Would you buy a home in Lancaster,CA now (if you only planned to be in it 2-4 yrs)? (Los Angeles: rent, insurance)

[NYSD1995]

the general rule of thumb is that if you don't plan to stay 5yrs, it's better to rent. That said, don't listen to the people over on Piggington's web site. They are the hardcore anti-homeowner crowd. Very negative group.

[jahdielt]

Just being nosy I just bought a house in Rosamond. I also work in front of LAX (Directv). If you are planning to stay in lancaster or move to Rosamond. I am looking for some one to carpool with. I work second shift 12:00am-11:00pm

[SoCalMomma]

I also think that renting is probably the better option if its possible that you will have to move in 2 years. The market is flat as others have mentioned and it seems silly to 'risk it'. Rents in Palmdale/Lancaster are below the money you are allowed. Put the extra in a savings account somewhere & then at the end of the 2 years you'll at least have that!

[FROMCATOGA]

Yeah, I'd rent than buy. 2 years from now a lot of things could happen, and I mean happen in a negative way... which could cause your house to depreciate, instead of appreciate.

[jeffncandace]

Just pitching in my 2 cents. I was born in Lancaster and raised in Boron and North Edwards, which is just off the north gate of Edwards AFB (thus the creative name of North Edwards.)
Let me 1st address whoever posted to check out California City. Stay away from any towns north of Edwards, which includes this town and the previous 2 I was raised in. I can tell you from experience that the schools aren't good, there is high crime considering how few people live there, lots of drugs and on top of that it's uglier than sin. Don't do that to your kids. There is a reason it is so cheap to live there.
Since you don't have a choice and must subject your family to the Mojave Desert, don't move any further north than Rosemond. Since you can afford it with your housing allowance, I would recommend west Lancaster/Palmdale/Quartz Hill area. Although I personally hate the whole dang area (moved when I was 17 and never looked back), if you have to live there move to this area.
People are losing there butts in California real estate right now. Since you might only be there for 2 years, I would seriously recommend renting, especially since the desert is a market that grossly overinflated in the housing bubble that finally burst last year, and it isnt done adjusting.
Hope I don't make everyone mad! Truly, I believe in "to each his own". I still have tons of family that I love dearly that live in the area and wouldn't move if you paid them. Just giving my humble little opinion.
Good luck to you!

[JackSparrow]

Buy.

If you can afford it, it's almost ALWAYS better than renting.

Good luck!

[jeffncandace]

Originally Posted by JackSparrow

Buy.

If you can afford it, it's almost ALWAYS better than renting.

Good luck!

Key Word: ALMOST.

The Mojave would be the exception to that rule.

[midnightbirdgirl]

Originally Posted by jeffncandace

Key Word: ALMOST.

The Mojave would be the exception to that rule.

Where did you get this information?
MBG

[JackSparrow]

Originally Posted by jeffncandace

Key Word: ALMOST.

The Mojave would be the exception to that rule.

Yeah, uhm, can you point out to me the exception?

The keyword was: "If-you-can-afford-it" not "almost"


In any location, if you can get away with renting cheap enough, it's better for you to save your pennies. But I doubt rent (even in Lancaster) is THAT cheap.

[midnightbirdgirl]

Originally Posted by JackSparrow

Yeah, uhm, can you point out to me the exception?

The keyword was: "If-you-can-afford-it" not "almost"


In any location, if you can get away with renting cheap enough, it's better for you to save your pennies. But I doubt rent (even in Lancaster) is THAT cheap.

Ain't that the truth...unless of course you, want to live in a slum.
MBG