Pages: 1 2 3

 

2010-06-28 03:59:10
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6696|'Murka

Phrozenbot wrote:

13/f/taiwan wrote:

The house that I'm living in now was purchased in 1990 for $250,000. 20 years later, you can put it on the market for $1,000,000 and it will sell within a few weeks. When my Grandfather brought it all he had to do was rent out the 2nd floor and basement as well as add on what he would of paid in rent and that took care of the mortgage each month for 15 years. Now my Grandmother(Grandfather passed away 10 years ago) makes $36,000 from rent each year. After subtracting all her yearly finances she comes out with 10k a year. All her kids are married and moved away so she has an entire floor to herself.
1 million dollars, in this market? Are you joking?

No accounts for inflation, property taxes, maintenance, etc? You're dense if you didn't even bother taking that into account.
My in-laws are trying to sell their home in NorCal. Their real estate agent said they're only selling homes under $200k and over $600k right now. Granted, real estate is regional, but it seems like the true high-end (vice speculatively inflated) market isn't really having a problem anywhere right now.

Last edited by FEOS (2010-06-28 03:59:40)

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2010-06-28 04:56:43
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7095|Nårvei

JohnG@lt wrote:

There was no fraud. No one put a gun to your head and told you to buy a home during a housing BOOM. Boom means there will be a bust coming at some point.
Home of the brave, land of the free.

Quite simpleton G@lt, nobody expected a lasting bust like this ...

JohnG@lt wrote:

It's not like the banks were building and selling homes themselves. Since you're all now defaulting on your homes, should the banks be able to go after the money the sellers made? Of course not. Just sit there and sulk about how the big meanie bank loan officer forced you to take out a loan to buy something you had no interest in buying. You signed a contract to buy an overpriced house. Suck it up.
Seeing as the banks are partially to blame for this they should also partially pick up the bill ... your economy will never recover if you leave the populace in economic ruins for a generation or two ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2010-06-28 06:10:33
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6391|eXtreme to the maX
The banks were giving loans to people who didn't have a hope in hell of paying so the bond traders could make their bonuses.
They weren't quite ramming them down peoples throats but they weren't behaving ethically either.
This, in large part, is what brought down the system - and devalued peoples homes.

The book I mentioned in the book thread listed a mexican fruit-picker on 14k a year being given a 750k loan, and a Las Vegas stripper with 5 investment properties.

Lack of regulation and pure greed caused a lot of it, but people should also learn to spot inflated bubbles.
Really houses are worth land value and rebuilding costs, less depreciation as the house approaches its useful life.

The banks should pick up some of the bill, so should the govt, but more likely the little guy will get screwed.
Fuck Israel
2010-06-28 06:16:54
nlsme1
Member
+32|5702
The little guys should pick up the fact they signed a contract. ATG was not a LV stripper. Nor was he a migrant fruit picker. He made a choice of his own free will, and him playing the "little guy" card will only hurt all the other "little guys".
2010-06-28 06:23:24
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6391|eXtreme to the maX

nlsme1 wrote:

The little guys should pick up the fact they signed a contract. ATG was not a LV stripper. Nor was he a migrant fruit picker. He made a choice of his own free will, and him playing the "little guy" card will only hurt all the other "little guys".
True, however the banks brought the system down just as the people failing to make their mortgage payments brought it down.

If you make what seems a sensible investment, and some crapball wilfully devalues your investment for you, who do you blame?
We all know the market can go up or down, but taking huge risks with the whole property and investment system so a few bankers can make their bonuses is wrong.
Fuck Israel
2010-06-28 11:24:40
Phrozenbot
Member
+632|6901|do not disturb

FEOS wrote:

Phrozenbot wrote:

13/f/taiwan wrote:

The house that I'm living in now was purchased in 1990 for $250,000. 20 years later, you can put it on the market for $1,000,000 and it will sell within a few weeks. When my Grandfather brought it all he had to do was rent out the 2nd floor and basement as well as add on what he would of paid in rent and that took care of the mortgage each month for 15 years. Now my Grandmother(Grandfather passed away 10 years ago) makes $36,000 from rent each year. After subtracting all her yearly finances she comes out with 10k a year. All her kids are married and moved away so she has an entire floor to herself.
1 million dollars, in this market? Are you joking?

