Marin columnist slams SF's hypocrisy in housing (worth, buying)

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

Marin needs more housing and SF certainly needs more housing. Same with the entire peninsula and Silicon Valley. Solving he housing problem requires development. The Houston metro area over the last decade has added more units of housing than the entire state of California. That is why housing is so expensive here. It is basic supply and demand.

Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner!

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by brightdoglover

The Atlantic? Houston is quite far from the Atlantic, actually. Perhaps you meant the Gulf of Mexico. Anyway, the flooding was from the rain, not the ocean, at least in Houston.

Not that this really matters, but the Gulf of Mexico is part of the Atlantic Ocean.

Carry on.

[aslowdodge]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

401ks are also free money guaranteed with match unlike houses. Also I'm closer to retiring than owning a house. Also housing appreciation is no guarantee, it can under perform. Much of money does go into taxable anyway because I fill all my retirement accounts.

are you saying your 401k won't ever underperform or lose value?

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by aslowdodge

are you saying your 401k won't ever underperform or lose value?

It can't underperform the index because it is the index.

[aslowdodge]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

It can't underperform the index because it is the index.

But could it go down in value?

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by aslowdodge

But could it go down in value?

Houses can too, this is a dumb argument. The sp500 outperformed the Bay Area from 1982-1999

[aslowdodge]

You can make anything look good if you want to pick and choose time lines. Why would you pick a time period so long ago? It doesn't apply to now.
You're the one who said houses are going up 25% a year. If true you have a 125% ROI. Well, that is unless you were just making up unsubstantiated numbers like 25% appreciation. Show me any time in the SP500 where you picked up 125% in any one year time period like the example you set forth.
Plus with so many people talking about the stock market having an adjustment, I might be concerned about it.

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by aslowdodge

You can make anything look good if you want to pick and choose time lines. Why would you pick a time period so long ago? It doesn't apply to now.
You're the one who said houses are going up 25% a year. If true you have a 125% ROI. Well, that is unless you were just making up unsubstantiated numbers like 25% appreciation. Show me any time in the SP500 where you picked up 125% in any one year time period like the example you set forth.
Plus with so many people talking about the stock market having an adjustment, I might be concerned about it.

If the stock market crashes (and Tech companies) the houses which rely on those companies will go down too.

[aslowdodge]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

If the stock market crashes (and Tech companies) the houses which rely on those companies will go down too.

Off course that would probably happen . So if you are worried about a house going down, you should also be worried your 401 will also go down so both are a risk. Isn't it better to make 125% on your money on a house than less than 30% in the market?
You said you got tax breaks for your 401k, you might well get a tax break for the interest write off too on a house.

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by aslowdodge

Off course that would probably happen . So if you are worried about a house going down, you should also be worried your 401 will also go down so both are a risk. Isn't it better to make 125% on your money on a house than less than 30% in the market?
You said you got tax breaks for your 401k, you might well get a tax break for the interest write off too on a house.

25% some years, this is unsustainable hence why it's not worth buying now. Also you're boring now I'm adding you to the "ignored list"