Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-18-2011, 09:59 PM
 
Location: Southern California
1,435 posts, read 1,553,670 times
Reputation: 258

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by chickenfriedbananas View Post
I think the key here is...if you're going to own a home, do it for the right reasons and take your time to shop around for a good buy. Buy a home to stay in it and build equity, and because the schools are good. If you buy it as an investment, then you're getting away from the true purpose behind home ownership in the first place...which is always risky.
I see one problem here. During the housing bubble many homewoners did build equity....their $300,000 home in a few years went up to $500,000. So some took out home equity loans based on the value of their home at that time, only to see it crash when the housing bubble bursted, and this is partly why we are in the foreclosure and debt mess we are today.

Build equity yes, but don't depend on it as a second or emergency source of income, unless you only get a loan based on the original price of the home.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-18-2011, 10:47 PM
 
Location: Southern California
1,435 posts, read 1,553,670 times
Reputation: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunchofweirdos View Post
fine...if you don't want to own one then don't. simple as that. i choose to own one...and it is not as a status symbol.....who cares?
Some would rather be slaves to property owners and landlords than masters of their own lives. Just as some would rather be slaves of big government and nanny-states. And some are just scared of the responsibility home ownership brings. A renter can move and saddle a landlord with a bunch of bills and damaged property (though it is not morally or legally right). A homeowner is accountable for everything. To me, home ownership is independence and more freedom. And I am prepared to take on and owe up to the responsibility. (Though I can't yet because of my income.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2011, 01:08 AM
 
1,337 posts, read 1,522,379 times
Reputation: 656
I present for your consideration:

Small house movement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tumbleweed Tiny House Company - Check out the 270 - 700 square-foot homes as an example of some possibilities.

There are smaller ones (90 - 200 ft^2), but I have found that the idea of micro-sized homes is a gradual acceptance type thing. People are not usually willing to jump into those waters right off... it's too big a step to handle. One first has to come to develop an appreciation for the smaller, but still more reasonably sized homes, before they think about the smaller ones (a few people like them right off, however).

Tiny House Blog - Living Simply in Small Spaces

For many decades, a movement has been afoot, the "tiny house movement." Like most other trends, it has fluctuated over the decades, but the idea in its current form has really taken hold in the last two decades.

While there is no precise definition for what constitutes a "tiny home," as it is more of a spectrum of sizes, they typically range anywhere from 90 square-feet on the extremely small end to 1,300'ish square-feet on the larger end. A more reasonable range may be anywhere from 300 - 700 square feet. A single person or small family could easily live a comfortable life in such a home, provided they make the right lifestyle choices.

The reasons for wanting such a home are manifold. The most obvious is that the cost is so low, that it virtually puts home ownership within the grasp of every man, woman, and child in the country (discriminatory state and local laws would need to be remedied nationwide to help bring this to fruition). Additional benefits include the fact that utility bills are often radically reduced, which is commensurate with smaller homes. Likewise, home maintenance and repair costs are often less with a smaller home. Another facet to embracing such a movement is that one is no longer saddled with decades worth of debt in the form of a mortgage, which plagues so many people today. Depending on how you feel about banks, this movement also has the ancillary benefit of putting thousands of banks out of business, or at least largely neuters many of them, as interest bearing loans will no longer be their bread and butter.

The land issue is a big part of the problem for which I have an opinion on that, but for the purposes of this message I shall confine my comments to promoting the idea of small homes as a means of freeing oneself from completely unnecessary debt. Not everyone needs to be an owner, but for those who want that, the options are there if only people would embrace them (and support the needed legislative changes which currently pose a barrier to entry on property owners in some localities from installing these homes, if they so desire).

Last edited by FreedomThroughAnarchism; 11-19-2011 at 01:20 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2011, 01:11 AM
 
4,042 posts, read 3,528,510 times
Reputation: 1968
My case against home ownership is that when and if we have a major repair, all of the sudden I remember the good 'ole days when we were renters.