No accounts for inflation, property taxes, maintenance, etc? You're dense if you didn't even bother taking that into account.
My in-laws are trying to sell their home in NorCal. Their real estate agent said they're only selling homes under $200k and over $600k right now. Granted, real estate is regional, but it seems like the true high-end (vice speculatively inflated) market isn't really having a problem anywhere right now.
That may be so, but 13/f/taiwan aka JihadOfTheNight seemed to suggest any average home could turn into a million dollars. That happened in some places in California during the housing bubble, but this market is simply too saturated and people's incomes have not risen that much to support housing that expensive on average. Housing starts are a little over half of what they used to be in 1990...
2010-06-28 12:07:43
Ilocano
buuuurrrrrrppppp.......
+341|6952

Phrozenbot wrote:

That may be so, but 13/f/taiwan aka JihadOfTheNight seemed to suggest any average home could turn into a million dollars. That happened in some places in California during the housing bubble, but this market is simply too saturated and people's incomes have not risen that much to support housing that expensive on average. Housing starts are a little over half of what they used to be in 1990...
Zillow/Redfin houses in San Marino, CA.  Price out from 20 years ago to today.   Due in large part by the influx of wealthy Chinese.

And to nlsme1, I agree.  Housing can be investments, if you are smart by buying only during down markets.  Rents/leases on comparable houses near my properties are at least double my mortgage payments.

Last edited by Ilocano (2010-06-28 12:10:01)

2010-06-28 12:45:02
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5544|foggy bottom
the house I live in the shitty part of altadena was bought for a little over 100K in the mid 80's and its worth the mid 400K range today, after the prices have dropped.
Tu Stultus Es
2010-06-28 12:45:17
Phrozenbot
Member
+632|6901|do not disturb

Ilocano wrote:

Phrozenbot wrote:

That may be so, but 13/f/taiwan aka JihadOfTheNight seemed to suggest any average home could turn into a million dollars. That happened in some places in California during the housing bubble, but this market is simply too saturated and people's incomes have not risen that much to support housing that expensive on average. Housing starts are a little over half of what they used to be in 1990...
Zillow/Redfin houses in San Marino, CA.  Price out from 20 years ago to today.   Due in large part by the influx of wealthy Chinese.

And to nlsme1, I agree.  Housing can be investments, if you are smart by buying only during down markets.  Rents/leases on comparable houses near my properties are at least double my mortgage payments.
Valued for =/= easily sell for. Rich neighborhoods are expensive, that is to be expected. To assume homes make good investments because a few homes sometimes leap astronomically in value when bought at such a low price is being fairly unrealistic. Anything you buy at severely low market value, and successfully sell for at market value could be considered a good investment, but there are many people who have been burned by trying to flip houses.

Meh.

Last edited by Phrozenbot (2010-06-28 12:46:06)

2010-06-28 12:59:20
Ilocano
buuuurrrrrrppppp.......
+341|6952

Phrozenbot wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

Phrozenbot wrote:

That may be so, but 13/f/taiwan aka JihadOfTheNight seemed to suggest any average home could turn into a million dollars. That happened in some places in California during the housing bubble, but this market is simply too saturated and people's incomes have not risen that much to support housing that expensive on average. Housing starts are a little over half of what they used to be in 1990...
Zillow/Redfin houses in San Marino, CA.  Price out from 20 years ago to today.   Due in large part by the influx of wealthy Chinese.

And to nlsme1, I agree.  Housing can be investments, if you are smart by buying only during down markets.  Rents/leases on comparable houses near my properties are at least double my mortgage payments.
Valued for =/= easily sell for. Rich neighborhoods are expensive, that is to be expected. To assume homes make good investments because a few homes sometimes leap astronomically in value when bought at such a low price is being fairly unrealistic. Anything you buy at severely low market value, and successfully sell for at market value could be considered a good investment, but there are many people who have been burned by trying to flip houses.

Meh.
Yeah, many of those who got burned flipping houses were those who should have never been in the house flipping business to begin with.  Others, plain and simple, greed. 

