June 16, 2007

HousingPANIC serious question for doubters, trolls, REIC, ramen eaters and Desperate Homedebtors

If it costs $1,000 a month to rent "Condo A", but if I bought it today it my total carrying costs would be $3,000 a month (pretty typical), and "Condo A" is declining in value, why in bloody hell should someone buy today?


Do you understand now?

It's the P/E stupid. It'll always be the P/E stupid.

Meanwhile, a HP thank you to the landlords and "owners" of America for subsidizing 2/3 of the rent


50 comments:

Anonymous said...

Cracking Down! appraisers and mortgage brokers accountable for the shady dealings

watch this: http://www.paperdinero.com/BNN.aspx?id=218

Cracking Down!

Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann discusses his intention to hold Ohio appraisers and mortgage brokers accountable for the shady dealings that became all too common during the historic housing run-up. Next up… WallStreet!

Originally aired on: 6/7/2007 on Bloomberg

Running Time: 4 minutes 6 seconds

Anonymous said...

Watch this video.http://www.winknews.com/news/local/7896352.html?video=YHI&t=a

Video: LUXURY Home/McMansion Foreclosures ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ !!!

Watch http://www.paperdinero.com/BNN.aspx?id=222

New Today! Luxury Foreclosures

Sad CNBC segment chronicles a poor bastard in Maryland who got caught up in the mania in 2005. He bought a waterfront property in the hopes of subdividing it, creating a luxury “dream” home for himself and another to sell for profit. Unfortunately, he is stuck with a luxury vacation home no one wants and his unfinished dream home and ready for auction.

Originally aired on: 6/13/2007 on CNBC

Running Time: 2 minutes 30 seconds

Anonymous said...

Serious Answer: You'd be a fool to buy

Anonymous said...

renting a "600k" condo (not including HOD and taxes for well under $1700.

do the math troll homedebtors!

Anonymous said...

jUST THINK AND BE SURE EVERYONE THAT WHATEVER YOUR CULTURE ETHNIC OR CREED THAT TODAY YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO IT... AS ANY PEICE OF IT THAT ENTAILED PHYSICAL WEALTH IS BEING PROTECTED BY THE WORLD HERITAGE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED NATIONS... JUST DONT TRESSPASS UPON IT OR TRY TO MONETIZE IT OR GET A PEICE OF THE ACTION OF IT FROM THE PRESERVATIONISTS BUT PAY THE TAX..............

Anonymous said...

DITTO TO NATIONALITIES

Ricky said...

Casey Serin on front page of msn again!!!

http://tech.msn.com/news/articlecnet.aspx?cp-documentid=5013133>1=10138

Buy NOW! said...

anonymous said:
"Serious Answer: You'd be a fool to buy"
I think that's BS. You gotta be kidding me. It's always a good time to buy. Buying real estate is the BEST way to invest your money! Buy now and you will not regret! You'd be a FOOL not to buy.
He-he-he!

Anonymous said...

Because real estate only goes up and renters are financial terrorists who should be rounded up and sent to concentration camps.

BTW - Thanks for paying 1/3 of my mortgage, suckers.

Anonymous said...

Q: "why in bloody hell should someone buy today?"

come on folks, this is too easy.


A: Because I need a commission check!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


ummmm, was that at TRICK question?

Anonymous said...

But if I don't buy now I'll be priced out forever!

Frank@NeverColdCall.com said...

Simple: Because Scottsdale-type egomaniacs aren't able to feel like they're better than everyone else if they rent.

Ego makes people do stupid, foolish things with money. Always has, always will.

www.scottsdale-sucks.com

Anonymous said...

Ya ever notice how everything boils down to the Simpsons!

Anonymous said...

Looks like Homer just found out the foreclosed home down the block just went for 50% off the 2005 price. Neighborhood values soon to be adjusted...

real estate 101 said...

It's not quite upside down in the mid-South. A $170,000 3/2.5 house rents for $1300/mo. in our area. Carry cost to purchase with 10% down would be $1250-$1300 with taxes/insurance at a 6.5% interest rate.

California, Florida, Arizona are not the USA.