If BO and his bunch actually do start to incrementally take our mortgage interest deduction away, then that's sure to be a large part of "the case" against it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2011, 01:35 AM
 
3,345 posts, read 3,074,284 times
Reputation: 1725
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey View Post
So why do sprawled metros have dire economies? Can you explain that?

Fail....

Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, San Antonio, Charlotte, Austin all have good economies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2011, 04:47 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,298,921 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunchofweirdos View Post
fine...if you don't want to own one then don't. simple as that. i choose to own one...and it is not as a status symbol.....who cares?
I think owning a home is a status symbol in the same vein as having a car. Many people think "badly" of those who choose to do neither. Owning a home and having a car is supposedly a sign of being an adult, being successful, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2011, 04:58 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,298,921 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedomThroughAnarchism View Post
I present for your consideration:

Small house movement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tumbleweed Tiny House Company - Check out the 270 - 700 square-foot homes as an example of some possibilities.

There are smaller ones (90 - 200 ft^2), but I have found that the idea of micro-sized homes is a gradual acceptance type thing. People are not usually willing to jump into those waters right off... it's too big a step to handle. One first has to come to develop an appreciation for the smaller, but still more reasonably sized homes, before they think about the smaller ones (a few people like them right off, however).

Tiny House Blog - Living Simply in Small Spaces

For many decades, a movement has been afoot, the "tiny house movement." Like most other trends, it has fluctuated over the decades, but the idea in its current form has really taken hold in the last two decades.

While there is no precise definition for what constitutes a "tiny home," as it is more of a spectrum of sizes, they typically range anywhere from 90 square-feet on the extremely small end to 1,300'ish square-feet on the larger end. A more reasonable range may be anywhere from 300 - 700 square feet. A single person or small family could easily live a comfortable life in such a home, provided they make the right lifestyle choices.

The reasons for wanting such a home are manifold. The most obvious is that the cost is so low, that it virtually puts home ownership within the grasp of every man, woman, and child in the country (discriminatory state and local laws would need to be remedied nationwide to help bring this to fruition). Additional benefits include the fact that utility bills are often radically reduced, which is commensurate with smaller homes. Likewise, home maintenance and repair costs are often less with a smaller home. Another facet to embracing such a movement is that one is no longer saddled with decades worth of debt in the form of a mortgage, which plagues so many people today. Depending on how you feel about banks, this movement also has the ancillary benefit of putting thousands of banks out of business, or at least largely neuters many of them, as interest bearing loans will no longer be their bread and butter.

The land issue is a big part of the problem for which I have an opinion on that, but for the purposes of this message I shall confine my comments to promoting the idea of small homes as a means of freeing oneself from completely unnecessary debt. Not everyone needs to be an owner, but for those who want that, the options are there if only people would embrace them (and support the needed legislative changes which currently pose a barrier to entry on property owners in some localities from installing these homes, if they so desire).
Great post. If DH and I ever do buy, it will be a small home. I'd love a little bungalow or a storybook house.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2011, 05:28 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,298,921 times
Reputation: 16665
I just looked through the blog you link FTA. I'm not sure if we are ready to go that small, but I do like the idea!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2011, 06:11 AM
 
690 posts, read 1,202,035 times
Reputation: 472
Problem is most american and british families have been indoctrinated to spend spend spend, consume consume consume.

Places with lower home ownership like Germany have a strong savings culture, and so build up equity/wealth in other ways.

Every penny Americans saved by not buying a home they would spend on Chinese junk and have absolutely nothing to retire on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2011, 06:18 AM
 
Location: Maine
561 posts, read 505,629 times
Reputation: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey View Post
If you watched the video . . . homeownership increases unemployment.
Aparently, you didn't watch your own video.

The homeownership rate in Canada (about 68%) is higher than that in the US (about 60%) and they have lower unemployment.

If higher homeownership lowers employment, then why is it just the opposite in Canada?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:23 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top