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.
Kellz,
What town are you in?
How long is your commute?
Do what you need to do to move from Dutchess into Westchester.
You will shorten both your commutes, and have fewer "hick" neighbors.
You will also be in better school systems.
Shouldhaveleft, I am not bored. I want to figure stuff out before rates go back up and prices increase. Then, I truly will be stuck in a 1 br apt... with kids.
I am a Teaching Aide... with a very low salary, basically earning 1/4 of a starting teacher salary (although I am fully certified with a masters degree). My husband is the "bread winner". We have 10%+ saved for a 300+ house and will have more saved by next spring, when we plan to buy. We are currently prequalified for a $350 house, but would like to spend under that.
Actually, this isn't correct. Depending on the area, you definitely can afford a house with $30K.
Putting $30k down on a $300k house is what people who can't afford a house do.
20% down, or it's a non-starter.
Either you don't make enough, or don't have the financial discipline to save.
Either way, you can't afford it (even though some idiot bank will lend you the money with PMI)
You think demand increases when rates go up?
Think again. Econ 101.
Demand can increase when rates go up because demand is not purely dependent on rates. You need to get past Econ 101. Rates are a single variable, demand is multifactorial and any one of those, or a combination, can outweigh the influence of rates.
Putting $30k down on a $300k house is what people who can't afford a house do.
20% down, or it's a non-starter.
Either you don't make enough, or don't have the financial discipline to save.
Either way, you can't afford it (even though some idiot bank will lend you the money with PMI)
While I agree that it's better to put 20% down because you have a bigger equity cushion, it does not follow that you can't afford a house if you only have 10% to put down and can get a loan. You make it sound as if it's not possible for the poster to afford a house given those facts, and that is CLEARLY WRONG.
I know a number of people who have put 10% down, and the cost of the mortgage, property taxes, and PMI is significantly lower than what they were paying before for rent. Does the fact that they're not using "best practices" of a 20% down payment mean they simply cannot afford a house? It does in your world, but not in mine.
Borrowers who don't have as much cash to put down are simply riskier, and they accordingly pay a higher interest rate (when you factor in PMI) as part of the premium for that risk. All things being equal, it's better to have a bigger down payment, but the lack of a 20% down payment does not ipso facto mean that you can't afford a house.
This is basic finance, by the way. It works the same way in corporate finance. Investment grade companies can borrow money at FAR lower interest rates than companies who are rated "junk" (meaning below investment grade). Does this mean that companies who can only borrow in the junk bond market shouldn't borrow because it costs significantly more for them to borrow? Or that hedge funds who buy junk bonds shouldn't because there's ostensibly more risk?
I'm interested to hear your response to this.
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.
