Help us decide where to buy a house (price, school district)

[Drover]

Originally Posted by Anthera

A good school district will attract buyers when you want to sell your home. Not everyone who can afford a million dollar home can afford multiple private school tuitions.

1) A home's worth is determined by several factors other than the quality of the school district. If a home is worth a million dollars for any number of reasons today, it will probably be worth a million dollars for those same reasons tomorrow -- whether the school district is part of the price premium or not. If anything, the quality of the school district becomes an increasingly minor concern over the million-dollar mark. Otherwise there would be no such thing as a million-dollar home in the city of Chicago when in fact they're a dime a dozen in this city.

2) Anyone who can afford a million-dollar home certainly can afford multiple private school tuitions. Some may not be able to afford both. Some may choose to place a higher priority on the million-dollar home instead of the tuition, but they could still afford the latter by shifting their priorities. If you can afford the taxes on a million dollar home, you can afford tuition and a $400K home.

[linicx]

Grandview Drive is a oerfect area, Professionals, beautiful homes, less than 10 miles from the medical school and 3 hospitals in Peoria. Prospect Road becomes Glen Oak. It doesn't get much better than this.

[BUalumni]

Originally Posted by linicx

Grandview Drive is a oerfect area, Professionals, beautiful homes, less than 10 miles from the medical school and 3 hospitals in Peoria. Prospect Road becomes Glen Oak. It doesn't get much better than this.

Yeah...well...check today's Journal Star. The newest home in that area is going for about 4.5MIL! It is one of the most pretigious areas of the state, but I can't imagine what the property taxes must be!! Then again, it is the Heights, maybe they are a little less than Peoria's.

[Anthera]

Originally Posted by Drover

1) A home's worth is determined by several factors other than the quality of the school district. If a home is worth a million dollars for any number of reasons today, it will probably be worth a million dollars for those same reasons tomorrow -- whether the school district is part of the price premium or not. If anything, the quality of the school district becomes an increasingly minor concern over the million-dollar mark. Otherwise there would be no such thing as a million-dollar home in the city of Chicago when in fact they're a dime a dozen in this city.

2) Anyone who can afford a million-dollar home certainly can afford multiple private school tuitions. Some may not be able to afford both. Some may choose to place a higher priority on the million-dollar home instead of the tuition, but they could still afford the latter by shifting their priorities. If you can afford the taxes on a million dollar home, you can afford tuition and a $400K home.

1) I was really speaking about suburban homes, not the city. I am unaware of any subdivisions areas in the city within her specific perameters. I really don't know of any suburban areas with bad schools and a large number of million dollar homes.

Could you please back up your statement that the school district becomes unimportant as homes are more expensive. I know what your trying to say, but I think its theoretical, not practical.


2) Most people who can afford a million dollar home are smart enough to put that $60k a year(3 tuitions at $20k) into equity or other investments rather than tuition. $60 times 14 years (jk - 12) is $840k. Invested properly, this could be a nice nest egg.

Most would put the priority on both. A nice home in a good public school district. The vast majority of expensive suburban homes are in good school districts. Otherwise there would be more private schools.

ETA - Some people also have philosophical problems with private schools. They choose not to send their children to parrochial or private schools for reasons other than school quality.

[Drover]

Originally Posted by Anthera

1) I was really speaking about suburban homes, not the city. I am unaware of any subdivisions areas in the city within her specific perameters. I really don't know of any suburban areas with bad schools and a large number of million dollar homes.

Could you please back up your statement that the school district becomes unimportant as homes are more expensive. I know what your trying to say, but I think its theoretical, not practical.


2) Most people who can afford a million dollar home are smart enough to put that $60k a year(3 tuitions at $20k) into equity or other investments rather than tuition. $60 times 14 years (jk - 12) is $840k. Invested properly, this could be a nice nest egg.

Most would put the priority on both. A nice home in a good public school district. The vast majority of expensive suburban homes are in good school districts. Otherwise there would be more private schools.

ETA - Some people also have philosophical problems with private schools. They choose not to send their children to parrochial or private schools for reasons other than school quality.

