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.
To add to my previous post, for me it has always been a choice of having day-to-day contact with nature rather than magnificent vacations every once in a while. With a house you can have that, just wandering around your home. Weekend sojourns might have been fine, but I really enjoyed having my dogs with me every day. Of course I was raised in a desirable climate, which might have set the tone for the future.
Maybe where you live, but in many Texas towns and cities, the subsidized 55+ apartments are often quite nice. They're in desirable locations with good floor plans, amenities, and management. Here's a typical example.
The big problem is that if you're a retiree with average or above means, i.e. a joint annual income > $35k, you just can't get into them. They only set aside a very few apartments - usually around 14 units per complex - at market rates but the waiting lists for those are miles long.
The wait lists can be very long for many units, most being Tax Credit or Subsidized.
As others have stated, some of the low cost senior apartments are like packing rats inside of a building, and many do not have a patio or balcony. The floor plans are low in square footage, no washer/dryer or w/d hook-ups. Some have laundry facilities on each floor, but they are not free and you need to drag your clothes down the hallway and wait in line. Some will pick up your trash at your door once a week....walking down the halls really smells great after a day or so.
My area has the worst and the best, the worst has a long wait list and is in a high crime area (several cars have been stolen from the seniors). And we also have buy-in places - one such place requires $165k to rent a one-bedroom unit, and the monthly rent is $1,200. They explained that a renter "MAY" get a tax break and the only way the initial buy-in would be refunded (without interest) is when the unit is resold for the current market rate. There are no meals served, no housekeeping (as some require), no activities, just a one bedroom unit, same as in an all-age apt building.
OP: I'm in complete agreement. Just rent an apartment or buy an RV and live in RV park. Once we retire next year, this is our plan. We're moving full time in an RV. Cost of home-ownership is just too much money, maint., taxes, for living in a space that is too big. Most people really don't need all the space they have. Listen to people and you'll often find that they have a big house or vehicle and justify it by saying, we need it for company, or for entertaining. In reality, most of them will entertain very little, and it would be far cheaper to put up family in a nice motel when they come and visit than a big house. I think this is a movement of the future. Don't buy. You'll just be stuck with a house that will lose value.
I'm approaching 70 and there still is nothing I would like less than renting. I realize this is unusual, but I cannot imagine having to put up with noisey, disrespectful neighbors, living in close proximity. Even wonderful apartment/condo/townhouse neighbors, while delightful, no doubt can be overwhelming at times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl
I lean your way on this. Even though the reasons for renting may be compelling in older age, once you've had the experience of owning, and the freedom (despite the headaches) that brings, it's hard to think of putting yourself under the housing authority of a landlord (or even an HOA, imo). I think the choice reflects the personality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland
Most of my adult life I've been a homeowner but now we're renters. I don't know which is better at this age.
There are different kinds of rentals: you can rent a little house by the sea with a tiny yard, just big enough for a few tomato plants and some flowers. A place that allows pets and is all on one level, has a first floor laundry room and a dishwasher. In a building you don't often get those amenities.
There aren't many choices unless you're practically a millionaire, it seems. Most that I've looked at are luxury minded and you pay a lot for extras that you don't even want.
^^^We feel the same. We were home owners and decided to move and rent. Now, we are looking
to move back for many of the reasons above. We have only 4 months before our lease runs out and
time is running out. Our wish list is modest: a small home, one story in a neighborhood that has
a mix of age groups and a little yard (I miss having a garden).
As luv4 and newenglandgirl said, I do not want to put up with the noise (the apartments may look
nice but are not insulated for noise or cold temps), almost everyone has large dogs that never stop
barking and they seem to like the back of our unit to let them do their business (which smells pretty
bad during the summer- so opening windows during this time is not pleasant). The management
does nothing and why should they since they do make money from pet owners i.e., extra pet
deposit and a higher fee for rent. Then add the damage that these pets cause after moving out
and the corporation that owns this complex collects for damages. Don't get me wrong, I do love
dogs and when we get our own home again, I want to adopt another one.
So for the OP, I would say, as other's have, rent first. It might work out well for you and if not
then you can buy a home.
The day I rent is the day I go into assisted living. I like the idea of getting all my money back and some if I decide to sell. Not be giving it to a landlord and having nothing to show later.
You don't get all your money back with a house unless you have a very high rate of appreciation sufficient to cover your costs. If mortgage interest is 4%, property tax is 1.5%, insurance is 0.5%, maintenance 1%, and repair 1%, the sum is 8%. Your house would have to appreciate at 8% annually in order to break even.
Since this normally doesn't happen over long periods, you still have a net housing expense (which can be compared to rent).
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,705 posts, read 58,031,425 times
Reputation: 46172
Quote:
Originally Posted by augiedogie
OP: I'm in complete agreement. Just rent an apartment or buy an RV and live in RV park. Once we retire next year, this is our plan. We're moving full time in an RV.