Upper end home sellers are doomed in our area. Too much inventory and too few Buyer's. Some are still selling at silly money, but 10 years ago the upper bracket (over $1 million) homes were non-existent. Now we have 100's on the market.

edd said...

'weedoant need no ejukayshin …
leev dose kids our loans'

Anonymous said...

any examples of $3K mortgages that rent for $1K?

Anonymous said...

Horseshit.

Live in a shoebox owned by someone else.

no tax deduction.

no equity or future cap gain.

no garage, dont paint anything, dont put a hole in the wall, listen to your downstairs and next door neighbors, and the list continues.

Life of losers.

If you are a college student, go for it, but if you are a grown adult with a half decent job, or wife and family, and you want a home and garage and tax breaks and all the perks of owning a home then this blog makes you laugh out loud.

So, I guess the 80% that have some pounds and dollars to drop on a place, and do not want to live like a godamn fast food employee/student are in charge.

I speak of home owners, NOT flippers or investors. They are wankers.

jorghis said...

Its like you described my situation exactly. I live in a condo on the beach in Florida paying 1k a month. I had a brief conversation with my landlord about it when I first moved in. He explained to me that my rent helps reduce the carrying cost, but in the long term the condo's value will go up way more than that and he will be much richer than me. I asked him if he thought that there is a chance it might go down and he responded with a smug smile "Oh no, I dont have worry about the bubble because this property is on the water." I'm trying to decide if I should give him a smug smile 5 years from now when I buy something in the same neighborhood for a fraction of the price.

And by the way what is the deal with all these owners talking about how their property is "bubble proof" because of its proximity to the water?

Anonymous said...

The corporate run media has got so many hooked on their bull caca, that i see most not having an inkling of a clue as toi what you say.

Anonymous said...

I'm no realtor but in LA,utah,seattle it very hard to find cheap rentals. Utah normally has had low rents but they have been rising. It's true LA is cheaper to rent then buy but rent are outrageous now. The only winner are people who bought pre bubble and have you the low rates to lock 30year fixed. The problem is so many people are using crazy loans. I own (mortagage) in Utah nice how low per mon 5.85/ 30fixed. I used Cali money to put huge down. But friend have much nicer house and look at my place like why don't i upgrade like them and have a similar mortgage but they have i/o's and all the other leased cars etc. Its tough sometimes to think i'm doing right when they have all the toys and vacations. There all hoping for inhertitance so why save.

Anonymous said...

6% to 7% rate increase make a house 10% decline in price. so when people bought 6 months ago at 6% now those same houses at 7% are 10% more expensive. If we see 8% game over. Prices in most area's have not even begun to drop. Were head into painful housing times. 08 will just be the beginning.

Anonymous said...

i'm not saying buy now, but have you ever had asshole landlords. the bank doesn't care what you paint your walls, the bank doesn't care if you have something on your balcony, the bank doesn't threaten to evict you because they don't like you even though you are paying your rent making your life miserable, the bank doesn't care if you have a mutt or a cat, the bank doesn't care if you ruin the carpet, the bank doesn't care if you don't fix a leaky faucet or have a bug infestation (neither does the landlord) the bank doesn't care if you park in the wrong stall, the bank doesn't care if you hate the kitchen and want to fix it and in my case the landlord wanted to know if i could pay rent early because she was broke, the bank doesn't care if you manage your money and pay your loan off early and the house is yours free and clear, the bank doesn't care about annoying neighbors and neither does the landlord, the bank doesn't care if you hang pictures on the wall you sign on the lease no pictures on the walls, white walls, no holes in the walls no damage what so ever or you won't get your security deposit back. true if you loose your house you loose everything but what if you don't. renting someones house can be a headaches in itself your suggestion is only limited to a perfect world and we know it's not. thank goodness i bought 14 years ago and thank goodness i don't have to deal with a landlord. i never hear from my mortgage company because as long as i pay everything is fine. i am not wealthy and i have to pay someone i would rather pay extra to not deal with a landlord period.

Anonymous said...

Of course you should buy, because crushing debt is so much fun

Anonymous said...

prices dropping about 3k/mo in LA

the_grateful_ed said...

This is putting a whole new meaning to the word "appreciation" when it comes to housing.

We can now define housing "appreciation" as:
The gratitude a renter feels toward a landlord who is subsidizing their living accommodations even while their precious over-leveraged investment falls in value.

TM said...

"i am not wealthy and i have to pay someone i would rather pay extra to not deal with a landlord period."

------------

I agree, up to a point. I'll gladly buy, even if owning is a little more expensive than renting. The key word there is "little." We have a long way to go before owning is only a little more expensive than renting.

But I agree that renting, though it is the more fiscally prudent choice, sucks in all the ways you described.

Can you imagine condo owners? Now there's an inexplicable decision: all the financial burden of owning, only to live in a god-damned apartment (a rose by any other name...).

Joe said...

Zero interest in living in a house. I like being able to walk out my door to go to restaurants, stores, etc. In the suburbs everything is a drive. Screw that.

I have rent control in L.A. and pay less than $1000/month on the same block as $1,000,000 condos. The condos are next door to a two building body shop. Who knows what their HOAs are? My building is quiet, same neighbors for years, great landlord who checks for bugs (never had any) leaks, fire alarms, replaced my fridge, replaced my blinds, replaced my toilet seat, repainted the bathroom, etc, etc. I can paint any stupid color I want and then have it repainted when I move (just like painting bother you sell.)

Anonymous said...

I do worry about one thing. Yes, sellers think their houses are worth twice or more what the rental value is.

However, raw materials, medical care, tuition, gold, milk, gas and oil and many other things are also going up in price drastically.

The things that people compete for are getting more expensive because our dollars are losing value.

The declining price of homes may intersect the rising price of other essentials well before the rental-value-bottom is reached.

It seems only real assets will maintain their value as the U.S. dollar loses its.

Our wages and salaries are not going up to compensate for this rise so those who paid too much for their houses will probably lose them anyway.

However those of us who are waiting for a bottom better be careful to realize when our dollars are declining so fast we better find a hard asset to invest them into.

Anonymous said...

Why does everybody equate renting with a "turd" apartment. The rents on CL in Seattle are highly negotiable. (14.5% off asking price for me) I don't need to repaint as it's a brand new luxury condo. I can order room service from the 5 star hotel underneath me. Have a kick ass fitness center etc etc. It has all the "trimmings"...1 1/4" slab granite, high end SS appliances w/ gas cooking, high end fixtures, hardwood floors, nice view and I'm paying 35.4% of PITI if I did a 30 year fixed at 6.75% with 0 down (I didn't need a down payment to rent) and even if I take the tax deduction into consideration that would only increase the 35.4% to 37%. I'm also basing my numbers on what people actually paid for units recently. Not asking prices.

The landlord also left me a "gift basket".

How cool is that.

And yes I did the math.

I also have a 2 year lease so the rent won't go up for a while. And if he tries to raise my rent after the lease I'll just bounce out of here and let the LL eat a month worth of vacancy which will wipe out the "increase" for the year.

I took very good care of the house I owned before selling in 2005 and plan on treating my landlords condo with the same respect because it's the right thing to do so I'm pretty sure that he won't screw me on my deposit which isn't very large anyways.

Anonymous said...

I hate these anecdotal stories on CNBC about people and their house problems. You can always find someone in trouble. What I'd like are some real statistics detailing by zipcode, with graphs:

1) asking/sales price spread.
2) average household income / house debt ratio (entire loan balance not just monthly payment)
3) average increase in loan payments due to ARM resets.
4) average homeowner debt sans mortgage.
5) square footage sold.
6) sales price per square foot adjusted for total lot size (remove lot size as a factor)
7) Percentage of sales that were done under duress (preforeclosure and beyond).

Everyone is just guessing now at what is going on. Sure we have an idea that the stress is increasing but I'm wondering why things haven't really cracked completely by now.

Anonymous said...

The bank doesn't care what you do to your house, but the next buyer does. If you screw things up because "I'll do whatever the hell I want to my property" you'll pay for it when it comes time to sell.

The trade off between renting and owning is a matter of choice. It's not an automatic yeah for owning. Owning a condo gets you all the negatives of both. Yuck.