GS, there are shitty parts of Altadena?
2010-06-28 20:05:15
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6696|'Murka

Phrozenbot wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Phrozenbot wrote:


1 million dollars, in this market? Are you joking?

No accounts for inflation, property taxes, maintenance, etc? You're dense if you didn't even bother taking that into account.
My in-laws are trying to sell their home in NorCal. Their real estate agent said they're only selling homes under $200k and over $600k right now. Granted, real estate is regional, but it seems like the true high-end (vice speculatively inflated) market isn't really having a problem anywhere right now.
That may be so, but 13/f/taiwan aka JihadOfTheNight seemed to suggest any average home could turn into a million dollars. That happened in some places in California during the housing bubble, but this market is simply too saturated and people's incomes have not risen that much to support housing that expensive on average. Housing starts are a little over half of what they used to be in 1990...
True. They're talking about an impending housing shortage here in Texas due to fewer/almost no homes being built on spec since lending rules have changed. Builders simply aren't going to put themselves at risk building on spec anymore. Which means existing home values should increase...
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2010-06-30 17:22:40
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5544|foggy bottom

Ilocano wrote:

Phrozenbot wrote:

Ilocano wrote:


Zillow/Redfin houses in San Marino, CA.  Price out from 20 years ago to today.   Due in large part by the influx of wealthy Chinese.

And to nlsme1, I agree.  Housing can be investments, if you are smart by buying only during down markets.  Rents/leases on comparable houses near my properties are at least double my mortgage payments.
Valued for =/= easily sell for. Rich neighborhoods are expensive, that is to be expected. To assume homes make good investments because a few homes sometimes leap astronomically in value when bought at such a low price is being fairly unrealistic. Anything you buy at severely low market value, and successfully sell for at market value could be considered a good investment, but there are many people who have been burned by trying to flip houses.

Meh.
Yeah, many of those who got burned flipping houses were those who should have never been in the house flipping business to begin with.  Others, plain and simple, greed. 

GS, there are shitty parts of Altadena?
nw pasadena/altadena area around john muir high school up to altadena drive  to north and los robles to the east
Tu Stultus Es
2010-07-02 09:10:17
JahManRed
wank
+646|6913|IRELAND

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/14615/ATG.jpg
Spotted this the other day. Good to see you branching out ATG................
2010-07-03 08:04:38
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6834|San Diego, CA, USA

Dilbert_X wrote:

The banks were giving loans to people who didn't have a hope in hell of paying so the bond traders could make their bonuses.
They weren't quite ramming them down peoples throats but they weren't behaving ethically either.
The government also had a hand in this, through regulations they forced banks to give loans to "low income earners" as part of the "Home Affordability Act".  Basically strong arming banks that were federally backed to give loans to people who could barely pay the interest on the loan while putting 3% or NOTHING down on a home.

Couple this with the lax business environment that you mentioned already that lowered standards on mortgages and it was a perfect storm.

Everyone had a hand in this and everyone is to blame including the homeowner who purchased a home with a mortgage more than 40% of their monthly income.
2010-07-06 08:46:22
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|6981|NJ

Harmor wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

The banks were giving loans to people who didn't have a hope in hell of paying so the bond traders could make their bonuses.
They weren't quite ramming them down peoples throats but they weren't behaving ethically either.
The government also had a hand in this, through regulations they forced banks to give loans to "low income earners" as part of the "Home Affordability Act".  Basically strong arming banks that were federally backed to give loans to people who could barely pay the interest on the loan while putting 3% or NOTHING down on a home.

Couple this with the lax business environment that you mentioned already that lowered standards on mortgages and it was a perfect storm.

Everyone had a hand in this and everyone is to blame including the homeowner who purchased a home with a mortgage more than 40% of their monthly income.
The CRA loans really had nothing to do with it. It was the stated income loans that every bank issued out. The CRA loans were actually highly conservative. Of a matter of fact the requirements on CRA's were only really laxed on credit scores, but the DTI(debt to Income) requirements where under 36% maybe if 32% DTI requirement(it's been a long time since I've even looked into them). While the normal loans can go up to 55%.

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard