If I would give you 100k more... (mortgages, loan)

[giffman]

Originally Posted by 8 SNAKE

Don't take this the wrong way, but you're making some very wild and unfounded assumptions.

This is very basic economics. Right now, the supply of housing appears to be tighter than the demand so prices are being driven up. As more houses are built, the demand will subside and prices will level off. If too many houses are built, then supply will outstrip demand and prices will fall.

Simply put, there is a reason that people are offering prices that they are. No one is going to buy a house for more money than they need to spend. No one is going to sell a house for less money than they can get. In a free market economy, buyers and sellers determine the market prices based on changing economic conditions.

Basic economics indeed.

[giffman]

Originally Posted by JustAGoodPerson

of course none of those things happen.

i wouldnt tell anyone to.

but... do you get why a house thats just carpet and wood on God given land costs more then the wood and labor?

you cannot say that Cali's are causeing the market to go up, taking the offer does it.

God didn't give me the land. I had to purchase it from a developer.

[JustAGoodPerson]

thats the brainwashing of america isnt it?

[jcbmontana]

Originally Posted by JustAGoodPerson

thats the brainwashing of america isnt it?

[JustAGoodPerson]

Originally Posted by jcbmontana

i guess you'd have to see cali's houses that are just carpet wood on ground that costs 300k for a ****ty dump.... and that no first time homebuyers young adults or new couples can afford. or they get into a loan that digs them in backwards...

then you'd understand why i say it is brainwashing to tell someone that land should costs money just cause a developer buys it first...

i say that a house should cost what it costs.

well, septic, electric hook up, material and time...

not the fact that someone with more cash can buy it for more so therefore it costs more...

do they do that with food, cars, clothes... if so we'd all be hungry and naked...


its a house.. a roof over a families head. shelter...

some are nicer, and some aren’t but still a house.

i as a realtor am in escrow with clients buying thier first time house. i have told them not to. they dont have cash for closing costs, for buying the interest rate down, for even a down payment. its a $360k home thats not been updated since it was built over 50 years ago.

yet they insist. they want the american dream, they are willing to stress over thier 2500 month payments that they will have. fireman with two young children. closes tomorrow. and they cannot even afford the first payment that'll come before they know it.

they too disearve a home and a place to raise thier children. and to retire without a mortgage... around thier necks.

i am feeling awefully sad today about it to say the least...

[jenzebel]

Originally Posted by jimj

I just took a look at the local MLS and found the following:

Out of all of this there are 324 2-3 bedroom houses below $200k
There are 364 3 bedroom houses for sale in Flathead County from $0 to 250k.
204 2 bedroom houses
61 one bedroom houses
From $250-$350k there are 401 2 and 3 bedrooms. I didn't look at one bedrooms because they are mostly resort condos.

From $350-$500k there are 216 3 bedrooms, again I didn't look at 1-2 bedrooms for the same reason stated above.

So I guess it comes down to what is affordable for each person vs what they would like.

Actually, I just looked at the NMAR MLS listings tonight and it lists only 271 total SF houses under $250,000 (I excluded trailer homes since many of those are on rented lots or are trouble to finance). The beginning price for something in the Flathead Valley is $142,000 for a 3 bd in Kalispell needing TLC (we all know what that means!).

If you think a beginning price for a home in Kalispell is doable on the $8-$10 an hour many people make there, you are sorely mistaken. There is still a huge gap between wages and affordable (for those that still need to work) housing.

An example from the Citizens for a Better Flathead Website:

"Between May and August 2005, 950 jobs were posted at the Flathead Job Service. Of those, 250 paid less than $8.00/hr. Of the remaining 700 jobs paying more than $8.00/hr, 450 were all posted by the same company, and all those were between $8.00 and $9.25/hr. Of all 950 posted, only 7 jobs paid wages that would allow an individual to afford the estimated median home value in Flathead County for 2003."

Now I realize these statistics are from 2005 but if anything, I would argue the gap between jobs and a living wage in the Flathead and throughout much of Montana that has been "discovered" has gotten worse.

[jenzebel]

Originally Posted by jimj

And exactly what system is better? Communisim maybe? How about more government redistribution of wealth? I do so enjoy having the argument that people who build wealth should "give back" like they took something to begin with. They didn't take it they MADE it. Call it luck, hard work or whatever it still comes down to most made the money.
It also makes me shake my head when I hear things like "that person made too much money so we should tax him more" and then give it to people who are "less fortunate".Who decides what is too much and who is less fortunate?

I am not wealthy and I do not think that people who have built wealth "owe" me anything or should "give" me anything. The "you owe me" or "I have a right to" type thinking is detrimental to personal success. How does whining about what others have and you don't get anyone ahead? Take that energy and put it to use at school or work! No one has the "right" to own a house or car, you do have the right to pursue those goals and be anything you want to be.
Being that the U.S. is the last superpower standing must say something for the free market capatalst system not to mention people are dying trying to get here to participate.
You don't see people sneaking into Russia or Cuba or Venzuala do you? Granted, it may not be perfect but what is?

You know, I've been thinking about your post quoted here and I would have to say that you are looking at the issue in the terms of two extremes, to you people are either free enterprise or they are communist.

My family has been in this country a long long time....some ancestors were here before Europeans and other ancestors were very early (some even pre-1700) European immigrants. To say that I favor communism just because I don't like the growth here in Montana and because I want to see more economic equality is akin to calling me un-American and to use a figure of speech, "them's fightin' words".

