Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Check your oil level I see smoke . Are you high? When you do a improvement in a house it adds to the value.
ALL my multiple properties have had huge gains in value. Both from the demand and the renovations. In very desirable sections of OC. The land and house is all in one. You’re just nitpicking.
And land itself has very little value unless it’s developed or demand. And if it’s not developed it is worth less than a plot that is developed. I have land in a different state. It’s worth absolutely nothing. There is no development on it. we sold it simply because it never appreciate much.
Dave Ramsey advice:
Get a 15 year mortgage and not spend 25% of your monthly income on the mortgage.
That's called living in the ghetto my friend where property values do not increase nor is your house an appreciating asset.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrician4you
When you do a improvement in a house it adds to the value.
Yeah, adding a pool and new kitchen will surely increase the value to your house in the ghetto.
Vast majority of people, even middle to upper middle class, can't do this.
Replace the word “can’t” with “don’t” and I would agree with you. Our expectations have grown over time. Take a look at the average size home today versus when you were a kid. In 1973, the average size was around 1660 sq ft. By 2015, it was 2687 sq ft. Meanwhile, the average number of occupants per household has gone down. People also expect more features in their home now versus back then.
“Americans are paying about 70% more today for a median-priced new house on an inflation-adjusted basis compared to a 1973 house, largely because the size of the median house today is larger by almost 1,000 square feet and by 62%. So on an inflation-adjusted basis, Americans are actually paying only slightly more today for a new house on a per square-foot basis ($120) than in 1973 ($114.42), for homes that are of higher quality and more energy-efficient with more features like air conditioning, fireplaces and multiple garages. ”
The land it sits on is appreciating. And that's hoping you don't live in the areas where property values are dropping like flies, which you will be if you follow Dave Ramsey's advice.
Try using your brain instead of slurping up everything Dave Ramsey says.
For the overwhelming vast majority of property owners, if you take the house off the property the value goes down.
Replace the word “can’t” with “don’t” and I would agree with you. Our expectations have grown over time. Take a look at the average size home today versus when you were a kid. In 1973, the average size was around 1660 sq ft. By 2015, it was 2687 sq ft. Meanwhile, the average number of occupants per household has gone down. People also expect more features in their home now versus back then.
“Americans are paying about 70% more today for a median-priced new house on an inflation-adjusted basis compared to a 1973 house, largely because the size of the median house today is larger by almost 1,000 square feet and by 62%. So on an inflation-adjusted basis, Americans are actually paying only slightly more today for a new house on a per square-foot basis ($120) than in 1973 ($114.42), for homes that are of higher quality and more energy-efficient with more features like air conditioning, fireplaces and multiple garages. ”
Depending where you're at though land prices drive that. Empty lots in Santa Rosa where entire neighborhoods were wiped out are going for $400,000 - $500,000. These aren't big lots in fancy neighborhoods. Just normal tract homes. They're maybe a bit nicer (and larger) than the average tract home because of the land prices. It really doesn't make that much sense to put a 1,200 square foot basic house on a $400,000 lot than a more upgraded 2,6000 square foot house on the same $400,000 lot. Easier to sell the 2,600 square foot house at $800,000 than the 1,200 square foot one at $600,000.
Need different zoning with smaller lots and likely semi-attached houses for the 1,200 square foot stuff to make fiscal sense with land prices what they are. Problem is places like Santa Rosa weren't designed with that kind of density in mind. The infrastructure can't handle a 3x population density.
I'm semi-retired in Hawaii, thanks for your concern my friend.
Since you are retired, you have plenty of time to read up on what Dave Ramsey actually says. Otherwise, you could keep doing what you are doing and look foolish when you misquote someone.
I certainly didn't need to read a Dave Ramsey book to become semi-retired in Hawaii.
Some of us use logic instead of blindly worshiping and enriching formerly bankrupt conmen.
It's funny you say that, because as much as Dave Ramsey is worth now, he wouldn't need to be semi-retired to live in Hawaii, he could be completely retired and living in luxury in Hawaii.
As far as the other stuff I posted that you didn't read, it didn't come from Dave Ramsey.
For the overwhelming vast majority of property owners, if you take the house off the property the value goes down.
Does land appreciate? Indeed. As does houses.
Tell that to the millions who have lost millions in real estate. Tell that the people who can’t sell their houses for a profit. Tell that to the people “under water” on their house.
There are many factors that go into what make a house an appreciating asset. But it’s never a forgone conclusion and it’s certainly not every house in this country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim1921
Since you are retired, you have plenty of time to read up on what Dave Ramsey actually says. Otherwise, you could keep doing what you are doing and look foolish when you misquote someone.
No thanks, reading on Dave Ramsey would’ve led to me still working full time like you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy37
It's funny you say that, because as much as Dave Ramsey is worth now, he wouldn't need to be semi-retired to live in Hawaii, he could be completely retired and living in luxury in Hawaii.
.
I’m still better than any position you’re in. Ofcourse Dave has money now, telling people like you how to manage their own money is a very lucrative occupation.
Location: San Ramon, Seattle, Anchorage, Reykjavik
2,254 posts, read 2,738,942 times
Reputation: 3203
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
Because you are unable to unless you pay cash?
We buy all sorts of things we do not need. Unless you are Ted Kaczynski you probably have no room to talk.
Most people, no, they cannot think critically at that level. And sure, I personally buy all kinds of things I want but don't need. But I'm not broke. In fact, I'm one of those people that listen to Dave Ramsey for entertainment but, as he would agree, can afford to buy anything in this world I want. For cash. Most Americans are not in this financial space. In fact, most people in the US are just plain broke. Even if their heavily leveraged lifestyle looks sustainable, and it may be over the short term, any little issue could cause it all to crumble to the ground. This is why Dave says to buy with cash. It helps inject a little self control which we as a majority of Americans sorely lack.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
