST money.

Well, we have different investment strategies, but our hatred of CA brings us together. So glad I got out. You forget how interesting and nice other people can be when you live there. 90% of all conversations I had with people in CA was either real estate or tech companies, that gets old fast. Plus everyone hates each other. I remember walking around the streets of SF just thinking in my head "We need a new plague", such dark thoughts, I think a lot of people over there would agree with that though.

There ought to be a way to make money off of people like you who want to buy their house cash and make no payments. Something like:

1. You take a loan out and give the money to me
2. I make the payments and invest the money
3. I pay you a few thousand bucks a year for the privilege
4. You agree not to sell the house for a term (like 7 years). After 7 years, if you sell the house I will repay the loan. If you sell before 7 years, you have to repay the loan and wait until 7 years to be re-imbursed.
5. I buy an insurance policy in case I loose money and cannot repay. Should be a pretty cheap policy, especially with a large enough pool of houses.

I'd be surprised if there wasn't a product like this out there already. Sorta like a reverse mortgage, but doesn't tap the equity of the house.

anon_603ec says

Monday morning quarterback. nobody knew in 2016 what the stock market would do in 2017. if it had followed the pattern of the two previous years, the return would have been only a few points, at best. at 3% mortgage interest, it would have been a break even, if the market crashed, like all the Dems predicted in 2016, he would have LOST money.

Which is why you don't try to time the market. Any money you have that you do not require in the next 5 years should be in a diversified portfolio. And probably the money you won't be needing in the next 1 year should be in a more conservative diversified portfolio. Long term return on US equities is ~10%. If you leave your money in long enough, you will make 10%, it's like a law of physics almost.

You can get 15 year mortgages at 3%. The worst the S&P 500 has ever done over a 15 year period is 3.7%. If you buy at the absolute worst time possible and sell at the absolute worst time possible you will still make money over ANY 15 year period. If you stretch out to 20 years, the worst you could have possibly done is 6.4%.

And these numbers aren't assuming a diversified portfolio, which would reduce volatility and make it even less likely that you are buying and selling at the absolute worst time (the odds of you buying and selling 10 different asset classes at all exactly the wrong times would be remarkable), so the numbers are even better then what is stated here:

https://www.thebalance.com/rolling-index-returns-1973-mid-2009-4061795

anon_8f378 says

I have no idea what your house would sell for, but I'd treat that Zestimates with a large grain of salt. Better off looking at what sold in your neighborhood in the last 6 months and judging from that.

Last several sold for $289-342k. The Zestimates have actually held to be pretty accurate for my area.

Hey, I'm only referencing Zillow because all you "anonymous" users claim 2.2% appreciation for my area. And that my $50-60k increase wasn't possible (because of Zillow).

NewGuy says

Well, we have different investment strategies, but our hatred of CA brings us together. So glad I got out. You forget how interesting and nice other people can be when you live there. 90% of all conversations I had with people in CA was either real estate or tech companies, that gets old fast. Plus everyone hates each other.

I couldn't agree with you more. Where did you end up settling?

South Carolina. If you are in California reading this, please do not move here. I like living in a community where people give a shit about each other, sending my kids to public school, and being able to get in the ocean without a wet suit. No offense but you guys tend to ruin things. Not sure how you'd screw up the warm ocean water, but I'm sure you'd find a way. Also, it's too hot here, like you have to wear shorts sometimes, you wouldn't like it.

Californians care about each other. Who would they have to sue if they didn't have neighbors?

joshuatrio says

Actually, the "bad idea" would have been to finance for 15-30 years, where I would have paid over $80-150k in interest.

as NewGuy pointed out, instead of the 80% earning 10%, now it earns exactly 2.2%. on the other hand, paying cash is not a problem in the bay area due to its higher appreciation rate. many people had no idea why 2.2% was relevant. this is why.

smart money leverages and gets 177% return annually while the average gets 2.2%.

joshuatrio says

So, enjoy your liberal utopia while things disintegrate. Keep telling yourself that life is good because of the weather :)

since you asked. if i was the boasting type i'll list all the great things about life in suburban Los Angleles compared to a place like Atlanta. my house costs twice as much and appreciates twice as fast. great tech jobs here are plenty and i only need to work one job and retire comfortably. my income more than qualifies for a $1M house and the average home here is only $650K. i drive a new MB every 3 years and i have more money than i can spend while my 401K is maxed. i take vacation twice a year because the company gives me close to 2 months off a year. the weather is just icing on the cake. why would i ever want to move to a place like Atlanta?

over the years i see many people get priced out, leaving CA. some just casually mention their leaving. some go at great length to boast their inflated income, assets, great life in another state to make a point. and smart people take the boasting with a grain of salt. but even if it's true they have this great life outside CA, why did they wait so long? 99.5% of the time they needed a down payment. so they stayed for the easy money, the easy money they apparently couldn't have gotten elsewhere. otherwise, wouldn't have stayed in CA for so long and "suffered" for years as they described in details.

houses are cheap for a reason. there is no free lunch. one can hide in white neighborhoods but do they work (where 50% of co-workers are mostly likely black)? get out of the house sometimes? do their cars run out of gas, break down in the middle of the road at night? in an area that has 50% blacks? when criminals plan their home invasions, do they choose black neighborhoods with nothing to rob, or they pick the white middle class neighborhoods where there are more to gain?

lets check back 10-20-30 years and see how much my house will be worth and how much your house will be worth.

the home estimate on Zillow is the one that can be off, and really off.

median home price for last year is the only accurate number on Zillow. good for you if your house appreciates that much. but most of the time that's either:

1) an error or
2) something is wrong with the house that it was sold for much less than a similar house in the area. or maybe it is a much older house in an area with mostly new houses.

joshuatrio says

anon_5f0e8 says

there is zero report claiming Atlanta went up 20%+ (for it to go from $250K to $300K+) but there are a lot of 8-10%.

i'll believe the reports i read online over some wild claims.

Without giving you my actual address, here is output from your buddy Zillow.

For the record, I bought at the tail end of 2016. So I have owned for one year and a few months :)

willywonka says

Unless you are going to invest that money instead and live on the streets. You also have to factor in no rent, but of course, maintenance.

Previous owners put a new roof, HVAC and appliances in the house. It needs nothing major.

We re-upped the home warranty ($500/yr), so that if anyth...

joshuatrio says

Lol.. OK. I could afford CA. I just didn't want to tie myself to a 1950's shit shack that needed a full remodel. Plus, the large majority of people I worked with out there were check to check. Everyone was house/rent/bill/debt poor.

Correct - but that is why I said (post 55) comfortably afford. I get it - like you (I suspect) I am a tightwad at heart, so yeah while I could have streeeeeched to afford a decent place in coastal ca, I didn't want to put myself in that uncomfortable financial position.

But like I said, that all changed when I got extremely lucky and got a sizeable inheritance. Suddenly what was previously unfeasible, was, and once that happened, my corresponding outlook suddenly brightened and when that happened the comfortable in CA vs the Mansion in ATL became a no brainer for CA (all things considered).

BorderPatrol says

my house costs twice as much and appreciates twice as fast

It can crash twice as fast too though. Primary homes should never be thought of as investments. Ever.

BorderPatrol says

great tech jobs here are plenty and i only need to work one job and retire comfortably

This is the case if you're educated and not an idiot pretty much anywhere in America. Not necessarily tech jobs at the rate you can find in CA, but there's always a tech job somewhere that as a ratio of income to cost of living it's generally equal to CA. Income levels and the cost of living generally stay at similar ratios across the country. Again, I preface this by saying educated and also not an educated idiot. Your income to COL ratio in LA burbs is very likely similar to income to COL ratio in Dallas or Atlanta or Chicago.

BorderPatrol says

my income more than qualifies for a $1M house and the average home here is only $650K.

Good for what you can qualify for. I assume you made the smart move and bought a place for $500k? I'd never be heavily tied up financially into my primary home. There are things completely out of your control that could force you to move tomorrow and if it happened to be 2008 or 2009 roughly, and were forced to sell, well that might not have turned out so well. You could also do well, so your point is obviously still valid. Gains can't be taken as gospel and neither can losses is all I'm trying to say. Pen on paper always looks better then the reality most the time.

You also really need to think about a house. 6-8 hours of your time per day are just sleeping in it. You mentioned you vacation. More people work from home, so this argument isn't as valid, but most still do work a 40+ hour work week outside of their home. You are in CA and likely do things outdoors because of the weather. Long story short, you don't spend all that much time actively awake in your home, or at least most people don't. I have no interest in paying much more than 10% of my gross income towards a house. I'm not being a smart ass, but I genuinely feel bad for people that pay more than this towards the glorified roof over their head.

BorderPatrol says

i drive a new MB every 3 years and i have more money than i can spend while my 401K is maxed.

No problem with people that like cars. Not my thing personally. Congrats on the 401K, more people need to do this. Not sure what this contributes to the discussion though. Be proud of your accomplishments, but on an anonymous forum I do hope you understand that no one believes you.

I've always lived in Chicago area. ANYONE that has EVER moved out of here has boasted how much better it is. In some cases it's true, in others people are just as miserable yet they put on a show. Not saying Joshuatrio is doing this, but very few people will ever tell you the reality of their situation. Unless you physically pick up and move yourself to that location, no one else's opinion on it even matters. You could move to ATL tomorrow and absolutely love it. You have no idea and can't really judge it. This is where people and their online personalities go too far. If someone else if happy with what they're doing or did, who gives a shit.