... I think this is a movement of the future. Don't buy. You'll just be stuck with a house that will lose value.
This trend is something I am banking on. I trust enough retirees will be doing this to fill my vacancies in my senior friendly rural abodes. I am also converting one of my Multi-family properties to 55+ through attrition. It is just a lot less wear and tear and hassle. (seniors are less transient)
My Rural props also have Long Term RV hookups with community space with laundry and kitchen and shop and garden areas to share. I am equipping TX and WA places with full auto, machining / welding and woodshops and covered storage. Both have very nice peaceful settings with view and wildlife and each are <7 min to full service shopping, <1 hr to international airport and in desirable 'destinations' with lots to do nearby. The RV spots will rent for ~$300/ month with 'credits' for labor contributions. These will be complete in 2015.
Also working on a senior 'cottage community' on 10 acres in town, equipped similarly, tho it already has the shop / salsa dance hall and is next to a nature reserve / ponds. Dealing with county planning for senior advantages that can reduce development costs, (reduced trips (traffic) and utility usage, eco / open space for ground water recharge / gardening / sustainable community ag. Complete by 2020 (I hope...)
Ownership vs rent is still a concern. Seeking advice / feedback:
1) under $80k with guaranty of repurchase? (LLC that owns the community buys back at market rate and resells)
2) Co-op share, regulated ownership, (must pass financial and personality means tests)
3) Share of ownership in LLC / property ~ $80k...+ $300 / month for reserves / taxes (You own a share of the whole place, but not your unit) same as ROC (resident owned community, usually Mobile Home park)
4) Minimal share ($1000) with LT lease agreement (higher monthly ~ $800)
Plan to offer as a co-op or LLC with ownership 'share', so residents can have 2 options, but not 'deed' ownership. (Will still allow us to keep properties and rules that will assure the community stays as congenial as possible based on a formation of very general rules good for all, Co-ops have this down to a science and are able to skirt the 'fair housing laws' and yet not admit problem tenants / share holders). Ownership shares will be marketable with LLC having first right of refusal and validated market rate. Will also have some cottages owned by the LLC or Co-op available for lease with a minor ownership (as with a credit union) to assure undesirable tenants can be legally excluded. Shared home ownership is also becoming of age in the region (popular in some parts of Europe). Definitely need a special relationship / housing structure, (probably with separate qtrs) https://letssharehousing.com/ ROC ROC USA : Home
I rent. That said, I wouldn't rent in an apartment complex or high rise for the reasons some of you give for not wanting to rent at all. Under most circumstances, I would rather rent from a big company than an individual.
It is just as hard to find the perfect rental as it is to find the perfect place to buy. Difference is, if the rental doesn't work out, you can move. After my lease expired, I am month to month, but in my state, landlord and tenant are still bound by the original agreement unless written notice is given. Landlord can give notice and raise my rent or make other changes to the original lease. If I don't like it, I can move.
Once you have downsized and dealt with the first move, it's not a big deal. I am still getting rid of things. The next move, if it comes, will be easier. It might even be exciting to have a reason to relocate.
Another thing to consider is REITs. They normally pay high dividends and you can buy apartment REITs or a variety (commercial, health care, residential) in a mutual fund. When your dividends from REITS, municipal bonds, savings bonds, and treasuries pay for your rent, you are basically exploiting yourself (Ha!).
In fact I rent two apartments, one in a city 400 miles away from my usual place where I work. And no matter how some people here post that as landlords they will get our money, it's hardly true with rents. Don't let their snipes fool you. Most rentals are owned by big corporations and many of those are REITs. Small landlords exploit only a small percentage of renters.
In fact, one of my rentals is all paid for through my municipal bond income, savings bond income, corporate bond income and REIT dividends. A big corporation owns that place. The other place I rent - I'm working on covering that too. It's also owned by a big corporation.
You don't get all your money back with a house unless you have a very high rate of appreciation sufficient to cover your costs. If mortgage interest is 4%, property tax is 1.5%, insurance is 0.5%, maintenance 1%, and repair 1%, the sum is 8%. Your house would have to appreciate at 8% annually in order to break even.
Since this normally doesn't happen over long periods, you still have a net housing expense (which can be compared to rent).
O.K., but you left out a couple of things:
1. The mortgage interest and the property tax are tax deductions on your income tax.
2. Every month's payment results in some equity gain - very little at the beginning of the loan, but an increasing amount as time passes.
1. The mortgage interest and the property tax are tax deductions on your income tax.
Most homeowners don't have enough itemizable deductions to exceed the standard deduction anyway. When they do, it is typically by a small amount such as $2,000. A 25% tax bracket deduction of $2,000 over the std deduction would only take $500 off your tax bill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider
2. Every month's payment results in some equity gain - very little at the beginning of the loan, but an increasing amount as time passes.
This is already accounted for, because only the mortgage interest was taken as a cost, not the entire principal and interest payment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider
Those two things need to be figured in.
see above.
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.
