New Home or Pre-existing Home? (Scranton, Wilkes-Barre: real estate, lofts, crime)

[karen_s]

Originally Posted by JayJay

I agree with the above quote. I've been to many open houses where the condition of the homes were deplorable. Why would someone neglect to maintain their home is beyond me. I don't want someone else's headaches.

While it's fine that you don't want to buy "used," the way you stated this sounds a bit elitist to me. Most folks in my town who live in less-than-maintained houses either (a) are tenants and have no control over this (we have no landlord licensing or stringent inspections in our municipality), or (b) simply cannot afford the maintenance on their home due to the rising taxes - and most of these are elderly people and my heart breaks for them.

[TristansMommy]

If homes are in deplorable condition because they are "older" and weren't kept up.. I see a FABULOUS opportunity to get into the home at a much Cheaper price and fix it up.. you can either flip it or hold onto it and live in ti and know that you've increased your equity ten fold (that is if you purchase at the right price) . Rather than see a bad situation.. make lemons out of lemonade and look at it as a fabulous opportunity. I do.

[toobusytoday]

Flipping a house is not a part-time job, nor is it suitable for people that have no knowledge or interest in home construction. The reason there's money in flipping is because most people do not have the money or interest in doing it. My husband has done additions, electrial and plumbing, and even messy, dusty sheetrock and then painting which is exactly why we bought our last house all finished. I like to watch the house flipping shows on HGTV because they do it all in one hour - if only real construction was like that.

Karen, I don't think the other poster was being elitist. It doesn't much matter why a house wasn't maintained. Just as the people that live in the house might not have been able to keep it up, buyers may also not be able to afford to fix it up.

In a perfect world, everyone would be able to maintain their house and the same size family would move into each city house that was vacated. However, that does not take into account the social aspect that is just as important as the buildings themselves. I think cities are fine to visit but I wouldn't want to live in one. I live on the outskirts of a small town and am not sure I would want to live within the borough limits. I really, really like having a large yard and place for our dog to run. I like seeing the stars at night and seeing the sun rise over the hills in the morning. Just as there are things unique to living in close proximity to other people, there are things just as unique and important to those of us that choose not to.

[CosmicWizard]

ScrantoWilkesBarree wrote:

In my opinion, sprawl is simply pure GLUTTONY, and I don't know how any of you suburbanites could peg that as being a "good" thing.

I'm strongly inclined to agree with your assessment. While there is nothing quite like having everything new, building a new house on land that was previously forest land or agricultural land is pure SOCIAL IRRESPONSIBILITY. Adding to the problem is that many of these new homes are so-called McMansions. I read an article recently that some memeber of congress proposed a bill that would remove the tax exemption for mortgage interest for houses of more than 3000 sq ft. IMO, that person is a rare member of congress who is actually doing his/her job. While I agree the following Thoreau-ism; That Government is best which governs least, sometimes government has to step in when people are just too plain stupid and/or greedy to do what is best for the country as a whole and not look out merely for their own interests. I'm tired of the argument saying; If I can afford a McMansion, why shouldn't I buy one. Here's my 3 word response...GLUTTONY & SOCIAL IRRESOPONSIBILITY. If you have enough money to afford a McMansion, build your 2,999 sq ft mini McMansion and donate the surplus to Habit For Humanity, giving them the resources to build more socially responsible housing.

blessings...Franco

[greentown]

Originally Posted by
If you have enough money to afford a McMansion, build your 2,999 sq ft mini McMansion and donate the surplus to [B

Habit For Humanity[/b], giving them the resources to build more socially responsible housing.

Great idea. Redistribute the wealth of hard-working Americans so that the welfare crowd can have some more crack houses to trash. My husband doesn't spend weeks away from home busting his a** to give our family a comfortable life so that someone can tell us to how to spend our hard-earned money. The home, cars, and other things we have now were gotten through hard work and sacrifice for many years (and without the aid of college degrees or special schooling). Anyone thats WANTS TO WORK can do this; unfortunately, most just want to sit on their butt and get a handout.

[CosmicWizard]

greentown...good post, and thanks for sharing your ideas.

I've got nothing against working hard and having things as long as the things are not cramping other people and ruining the environment that all us ( rich and not so rich ) have to live in. IMO, building a new McMansion crosses that line! IMO, nothing wrong with some re-distribution of wealth either. Unfortunately much of the Redistribution of wealth is currently taking place in a very negative way. Wether we like it or not, my hard earned tax dollars and your husbands hard earned tax dollars are being shifted to the likes of Halliburton and other criminal corporations for their criminal actions in Iraq. ) Not everyone living in homes built by Habitat For Humanity (HFH ) is a crack head or crack dealer. Many of those folks are/were hard workin folks like your husband and me. For whatever reason the HFH dwellers experienced a stroke of bad luck. It could happen to you and it could happen to me, no matter how damn hard we work! Some of the HFH dwellers are Iraq veterans, abandoned by the very administration that purports to support them. Let all of us spread some our good fortune to those less fortunate than us thru whatever channel makes sense to us as individuals. I happen to like Habit For Humanity. What's your outlet? Here's a chance to give them a bit of FREE Press.

blessings...Franco

[greentown]

Originally Posted by go phillies

So your husband spends weeks away from home so that you can have a "comfortable" life? (I read into that and see MATERIAL comforts). Kids are better off with less material things and maybe an older house and actually having a father in their lives than with a father who is gone all the time so you can have new houses and cars.

Actually, he started his own business so that he has the opportunity to choose how much vacation time he gets. He spends lots of time with his family and has great relationships with his children. Our house, which was built by my husband, is over 20 years old and we have no plans on moving. Apparently, you read into "comfortable life" incorrectly. Comfortable to me is not worrying about where we are going to get the money to pay for oil for the winter, or health insurance, or the hundreds of other expenses that come up in families. We have plenty of other "things", but they aren't the necessities in life and we could live without them if need be. It seems that anyone who can't afford something has to lecture those that can on how to spend their money. I am more than happy to contribute my time and/or money to causes that are legitimate and important to me, but it will be my choice, not the government's, as to who my contributions go to.

[CosmicWizard]

On a gentler, lighter note, a 10 to 30 yr old pre-existing home generally has more charm & character than the newer homes, and they are usually still in good shape. Since they generally cost less, it leaves some extra money leftover for remodelling to make them look and feel like new. Since they already exist, no additional land is being gobbled up to create more sprawl.

BTW, a year ago I bought a 21 yr old home with 1944 sq ft of living space plus and additional 850 sq ft of unfinished basement, so I'm just squeezing under my own definition ( over 3000 sq ft ) of a McMansion. If my home contained an additional 1000 sq ft, my definition of a McMansion would probably be any home over 4000 sq ft.

blessings....Franco

[CosmicWizard]

greentown wrote:

but it will be my choice, not the government's, as to who my contributions go to.

That is only true in a very limited way. Actually you have no choice in the matter of the Iraq war for example. Your tax money is going to support that war wether you are pro-war or anti-war.

blessings...Franco

[greentown]

Originally Posted by NewAgeRedneck

greentown wrote:

but it will be my choice, not the government's, as to who my contributions go to.

That is only true in a very limited way. Actually you have no choice in the matter of the Iraq war for example. Your tax money is going to support that war wether you are pro-war or anti-war.

blessings...Franco

Actually, you do have a choice. You can pay taxes and support the defense of the United States of America, or you are free to leave and live in a different country.