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.
SF Bay Area Real Estate has also had a good run over the same period.
A 65k Probate Home in 1987 would bring 500k in the blink of an eye plus nearly thirty years of income... also California Property Tax is tied to purchase price plus improvements.
Of course the 500k home now was down to 100k in the deepest moments for the bust in 2009.... but rents actually increased as hard as this might be to believe.
Is this a great effing country or what? (exasperated)
Is this a great effing country or what? (exasperated)
Movement is required for something to happen or we would be like Detroit... stagnate.
No need to go back decades... homes were still bargains in 2012... the period from 2009-12 was it.
I posted before in 2009 it was as if 20 years of appreciation vanished... gone, kaput, etc...
Thing is rents really held steady even with prices down... at least for me because I didn't raise rents on existing tenants when prices were up... only on new tenancies.
I would have to agree with freemkt... this is a great country.... folks that were priced out with no hope as late as 2007 were able to buy at fire sale prices.
sigh. When you make monthly payment on an amortizing mortgage (as opposed to an interest-only mortgage), a non-zero portion of said mortgage payment is applied to principal, which is effectively retained by the mortgagor as home equity, or 'forced savings' if you will.
That's what I thought you meant.
You're confusing acquiring an asset (the definition of an asset is "something that provides a future benefit") with financing the purchase of the asset. The principal portion of a mortgage payment is not retained. It is money repaid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
... What if I want to purchase housing services by the decade?
I have a tenant who pays me a full year in advance. She has horrible credit because of bad financial decisions leading to personal bankruptcy, but she has plenty of cash flow from her work in a legal brothel.
Movement is required for something to happen or we would be like Detroit... stagnate.
No need to go back decades... homes were still bargains in 2012... the period from 2009-12 was it.
I posted before in 2009 it was as if 20 years of appreciation vanished... gone, kaput, etc...
Thing is rents really held steady even with prices down... at least for me because I didn't raise rents on existing tenants when prices were up... only on new tenancies.
I would have to agree with freemkt... this is a great country.... folks that were priced out with no hope as late as 2007 were able to buy at fire sale prices.
Dubious. Most people with no hope as late as 2007 still have not been able to buy.
You're confusing acquiring an asset (the definition of an asset is "something that provides a future benefit") with financing the purchase of the asset. The principal portion of a mortgage payment is not retained. It is money repaid.
I have a tenant who pays me a full year in advance. She has horrible credit because of bad financial decisions leading to personal bankruptcy, but she has plenty of cash flow from her work in a legal brothel.
Over in the Renting forum, the prevailing landlord opinion is that tender of a full year in advance is a red flag which should generally disqualify an applicant.
Dubious. Most people with no hope as late as 2007 still have not been able to buy.
Plenty have bought...
Many that bailed did so because they were getting out of a "Bad" deal... I work with a few who proudly told me they traded a $3500 a month mortgage, insurance, taxes of ownership for a $1500 rental and were never going back...
Thing is those rentals are now double or more and the property they walked away from are worth more too... and they never lost their jobs working at the Hospital.
2007 saw SF Bay Area property at all time highs... homes selling for 500k only to fall 50% to even 80% by 2009... it really was this bleak in my part of the Bay Area...
Just because a person can't afford a home priced at 500k has no bearing if that same home is priced at 250k... nothing dubious about it.
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.
