patrick.net

where is the resold at 448k that you pointed out in your first comment?

Like all disaster insurance, earthquake insurance should be mandated just like health insurance will be : )

Anything otherwise is just pointless risk-taking. Since we bid up the prices of housing to the point of unaffordability, mandated the insurance costs come DIRECTLY out of the purchase price, ie we get the insurance for FREE.

And economists say there no such thing as a free lunch, LOL.

$450K is below the 2002 price and I see there was work done upgrading the kitchen to 2000s standards. LOL. 5B with only 1700 sq ft looks a little tight, good for midgets maybe.

With a 15-year 4% loan I get a fixed cost of $1700/mo, declining to $500/mo after the loan is paid off. Not bad compared to renting, that's for sure.

The Black Swan of an earthquake could be another chit in the "rent column" in the "rent vs buy" discussion, unless one has enough spare cash to cover the losses. Not really sure it ought to be thought of as a Black Swan, though. They happen fairly frequently around here.

Over the years folks've told me how wrong I was to consider EQ ins., because doesn't everyone know that if it comes to that, they'll be able to get all the aid they need from the government?

I wouldn't buy it because I dont know Milpitas all I know about the east bay is if you go north a few miles they're practically giving the houses away.

We I dont know the East Bay I'm thinking Hayward but maybe that's more than a few miles. it's all the same to me.

I just did some poking around and I'm actually kind of shocked at the prices even as far north as Union City I thought it was supposed to be less expensive over there but it sure doesn't seem that way.

If you cant tell I dont get out a lot. My transportation is pretty much limited to public transit which puts Milpitas, Fremont and that area in sort of a dark spot on the map for me.

bubble tea sounds good though. that alone might be worth the trip.