BorderPatrol says

as NewGuy pointed out, instead of the 80% earning 10%, now it earns exactly 2.2%. on the other hand, paying cash is not a problem in the bay area due to its higher appreciation rate. many people had no idea why 2.2% was relevant. this is why.

I didn't disagree with NewGuy. Without a crystal ball, I don't know what the market is going to do. I needed a house, so I bought a house. It was nice paying cash for it.

Zillow got brought into the equation, because your buddies claimed that Zillow showed only 2.2% appreciation. When in fact, certain pockets have had much higher appreciation. And no, nothing was wrong with my house. I live in a nice, suburban, well-kept neighborhood.

This thread originally started out about why CA has gone downhill (and it has). I know, because I lived there for 8 years. And yes, I could have purchased a home on the Central Coast, but I'm glad I didn't.

BorderPatrol says

since you asked. if i was the boasting type i'll list all the great things about life in suburban Los Angleles compared to a place like Atlanta. my house costs twice as much and appreciates twice as fast. great tech jobs here are plenty and i only need to work one job and retire comfortably. my income more than qualifies for a $1M house and the average home here is only $650K.

So? I choose to live completely debt free. Just because you qualify for something doesn't mean anything anymore. I know people making $40k a year who were approved for a $70k escalade. Credit is a poor indicator of wealth.

I work for a tech company based out of SF, and fly there several times a year. I keep my west coast salary, and live where it's cheaper. Win win. Especially when you have kids.

BorderPatrol says

i drive a new MB every 3 years and i have more money than i can spend while my 401K is maxed. i take vacation twice a year because the company gives me close to 2 months off a year. the weather is just icing on the cake. why would i ever want to move to a place like Atlanta?

And you only qualify for a $1million dollar mortgage? LOL!!!!

I only get 4 weeks time off per year though. Nice deal on 2 months.

BorderPatrol says

one can hide in white neighborhoods but do they work (where 50% of co-workers are mostly likely black)? get out of the house sometimes? do their cars run out of gas, break down in the middle of the road at night? in an area that has 50% blacks? when criminals plan their home invasions, do they choose black neighborhoods with nothing to rob, or they pick the white middle class neighborhoods where there are more to gain?

So now liberals are racist/stereotyping against blacks? Hahaha.

WookieMan says

In some cases it's true, in others people are just as miserable yet they put on a show. Not saying Joshuatrio is doing this, but very few people will ever tell you the reality of their situation. Unless you physically pick up and move yourself to that location, no one else's opinion on it even matters. You could move to ATL tomorrow and absolutely love it. You have no idea and can't really judge it.

Wookie, I agree with you. The purpose of this thread was to point out how much San Francisco/CA has turned into a shit hole, and why I was glad that I left. I had to defend/prove that life outside of the CA bubble does exist, and home appreciation in certain pockets (do exist). It's now turning into a kindergarten match of "no you can't" - "yes you can."

I remember living in that bubble, and having the same mindset.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. CA is the most beautiful state in the country (and yes, I'll visit the national parks and my friends). But it is certainly going down the tubes.

WookieMan says

t can crash twice as fast too though.

that's not how it works for housing. this is not individual stocks. i'm 100% certain you never looked at the graphs for Atlanta and LA. i would suggest doing researches before commenting. i have avoided responding to many of your lengthy posts on various topic for this reason. consider this the last one.

WookieMan says

Primary homes should never be thought of as investments. Ever.

tell me something i haven't heard before. but what you don't realize, what you repeated is only for the average people. when one can turn $10K in to $160K over 5 years, how is that not a good investment?

WookieMan says

Again, I preface this by saying educated and also not an educated idiot. Your income to COL ratio in LA burbs is very likely similar to income to COL ratio in Dallas or Atlanta or Chicago.

the point you are missing is why move to Atlanta when i already make comfortable money and can afford a house easily. that's what my post was responding to.

WookieMan says

I assume you made the smart move and bought a place for $500k? I'd never be heavily tied up financially into my primary home.

completely wrong. i only put down $10K. what tied up money are we talking about here? my housing expenses is $2440 and the rent is $2600. I am SAVING money by buying at the right time.

WookieMan says

I genuinely feel bad for people that pay more than this towards the glorified roof over their head.

feel sorry for people who can afford to buy? LOL. well, i feel sorry for people who can't afford to buy and need to throw out a bunch of excuses to justify themselves.

WookieMan says

Not sure what this contributes to the discussion though. Be proud of your accomplishments, but on an anonymous forum I do hope you understand that no one believes you.

people bragging about private schools, all cash purchase for a house. why is only my "bragging" in question? sounds like the bias is strong. one thing you don't realize, nobody believes me just like nobody believes someone had $250K in cash to buy a house, when they could have used it for a down payment in CA. you actually HELP prove my point.

WookieMan says

If someone else if happy with what they're doing or did, who gives a shit.

then why are you even responding to my post? if i'm simply saying why i'm happy to stay in CA? that's right. worry about your own life an finances.