If you bought before 2004, owning seems great. If you bought after Jan 2005, you're screwed. That is, you might as well have taken 200,000 out of your pocket and burned it like Lem in The Shield. That's what buying an overpriced house cost you even if it does go back up in value. If you'd waited and bought when it was low, you'd have profited instead of broken even. I work with people who can't even afford to buy a pepsi because everything goes to the house. They have no money. They have to ask permission from the wife for a $3.00 lunch maybe once a month.

I'm an owner who cannot rent due to some bad "history" so I'm stuck holding onto this profit laden beast that I bought at the last bottom, unable to sell while it's fat with value.

Guy Daley said...

I've heard numerous times about the privileges of ownership, whether its from the same troll over and over again, impossible to tell. But there is some odd benefit to not having a landlord.

But its so hypocritical to say that if you live in a gated community with CCRs as thick as a bible that tell you what color you can paint and what plants you can plant, where you can park and whether you can put a for sale sign in your own damn yard. If not that then condos or townhomes where the HOA goes up much faster than inflation year after year after year.

Sometimes you can get a good deal on buying (all depends, when and where) but now you can get a good deal on renting as opposed to buying most anywhere especially in bubble areas. Especially now that interest rates have/are going up. Home prices are and will be adjusting BIG TIME.

Veronica Lodge said...

Do you understand now? It's the P/E stupid. It'll always be the P/E stupid.


Yes indeed.

And then something like this will probably happen: The cliff-hanger units on the south side of a 100-unit condo complex need major foundation work. Even though your unit is on the north side, you are assessed $15,000 for the repairs to units occupied by others.

Or maybe this: Toxic loans adjust and many of your neighbors abandon their units. Those who remain have their association dues raised to cover the lost revenue.

V.L.

Adam said...

Anon said:

i'm not saying buy now, but have you ever had asshole landlords.

Sure. We've all had a-hole landlords, but as you've also pointed out, buying means dealing with a bank who only cares about getting their 30-40 yr mortgage repaid on time. Late on the payment, due to illness, injury, etc? Good luck with THAT!

thank goodness i bought 14 years ago and thank goodness i don't have to deal with a landlord.

Well, there's your answer. You didn't buy during the recent price run-up (1999-2007), so there's no point for you to sell your home and "sit on the fence" and rent.

You've been in the house long enough to build up an equity "cushion" (provided you didn't do the stupidest thing imaginable, by taking out a massive HELOC, re-fi to "tap" some of the equity you've already built up, etc). So none of the bubble concerns apply to you.

On the other hand, some of us DIDN'T buy before the bubble, didn't buy during the run-up, and it CERTAINLY makes NO sense to buy at peak prices, or shortly thereafter!

I've been monitoring prices in my area (CA) for a year now, and often see not just similar properties, but the SAME property being offered. Almost without exception, the property is being offered for MUCH less than less year, and now the selections are MUCH GREATER.

As a fresh example from yesterday, I saw a brand new 4/3 house that was completed in 2006, and offered by the builder for $460k in Jan 2007. By Jun 2007, the asking price had dropped to $$395k.

Do the math: simply by monitoring (NOT BUYING), the price rollback in 4 months is $65k! In real money terms, that's a LOT of money, especially when you consider how much you'd actually have to pay back on a 30-year mortgage. We're seeing a MAJOR roll-off of the fat people got used to adding to their home values in the bubble, and that's a good sign for those of us who were priced out by the idiocy of the frenzy...

If that depreciation trend continues, the price would continue dropping at a rate of $200k per year!

People might say, "well, that's just crazy talk!". Uh, rapid depreciation in this market is much less tin-foil hat thinking than what we saw, where people felt one's house is fundamentally worth an additional $80k per year, for no other reason than just because! In fact, depreciation after a "market run" is not only rational, it's NECESSARY.

So perhaps you could excuse me for refusing to give away MY hard-earned $$$ to some loser, who's looking to convert his "pennies from heaven" into his retirement plan, leaving me holding the bag of an asset that is GUARANTEED depreciate further. Thanks, but no thanks: I wait it out before buying (as any rational person would do).

Adam said...

Anon said:

It seems only real assets will maintain their value as the U.S. dollar loses its (value).