I am not against free enterprise. I am for responsible free enterprise, which maybe some people wouldn't understand, especially if they have never been brought up in or participated in a true community. What this means is, it is okay to make money, but don't @#$% over people doing it. This also means you that you consider the consequences of your actions. Unfortunately it seems many moving here have no concept of being a part of a community--if their actions displace the little old lady down the street that can't afford the higher property taxes on SS, so be it, they could care less as long as they get their Montana dream. This is truly sad.

[jenzebel]

Originally Posted by jenzebel

Actually, I just looked at the NMAR MLS listings tonight and it lists only 271 total SF houses under $250,000 (I excluded trailer homes since many of those are on rented lots or are trouble to finance). The beginning price for something in the Flathead Valley is $142,000 for a 3 bd in Kalispell needing TLC (we all know what that means!).

If you think a beginning price for a home in Kalispell is doable on the $8-$10 an hour many people make there, you are sorely mistaken. There is still a huge gap between wages and affordable (for those that still need to work) housing.

An example from the Citizens for a Better Flathead Website:

"Between May and August 2005, 950 jobs were posted at the Flathead Job Service. Of those, 250 paid less than $8.00/hr. Of the remaining 700 jobs paying more than $8.00/hr, 450 were all posted by the same company, and all those were between $8.00 and $9.25/hr. Of all 950 posted, only 7 jobs paid wages that would allow an individual to afford the estimated median home value in Flathead County for 2003."

Now I realize these statistics are from 2005 but if anything, I would argue the gap between jobs and a living wage in the Flathead and throughout much of Montana that has been "discovered" has gotten worse.

Originally Posted by jimj

I just took a look at the local MLS and found the following:

Out of all of this there are 324 2-3 bedroom houses below $200k
There are 364 3 bedroom houses for sale in Flathead County from $0 to 250k.
204 2 bedroom houses
61 one bedroom houses
From $250-$350k there are 401 2 and 3 bedrooms. I didn't look at one bedrooms because they are mostly resort condos.

From $350-$500k there are 216 3 bedrooms, again I didn't look at 1-2 bedrooms for the same reason stated above.

So I guess it comes down to what is affordable for each person vs what they would like.

After I posted my response to JimJ's quote above, I went back to the Northwest MT MLS and it had just updated after midnight. Now there are only 136 active residential total listings at any price and only 8 listed under $250,000, three of which are trailers.

All I can say is OMG.

[jimj]

Originally Posted by jenzebel

After I posted my response to JimJ's quote above, I went back to the Northwest MT MLS and it had just updated after midnight. Now there are only 136 active residential total listings at any price and only 8 listed under $250,000, three of which are trailers.

All I can say is OMG.

As usual the public side of the MLS is not working properly so the data that was seen after the update is not corrrect, the side of the MLS that the realtors see shows 1657houses for sale excluding mobile homes. I stand by the figures I posted earlier.

[jimj]

Originally Posted by jenzebel

You know, I've been thinking about your post quoted here and I would have to say that you are looking at the issue in the terms of two extremes, to you people are either free enterprise or they are communist.

My family has been in this country a long long time....some ancestors were here before Europeans and other ancestors were very early (some even pre-1700) European immigrants. To say that I favor communism just because I don't like the growth here in Montana and because I want to see more economic equality is akin to calling me un-American and to use a figure of speech, "them's fightin' words".

I am not against free enterprise. I am for responsible free enterprise, which maybe some people wouldn't understand, especially if they have never been brought up in or participated in a true community. What this means is, it is okay to make money, but don't @#$% over people doing it. This also means you that you consider the consequences of your actions. Unfortunately it seems many moving here have no concept of being a part of a community--if their actions displace the little old lady down the street that can't afford the higher property taxes on SS, so be it, they could care less as long as they get their Montana dream. This is truly sad.

To listen to any group that promotes a "better" anything one has to keep exactly what their agenda is in mind. Using stats from 2005 is not an accurate barometer of today and is in fact misleading.
In the last 6 months to a year many wages have risen and many new employers have entered the valley. While I agree that employers shouldn't trash the people working for them by paying them dirt wages government intervention is not the answer. The government can't control what they have now and mess up whatever they stick their grubby little fingers in. Many of the big employers in the valley are feeling the heat right now and wondering why they have the turnover that they do. They are surveying the workers and I'm sure wages will top the list. This is how markets are regulated, people need to vote with their feet and have been! If people don't like the way some companies do business then don't shop or eat there, don't demand that the government step in and tell them what to charge or how much they can make.
I maintain that when you start regulating the upper amount of how much someone is allowed to make or pass legislation taking money from people when you think they have made enough to give it to people who made less it is socialism pure and simple (growth has nothing to do with it). You are taking from those that made it and giving it to those that didn't. That's like someone walking into your house and since you had the money to buy 10 boxes of cereal and put it away they are going to take 3 or 4 and give them to the guy standing on the street with the "will work for food" sign since how much cereal do you really need.
Economic equality sounds nice, kind of warm and fuzzy but how do you reach it? Do you take money from the store manager who works 80 hours a week and went to college for a degree and give it to the guy at the counter who barely made it through high school or dropped out and only wants to put in 40 hours and while doing that only wants to stand there? Or, do you take it from the owner, the person that risked his/her financial health, worked mega hours and put the sweat and blood into making a company that can hire people?

I agree that wages here have not kept up with the cost of living for a long time but again, that is changing becasue employers are having problems finding people and THEIR biggest complaint? Lack of educated and trained people in this valley, who's fault is that?

Everyone talks about how good 'ole Montana used to be but I am sure that back in the good old days you either worked to fend for yourself or you starved.