So the options are:Doesn't sound like their options were overextending themselves into a house or living on the streets.
1. Pay more for a mortgage in town
2. Drive from far, far way and still get stuck paying the new Bush high-gas price tax
3. Live on the streets....
I didn't say 'more expensive', I said 'just as expensive'. Apartments in these parts set their rates by taking the average price per square foot in the area and multiplying it by the square ft of the apt....Where do you live that apartments are more expensive than houses to live in? For everything you get, yes. As for living space, no. At least not in my 25+ years I have been aware of such prices.
You didn't answer my question of whether or not you thought that the government should provide housing or to explain where you stand. You can do that next.
To answer your question, no the options are not only:
1. Pay more for a mortgage in town
2. Drive from far, far way and still get stuck paying the new Bush high-gas price tax
3. Live on the streets....
There is also:
4. Rent until you can afford the house you want
5. Buy the house you can afford, not the one that you want
and I'm sure others as well. Tell me, are you either paying for a mortgage you can't afford or living on the streets?
When I lived in LA, I couldn't afford a house so I rented. My rent was equal to mortgages in other parts of the country, but not where I lived. I could have moved far out of town and bought a house I could afford but I made a choice to continue to rent while I lived there rather than get in over my head. Taking the interest only loan is a risk, and you can't complain if you take risks that don't work out. And it is not the fault of a company who is trying to make a profit. That's what they do. They can't all be non-profits.
^^Or go home to Moma and Daddy and sponge off them. That's
what Dan did.
When you’re single you can risk to live in a shadier part of town, but with kids, on top of making daily costs double, triple, or quadruple, depending on the number of kids you have, are influenced by things like good schools and friends. So many families don't make the decision to buy into burbs' simply out of ego, but out of necessity for their kids, and if they can get into a home and pay about the same as a apt (about 1,000-1,300 here for a 3 bedroom apt) then why not? At least, that is the enticement....and I'm sure others as well. Tell me, are you either paying for a mortgage you can't afford or living on the streets?
When I lived in LA, I couldn't afford a house so I rented. My rent was equal to mortgages in other parts of the country, but not where I lived. I could have moved far out of town and bought a house I could afford but I made a choice to continue to rent while I lived there rather than get in over my head. Taking the interest only loan is a risk, and you can't complain if you take risks that don't work out. And it is not the fault of a company who is trying to make a profit. That's what they do. They can't all be non-profits
once again, I'll ask the same question:
Do you want government to provide housing to everyone? What is your stance on this?
He wants to knock the people who borrowed when they shouldn't have, yet castigate the government for allowing those individuals to make a dumb decision. All in all, a typical Nbadan thread.
Well first of all, we have to put the brakes on the real estate speculation going on in the city before it prices families out of the city like in Austin....drive around, there are two San Antonio's....and it's only a matter of time before older neighborhoods are revitalized and the po' are no mo'....
So people are en led to live in certain neighborhoods?
It was the feds that dropped rates to 1% that led to overborrowing...it was the real estate realtor or agent and the broker who reassured the borrower that buying that home with a 2-5 year interest-only loan was a safe bet....there's plenty of blame to go around, but keep blaming just the buyer who got suckered..
NO, I was just explaining why people fall for these sucker-loans.....
At the end of the day who else is to blame? Nobody makes you sign those papers. Don't buy the most expensive house you can qualify for and by all means get a fixed rate when rates are in the 5 to 7% range.
Right, suckers signed up.
Exactly. If its too good to be true, it probably is.
...and people who just wanted to do right by their kids...
Nobody's en led to home ownership if they really can't afford it.
40% of our nation's kids don't even get enough to eat or live below the poverty level...it's disgraceful......if SA want's to be like Austin and other cities in other States where home speculation has priced families out of the city, we are well on our way....we need city leadership on this issue....affordable housing....affordable day-care, affordable health-care......we don't need to be throwing money at toll-roads which will be obsolete....
40%?
link?
And how do we put a brake on speculation? By putting a limit on the price you can sell your home for? Prices get driven up because people are willing to pay more and get in bidding wars to get into certain neighborhoods. You have every right to buy a house. The kind of house you get depends upon what you can afford. You can't live beyond your means. It is healthier to shop and eat at Whole Foods, but it costs more. You can't just say Whole Foods has to lower their prices because it would benefit more people to have the ability to eat healthier. People need to understand that basic fact. Perhaps we should start teaching those kinds of subjects at the high school level so that everyone has the opportunity to learn about it. I used to manage many people who refused to live within their means. They were constantly buying on credit and spending entire paychecks on entertainment and luxury items they had no business buying when they were late with rent. We need to learn fiscal responsibility. Whatever financial arrangements you get into, you are responsible. I'm baffled that people can make such large purchases without fully understanding the costs and risks. That is just foolish in my opinion.
If you want to talk about America's en lement generation, perhaps you should discuss those who think that someone else (the government) is responsible for everything bad that happens in their life and accept that each individual needs to think their choices through before they make them.
Ummmm, who's throwing money at the toll roads other then the people wanting to build them?
Dude, you are the ultimate "knee-jerk" guy.
What is your solution Dan?
I bet it is socialism.
Horse hockey! Throw those numbers out there and hope
they stick, right?
How many people have you even read of that has starved
to death in this country? Look at the obesity epidemic
in this country and tell me one more time who isn't getting
enough to eat. If they are it is only through neglect
of the parents.
You will learn one of these days that government doesn't
really solve any problem. In most cases they make it
more complicated and not solveable. You want someone
who pays six hundred dollars for a toilet seat looking
out for your welfare, I don't. Or spends hundreds of
thousands of dollars to ship two washers looking out
for your welfare, I don't.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