First: I like how you have to exclude Chicago to make your point and to minimize mine, and then ask me to substantiate my claim. The city of Chicago and its multitude of million-dollar-plus homes in a crappy school district, with many of those families sending their kids to private schools, is all the substantiation I need.

Second, you claim that "most people who can afford a million dollar home are smart enough to put that $60k a year(3 tuitions at $20k) into equity or other investments rather than tuition. $60 times 14 years (jk - 12) is $840k." Yet they apparently have no qualms about ponying up the huge amounts of property taxes one pays on a million-dollar home. The taxes they spend on that million-dollar-home could be spent on tuition instead if they stoop to living in a down-to-earth, modest home. Plus once your kids are done with school, you stop paying tuition. You never stop paying the higher taxes on that million dollar home.

Third, there are a whole lot of private schools out there with tuition cheaper than $20K per year, especially if you have multiple students in the school.

Fourth, there are also people who have philosophical problems with public schools. What the philosophical preference has to do with this conversation, I'm not too sure.

I stand by my claim that anyone who can afford a million dollar home can afford private school tuition, even if many choose not to prioritize their resources to that end.

[Anthera]

Originally Posted by Drover

First: I like how you have to exclude Chicago to make your point and to minimize mine, and then ask me to substantiate my claim. The city of Chicago and its multitude of million-dollar-plus homes in a crappy school district, with many of those families sending their kids to private schools, is all the substantiation I need.

Second, you claim that "most people who can afford a million dollar home are smart enough to put that $60k a year(3 tuitions at $20k) into equity or other investments rather than tuition. $60 times 14 years (jk - 12) is $840k." Yet they apparently have no qualms about ponying up the huge amounts of property taxes one pays on a million-dollar home. The taxes they spend on that million-dollar-home could be spent on tuition instead if they stoop to living in a down-to-earth, modest home. Plus once your kids are done with school, you stop paying tuition. You never stop paying the higher taxes on that million dollar home.

Third, there are a whole lot of private schools out there with tuition cheaper than $20K per year, especially if you have multiple students in the school.

Fourth, there are also people who have philosophical problems with public schools. What the philosophical preference has to do with this conversation, I'm not too sure.

I stand by my claim that anyone who can afford a million dollar home can afford private school tuition, even if many choose not to prioritize their resources to that end.

1) I don't know any area in Chicago that met the OP's criteria. If you were just answering for the city, and your arguement doesn't work in the suburbs, simply say so.

2)Taxes on a million dollar home in Winnetka are appox 17k a year, for a 500k home, 8k. How does 8k pay multiple tuition? You can stop paying taxes on the house when your kids graduate and you downsize.

3)What quality private schools cost less than 20,000 a year? Roycemore, Latin, Parker, Chicago City Day, Baker, NSCD, LFCD, LFA, all are in the 20k range(some are higher depending on the grade). Please don't give me the example of parochial schools, because we aren't talking about parochial schools and many people would not send their children to a school which promotes a different religion.

4) Never heard of this one, but for the sake of arguement I'll concede that there might be someone who is philosophically opposed to sending their children to a good public school. I know many people who send their kids to private schools even though they have a great school district, but their reasons have never been philosophical. I do know many who feel private schools ar elitist and would not chose them for that reason.

Could you please back up your statement that the school district becomes unimportant as the homes become more expensive. Using areas in the city where the population includes very few children is like using a resort town as an example. Unless you mean to say your example is only valid in a large city with a small population of children. Its okay if this is only true in these circumstances and is not a general rule. If its a general rule it should be true in the suburbs too. Please give an example.

[Drover]

Sorry, but parochial schools are a perfectly valid option, so you can't simply exclude them because it's not convenient to your argument to include them. I don't think you have any idea how many non-Catholic families send their kids to Catholic schools. Even if the city example doesn't apply specifically to the OP's situation, it still makes the point that those with means have less reason to be concerned about the quality of the school district. You don't get to wave away the evidence because you find it inconvenient.

Latin School, Francis Parker, Loyola Academy, St. Joseph, etc., all have plenty of students from suburbia. Who do you think is sending them there? People who live in 300K houses? No, it's people who live in 7-figure houses, because THEY are the ones that have that option. Some will put their kids in private schools regardless of whether they live in the best or the worst school district in the state. The point that those with more means have more options other than public schools is self-evident to just about anyone who doesn't insist on being argumentative.

[Anthera]

Originally Posted by Drover

Sorry, but parochial schools are a perfectly valid option, so you can't simply exclude them because it's not convenient to your argument to include them. I don't think you have any idea how many non-Catholic families send their kids to Catholic schools. Even if the city example doesn't apply specifically to the OP's situation, it still makes the point that those with means have less reason to be concerned about the quality of the school district. You don't get to wave away the evidence because you find it inconveniet


Latin School, Francis Parker, Loyola Academy, St. Joseph, etc., all have plenty of students from suburbia. Who do you think is sending them there? People who live in 300K houses? No, it's people who live in 7-figure houses, because THEY are the ones that have that option. Some will put their kids in private schools regardless of whether they live in the best or the worst school district in the state. The point that those with more means have more options other than public schools is self-evident to just about anyone who doesn't insist on being argumentative.

Okay, so you have changed your arguement from "private schools" to "parochial" schools". They are not the same thing.

In other words, there are no private schools under $20k. Or does your arguement only apply to Christians? Or should Muslims and Jews send their children to Christian schools?

Some Christians would never send their children to Catholic schools either. Many Christians would never send their children to a Muslim school.

You agree the city example doesn't apply to the OP's case, so why are you arguing it?

I'm not waving away evidence, I'm saying its an isolated case which doesn't apply universally. You are saying because it applys in one case, its universal. I'm not the one waving away evidence. I agree in an area with very few children the school quality might not be important.

Again, please show me one example in the suburbs. I'm not trying to argue, I just think you're wrong. I'm sorry that makes you angry.


Yes, I know children from the suburbs go to city schools. I don't know anyone from the suburbs who drives their kids in for parochial school. Latin & Parker may have suburban kids, but St. Clements probably doesn't.

Of course, to send your kids to a city school when you live in the suburbs would require a stay-at-home parent to drive, a economic cost which has to be factored in also.

Of course, the more money you have, the more choices you have, but that was not what you were saying originally.

You said :

Anyone who can afford a million-dollar home certainly can afford multiple private school tuitions. Some may not be able to afford both. Some may choose to place a higher priority on the million-dollar home instead of the tuition, but they could still afford the latter by shifting their priorities. If you can afford the taxes on a million dollar home, you can afford tuition and a $400K home.

You've changed "private school" to "parochial school".


I also don't think $8k would purchase many parochial tuitions. Using the Winnetka example, using the tax savings at Sacred Heart and FHC it wouldn't cover two tuitions at $6k per year.

Using your example of Loyola Academy, tuition is $11k plus books, Woodlands Academy of the Sacred Heart is $20k, so the $8k savings would not purchase one tuition at these very good parochial high schools.

[Drover]

Since when the hell are parochial schools not private schools? They're certainly not public. Are we now redefining words to suit the argument?

I'm done with this nonsense. It's self-evident to anyone with a brain that people with greater resources have greater options than just public schools for their kids. Since you refuse to acknowledge the obvious, there doesn't seem to be any point in carrying on.

[Anthera]

Originally Posted by Drover

Since when the hell are parochial schools not private schools? They're certainly not public. Are we now redefining words to suit the argument?

I'm done with this nonsense. It's self-evident to anyone with a brain that people with greater resources have greater options than just public schools for their kids. Since you refuse to acknowledge the obvious, there doesn't seem to be any point in carrying on.

Parochial schools are a particular subset of private schools. Religious education is always a component of these schools. You are now limiting private schools to be only parochial schools. Your example of Loyola Academy cost more than the hypothetical $8k tax savings. So even parochial schools don't fit into your model.



I agreed that people with greater resources have more options, that is not what you are arguing. You said that school district quality doesn't affect home value. I disagree strongly with that. It is self-evident to anyone with a brain that school quality affects home value..