Well said, my wife are planning on have kids. Right now we have 2700 sf for the two of us, plus a 1000sf unfinished basement. My motivation to make more money trading is to pay for a cleaning service! We realized even with kids we could go down to 1800 sf. My mom lived in a country house in upstate NY with 3 siblings and 2 parents in 1800 sf. They managed just fine. Most Europeans don't even own a damn house. If we sell this place I may just downsize and pay cash in a couple of years. No mortgage, that would be beautiful. That would be stree free trading at it's best!
news like that and the market closes at a new historical high!!!! soft landing hahahaha, yeaaa right!
housing prices in west la, santa monica, beverly hills, have not gone down at all...... nada zip in fact i would say they are more expensive than last year, or at least equal I see no sign of this 17% drop in prices here
If history is any key, this will take many years to sort out. Lets look at this from a stock perspective and then contrast/compare it to the housing situation. It took two years for Yahoo to go from its high in 2000 to its low before it started going up. Now keep in mind, Yahoo, the stock, is a highly traded equity where people simply push a button and liquidate. Houses are much harder to liquidate. So given it took 2 years for a highly inflated equity to go from a frothy top to a spectacular bottom. How long would it take for the housing sector to go from top to bottom? It will take many years, at least 3-5 to see the bottom. I wouldnt go near mortgage companies or homebuilders. I dont believe there will be a bottom. Now they might be short term trades, but I would not touch them as a long term investment. I dont think the bottom has been seen and wont be seen for another 3-5. In the meantime, unfortunately, there will be those who are FORCED to buy a house for one reason or another. These people will be buying in on a downwardly trading investment much like those who chose to buy Yahoo in 2001 thinking that the bottom was near. Its those people who will have to wait several years until the value is fully back into their house. That is the sad part. I did work for Wells Fargo during the 90s in California. I can tell you that I was still receiving calls from people who were backward on their houses as late as 1997. There were many people who sold for a loss in the 90s. Yep, its true.
Interestingly, in our area (central FL) prices are down only 3% close to the center of Orlando, and things are moving. Slowly, but they are moving. Not sure if this is the DCB (Dead cat bounce) or if it just represents sufficient demand to mitigate the lousy housing market. Six to 9 months or so should tell the tale.
What is your opinion on real estate in the Mid-west, or in places where RE wasn't part of the boom? Would any of you own property there? I own a small rental in KC, and from Zillow.com, it shows a pretty nice appreciation within the last year (not sure of how accurate it is...). But in anycase, I'm curious to see what others think.
Think it depends on what the local economy is based upon. If the local industrial base is manufacturing (like flint MI - aside, one of the highest crime cities in the country now), forget it. Would get rid of that in a hurry. I think the rust belt is in for some severe pain - its the real "new south." But will be cheap to pick up unimproved land there eventually. If the local industrial base is either services, or farming & other food processing areas, or related to mining, logging, etc... should be OK because those areas are less likely to be outsourced, resulting in loss of jobs, etc. Favorable tax structures in FL and NV should keep real estate relatively bid as retirees continue to move to these areas to maintain their portfolios intact. Not saying that you'll make money there - you just will be less likely to lose money longer term on a properly priced property.