Our wages and salaries are not going up to compensate for this rise so those who paid too much for their houses will probably lose them anyway.

However those of us who are waiting for a bottom better be careful to realize when our dollars are declining so fast we better find a hard asset to invest them into.


Yes, but as the old saying goes, "you cannot squeeze blood from a turnip". There's only so high that prices can rise before no one can buy! Energy prices are tapping off a lot of consumer's "disposable" income, so there's a power play at work these days, with many market players wrestling for their piece of the consumer's $.

The reason housing prices got so out of control was because of the easily-met threshold of lending money offered by mortgage banks, who offered new-fangled "affordability" loans to hand boat-loads of $$$ to almost ANYONE who asked! The rules of lending had changed, and it was like the old rules were suspended in a frenzy of lending activity. FICO, no job, no assets? No problem. Uh, time has shown conclusively that such liberal lending policies ARE a problem, and WILL continue to be a problem for not just the borrower, but the economy. It was like the ability to REPAY loans didn't matter, when if I ask you to borrow $100, the first thing running thru your mind is, "will this guy be able to repay me?" That's just common sense, but the banks suffered a case of temporary insanity, in the lust for profits. And besides, it was like they were loaning THEIR money, after all.

Think of it this way: any borrower who is stupid enough to take a loan at 100% APR (e.g. CashCall) is probably stupid enough to pay too much for the price of the item they're buying, right? And that's exactly what happpened: buyers convinced themselves that the home they wanted was worth 50% appreciation in one year, so why not buy? You'd be a fool NOT to buy, right?

These financial morons (circa 2004-2007 borrowers) drove housing prices well into the stratosphere, and the lending industry was all too willing to encourage them to gamble; that is, until they lenders found they couldn't pass the risk along to Wall St. any longer, when many of these loans early-defaulted and foreclosed.

But the point is, the banks KNEW what they were doing with loose lending: they were testing the limits of housing affordability ("what the market will bear"), and guess what: they found it!

Now they're trying to slowly back off prices, so as not to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.

The problem is, though, people tend to over-react to such problems, and suddenly no one's willing to lose THEIR money. It's all fun and games when it's OTHER people's money, but now banks have lost Wall St. investors $$$ (in the form of CDOs), so investors are a bit reluctant to donate MORE funds to these lenders!

Suddenly investors are DEMANDING that the lenders BUY back all the crap paper they'd been writing, and these lenders are going broke when they have to buy back the bad "product" they've been generating all this time but don't have the cash reserves to cover the buy-back....

The rules of lending have changed, and what once was the "can't lose" investment in 1999-2007 has turned into the "can't win" investment of 2007-2009 (at least).

Anonymous said...

How would you like to live next door to Ned Flanders?

K.W. - Southern Ca. said...

If house debtership is something
so appealing and necessary ... wait awhile ... it will only go lower.


Buy NOW! said...
anonymous said:
"Serious Answer: You'd be a fool to buy"
I think that's BS. You gotta be kidding me. It's always a good time to buy. Buying real estate is the BEST way to invest your money! Buy now and you will not regret! You'd be a FOOL not to buy.
He-he-he!

kitchenstove said...

Anon 4:58 AM,

The bank might not care about what you do with your house, but your neighbors (or the neighborhood association if there is one), and the city Building Inspector sure do.

Anon 9: 45 makes a good point about keeping your house in shape if you ever decide to sell it, but whether you ever decide to sell it or not, one thing is certain: if you are an owner, you don't have as much freedom in your own house as you think you do. You are bound by as many rules as renters if you really think about it.

Whether you live in a house or an apartment, you're almost never an island unto yourself. If this type of mentality, that you have more power and are alone in your housing universe, is what prompts you to think owning is always better than renting think again. You will constantly have to keep your home in a certain condition as to not upset your neighbors or get fined by the city. Maybe on the inside you can have bug infestations and filthy carpets and the like, but let one of your more picky neighbors see some rickety steps on your porch or a crumbled driveway. Or let that bug infestation (heaven forbid it's termites) spread to other houses. If you don't want the cops to show up you can't play your music any louder than someone in an apartment. I rent a home from a relative, a detached home, and I can still hear my neighbors when they argue, when they're watching the game, playing loud music, or any number of things. I don't live in a cardboard McMansion either.

Forget about renovating your home any way you want to too. You might be able to paint your house a bunch of cute colors inside, but if you ever decide to renovate or expand it, be careful how you do so. Don't build too much on the back and don't build that roof too high or the Building Inspector might come and shut the whole thing down. Then you and your house get a big, fat fine.

The only way any of this can possibly be avoided is if you live so far out in the wilderness that you don't actually have any neighbors, but I doubt this is the case. You probably have neighbors just like most of the people who post here.

I've lived in both houses and apartments, and I have enjoyed both styles of living. There are pros and cons to both renting and buying in a sane market, but don't get bogged down with superficial reasons as to why you think owning is better than renting. Especially in a ridiculous market such as this. I rather tell people to wait if they want to own a home instead of pumping them up with the many decorating and painting privledges they'll have if they buy.

stuckinthecity said...

If you are a college student, go for it, but if you are a grown adult with a half decent job, or wife and family, and you want a home and garage and tax breaks and all the perks of owning a home then this blog makes you laugh out loud.
---------------

This ranks up there with one of the dumbest things I ever heard. With prices now a days any house you buy will be a crushing debt they will limit your options for your family. You must not love your family too much or you just have no budgetary sense. Your job as a man and as a head of a family is to provide for your family. That does not mean provie a house any house now matter what the cost. You are supposed to provide the building blocks of strong financial sense your offspring. You don't seem to be doing that.

Anonymous said...

TM said, "Can you imagine condo owners? Now there's an inexplicable decision: all the financial burden of owning, only to live in a god-damned apartment"

Well said TM.

This is EXACTLY what I told the owner of this stupid blog when he giggled at my Scottsdale house (2003-2005).

HE LIVED IN A CONDO (A glorified, over priced little apartment)! His payment higher than mine, he had a view of a parking lot, huge association fees, one parking lot, a useless "loft" feature "upstairs", and loser neighbors, right next to crack den under a bridge. House is the way to go, not that little matchbox dump.

Wonder why he's so angry with everyone? If you knew his history you would be angry too.

He wont even have the balls to post this.

Anonymous said...

"This is EXACTLY what I told the owner of this stupid blog when he giggled at my Scottsdale house (2003-2005)."

Not everyone had the genius foresight of things to come and buying a home and not a condo pre-bubble. In all honesty, I think you bought your pre-bubble home like the rest of us..LUCK. Nothing to do with your oh so great financial wisdom. You smug asshole in your own little bubble. Come back and talk to us in 1 year when the foreclosures in your shithole hood' drop your value and guess what? no more house ATM to live the good life. Time to do it the old fashion way. WORK YOU BITCH. Remember...www.scottsdale-sucks.com

Anonymous said...

"You are supposed to provide the building blocks of strong financial sense your offspring. You don't seem to be doing that."

I have to agree with his comment. What are you? Some blue collar hourly worker with no brains? I guess you are just part of the general population..stupid.

Anonymous said...

Joe said...
Zero interest in living in a house. I like being able to walk out my door to go to restaurants, stores, etc. In the suburbs everything is a drive. Screw that.

---------------------------------
Whatever.

I sold my house in the burbs and now rent a house in the city. I was all ready to live the wonderful urban living I kept hearing so much about. I quickly realized how much more expensive it is to live in the city. A $5 sandwich in the suburbs is $7 downtown. Gas is $2.85 in the suburbs right now, $3.15 in the city. Sales tax is 8% in the city, 6% where I used to live. Groceries way more expensive. And on and on...

And I still do drive a lot. Yeah there are restaurants and stores within walking distance. But not every single store and every single restaurant is. Unless I want to eat/shop at the same 10 stores/restaurants for the rest of my life, I still have to drive. Only now I have to either pay $5 - $10 to park or circle around the block for 15 minutes until I can find a space.

Oh and the lovely people around me are just dreamy. At the closest gas station to me after 10pm there are usually 10-20 bums sleeping there. All this with $750K homes a block away. Hey but you're in the city so it's all worth it right?

And even ignoring all that, at the end of the day, I still spend 90% of my time at home. As soon as the lease is up I'm gladly heding back up to the suburbs. If I want a trendy restaurat/club I'll drive the extra 15 miles into the city for that. No need to put up with all the other shit just so I can save a 20 minute drive a few times a month.

Frank@NeverColdCall.com said...

any examples of $3K mortgages that rent for $1K?

I'm paying $3,500/month for a house the FBs bought for $1.2M ... that's $8,000/month in mortgage payments.

Talk about getting subsidized by the crash!!

Frank@NeverColdCall.com said...

Horseshit.

Live in a shoebox owned by someone else.

no tax deduction.

no equity or future cap gain.

no garage, dont paint anything, dont put a hole in the wall, listen to your downstairs and next door neighbors, and the list continues.

Life of losers.

If you are a college student, go for it, but if you are a grown adult with a half decent job, or wife and family, and you want a home and garage and tax breaks and all the perks of owning a home then this blog makes you laugh out loud.

So, I guess the 80% that have some pounds and dollars to drop on a place, and do not want to live like a godamn fast food employee/student are in charge.

I speak of home owners, NOT flippers or investors. They are wankers.


You must be a realtwhore or broke mortgage peddler.

First of all, I don't even qualify for the so-called "tax break." Contrary to popular belief, it gets phased out in the upper income brackets.

Second, buying for a "tax break" is the dumbest decision in the world. Pay out a dollar to get forty cents back? No thanks. If I want to throw my money away I'll just go to Vegas and at least have some fun while I'm at it.

The bottom line is this: Yes, I'd rather own, and no, I don't quite enjoy renting. However, there is one word for buying a house today that will be cheaper next year:

S-T-U-P-I-D

Unless of course you have a small p*nis and need to say "I'm a homeowner" to make yourself feel bigger.

PS: If you have a mortgage on your house, you don't own it. Sorry to break it to you but it's true. Stop mailing in those payments every month and you'll learn really fast who owns your house. You're just renting money from a bank.

www.scottsdale-sucks.com

Anonymous said...

The wonderful urban life is only in areas with wonderful urban centers like LA, Chicago and NYC. Areas like Phoenix and Denver don't have wonderful urban centers. I think people should try to live close to where there are jobs. Anything over a 30 minute commute is a waste of your life behind the steering wheel. I have a 5 minute commute to work. Some coworkers have a 90 minute commute each way. I spend less than an hour a week on the road while they spend 15 hours. We all make around $30/hr - it is costing them $450/wk in time lost driving before you even figure in fuel costs and wear/tear on vehicles.

Anonymous said...

Recently found a beautiful 1700 sq ft condo in Phoenix Sun City West for my mother-in-law. It has two large bedrooms and baths, full appliances including new washer and dryer and a large garage with plenty of storage space. There are currently six similar units for sales with average asking prices of 225,000. To buy what she now rents would cost 1460/month (30 yr fixed at 6.75%), plus taxes, insurance, HOA fees and maintenance. Conservatively, all this would be at least 2000/month. These condos doubled in the last three years, but are not selling now. Her rent is 850/month, but she wants to buy in a declining market. I'm trying to find a way to tactfully tell her that is not a good idea.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
I'm no realtor but in LA,utah,seattle it very hard to find cheap rentals. Utah normally has had low rents but they have been rising. It's true LA is cheaper to rent then buy but rent are outrageous now.

...

June 17, 2007 2:44 AM

--------------------

It's all relative. Relative to home prices, rents in the LA Metro are a bargain. But overall, the cost of housing is way up. I guess that's what happens when millions of illegals crowd into an area. The businesses get the cheap labor, the rest of us get stuck with more crime, more overcrowding, higher taxes and higher housing costs. What a deal.

The bottom line is that any halfway decent neighborhood in So. Cal. is outrageously expensive, rent or "buy." But buying is far worse. It's more expensive and the sucker/homedebtor is making a bet on a declining area.

Anonymous said...

Because, as many trolls have posted in various topics, renters are just buying the houses for their landlords. Who cares if the landlords are losing $2,000 every month. Also, the renters aren't building any equity.