Home buying thread

moonarchia

The Scientific Shitlord
22,886
41,445
I have the opportunity to buy a home in easy walking distance to Notre Dame. I could pay cash for it. I could rent it for sports weekends, football, hockey, and basketball (and the odd lacrosse weekend). Just by renting it I could easily pull in about $40K a year just in weekend rentals. The house would be unoccupied most of the time, giving me the chance to be in it and make sure everything is okay. But a while ago I sold all my rentals and declared I would never do it again. This feels different to me, and I'm contemplating it.

What do you guys think? Worth the risk of getting out of town people partying at a football game in for a weekend to make money while dealing with the consequences of tailgating?
Do it for your family. More income. Another bug out option. Possible place for your son/kids to live in if life goes sideways.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Lanx

<Prior Amod>
64,087
142,210
Maybe not, but every year as I eat the peaches I prefer I take the pits from them and have been throwing them in dirt. Each year this seems to result in around 6-10 peach saplings. I've been accumulating them in planting containers in my back yard right now. So at some point this year I need to find some land to go plant them on. So some day.. in the future... You might eat peaches that come from a can, and were put there by a man, and that man might in fact be me.

As for presidential aspirations... I have no desire to be president of THIS country. Now... Say things should arise which cause a certain state I live in to once again decide it needed to be it's own country. THAT might be of interest.
this must be how i have 1 corn stalk growing in my garden
 

Fucker

Log Wizard
12,409
28,007
The easiest solution is the tax code needs to accurately assess multiple home ownership with a simple sliding scale. If a mom and pop wants 1-2 houses to rent fine, but make it a premium. If an LLC has 50 and the built in maintenance and managers, then make it more. Homes are like any asset, if you can afford it you should buy it. But homes are also needed for a functional society, and policy needs to be promoting availability of housing for people to, you know, actually live in and be part of a community.

Just in this thread alone, how many are land lords? How many bought that either in times past when it was much cheaper, inherited it, or have cash to outbid locals? Nothing wrong with any of that mind you, but it eats housing stock without giving the next generation a chance. And if you can afford it great, but tax it accurately.

A lot of young people suck. A lot of old people suck. Those statements do not alter that unequivocally houses are astronomically more expensive relative to any income metric at any time since the 1950s, save some brief periods around 07-08. You can Google this and find any source. Many who claim to could not pull yourselves from your bootstraps now without doing a lot more than you did.

Society in many cities is only functioning due to legacy real estate. Nurses, teachers, sanitation workers on average cannot afford homes in communities they work based on income unless they bought 3 years ago. That’s a problem.
Taxing landlords will do nothing but raise rent for everyone. Coming up with ever more inane laws and tax policies will do nothing but raise rent for everyone. Coming up with any idea to "stick it to the man" under the guise of affordability will simply make everything more expensive for everyone. Want to go after institutional investors? Grats, now rent in all those apartment complexes just went up. The more people fiddle with housing, the more they break it.

If people want affordable housing, then the powers that be will have to incentivize its development. Give tax breaks to everyone in the development chain and reduce the administrative overhead both in time and money.

As I have mentioned before, the county here owns some land and is planning on developing it. They want 100 350k houses or $450k houses. Those 3200 sq/ft houses could easily be 200 1600 sq/ft houses at $200k a pop if you made them zero lot lines. The problem with that? No politician will want their name associated with McSubdivisions, and no one wants to live near one because it may reduce the value of their property.

all-about-duplex-houses-1-2973513425.jpg
fg.jpg
 
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 user

Burnem Wizfyre

Log Wizard
12,220
20,935
So anyone see these lawsuits going around which apparently is looking to change how deals are done in which the home seller no longer pays the buyers agents commission?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Gravel

Mr. Poopybutthole
38,705
125,729
So anyone see these lawsuits going around which apparently is looking to change how deals are done in which the home seller no longer pays the buyers agents commission?
That would be fucking amazing. The entire thing should be a flat fee, but then no one would want to do it.
 

Lanx

<Prior Amod>
64,087
142,210
i'm looking at possible homes/area for the next move (i might be back to jersey)

and i see this crap

it's obviously a remodel
72f329c015790f64924fd49950df458b.png

how do you remodel but put a janky ass cheap island?

i'm not saying they should have splurged, but they should have made it a permanent fixture w/ either a mini sink or where they raise half of it and have a 4seater bar top
 

TJT

Mr. Poopybutthole
<Gold Donor>
42,248
107,025
i'm looking at possible homes/area for the next move (i might be back to jersey)

and i see this crap

it's obviously a remodel
72f329c015790f64924fd49950df458b.png

how do you remodel but put a janky ass cheap island?

i'm not saying they should have splurged, but they should have made it a permanent fixture w/ either a mini sink or where they raise half of it and have a 4seater bar top

Is it normal in your industry to move as much as you do?
 

OU Ariakas

Diet Dr. Pepper Enjoyer
<Silver Donator>
7,218
19,958
I have the opportunity to buy a home in easy walking distance to Notre Dame. I could pay cash for it. I could rent it for sports weekends, football, hockey, and basketball (and the odd lacrosse weekend). Just by renting it I could easily pull in about $40K a year just in weekend rentals. The house would be unoccupied most of the time, giving me the chance to be in it and make sure everything is okay. But a while ago I sold all my rentals and declared I would never do it again. This feels different to me, and I'm contemplating it.

What do you guys think? Worth the risk of getting out of town people partying at a football game in for a weekend to make money while dealing with the consequences of tailgating?

This is not being a landlord, it is being a property manager for a short term rental. Much different and you would expect the clientele to be different and it to be a much more active and hands on experience. My wife is trying to convince me that we need to grab a place in the Destin area of Florida to do the same thing but with beach vacations; I am terrified of paying 4x what we usually spend for something that we've never done before.
 

TJT

Mr. Poopybutthole
<Gold Donor>
42,248
107,025
They're building these near where I live. 3d printer homes that cost even more than wood ones. Side benefit of also being really ugly!

Most of them look like this rn. $450k+ for a 3/2 <1800 SQFT.

1694354165987.png


 
  • 1WTF
Reactions: 1 user

BoozeCube

The Wokest
<Prior Amod>
50,654
296,588
They're building these near where I live. 3d printer homes that cost even more than wood ones. Side benefit of also being really ugly!

Most of them look like this rn.

View attachment 490093


The world gets dumber. It's a shame too.
 

Haus

<Silver Donator>
12,524
48,687
i'm looking at possible homes/area for the next move (i might be back to jersey)

and i see this crap

it's obviously a remodel
72f329c015790f64924fd49950df458b.png

how do you remodel but put a janky ass cheap island?

i'm not saying they should have splurged, but they should have made it a permanent fixture w/ either a mini sink or where they raise half of it and have a 4seater bar top
Looking at this I will admit that at first glance I thought 'Hey, that dude left his rolling workbench/toolbox in the kitchen"...

But upon further thought, that's NOT a large kitchen. I'll be willing to bet at some point the counter with the sink in it had a peninsula extending out from the wall that probably had the split level bar top and chairs, which they removed to get a more "open" floorplan. Then they realized they lost some valuable counterspace and added the roll in. I also would think twice about a permanent island there as it would directly block up your "magic triangle" (Draw a triangle in any kitchen between the sink, the fridge, and the oven/stove, know that 90% of a person prepping a meal will be walking in those lines....) Here a person making dinner would be walking through it to get from fridge to stove, or fridge to sink. I bet within a week that roll out island is pulled about 6 feet towards the main room to clear the space if you have someone really using the kitchen.
 

Lanx

<Prior Amod>
64,087
142,210
Looking at this I will admit that at first glance I thought 'Hey, that dude left his rolling workbench/toolbox in the kitchen"...

But upon further thought, that's NOT a large kitchen. I'll be willing to bet at some point the counter with the sink in it had a peninsula extending out from the wall that probably had the split level bar top and chairs, which they removed to get a more "open" floorplan. Then they realized they lost some valuable counterspace and added the roll in. I also would think twice about a permanent island there as it would directly block up your "magic triangle" (Draw a triangle in any kitchen between the sink, the fridge, and the oven/stove, know that 90% of a person prepping a meal will be walking in those lines....) Here a person making dinner would be walking through it to get from fridge to stove, or fridge to sink. I bet within a week that roll out island is pulled about 6 feet towards the main room to clear the space if you have someone really using the kitchen.
yea but a lot of ppl love to hang around the island too

more like "hover"
 

Haus

<Silver Donator>
12,524
48,687
yea but a lot of ppl love to hang around the island too

more like "hover"
Which they can do just as well with it about 5-6' towards the camera in that shot and let the person using the kitchen not get pissed at them. ;)
 

MrSpitz

Molten Core Raider
230
-967
I don't think you are getting it. The people that rent "starter" houses from us are not getting pushed out if the market by high prices. They are either unable to qualify for a home loan or move jobs/towns enough that owning would cost more than renting.

The people that should be buying our 2/3 bed 1/2 bath houses would not look twice at them because they are older and small. They are the ones going into crippling debt buying city suburb houses with 4 bedrooms, an office, and a bonus media room when they are newlyweds because that is what they have been told they deserve.

Taxing landlords more would lead to vacant houses, not some sort of home ownership Renaissance.

Taxing multiple home ownership accurately, wether the owner is a mom and pop or corporation is the best way to effectively disincentive wealthier entities, wealthier through whatever means, of taking a disproportionate share of single family homes. Taxing would increase some rents, and also make the prospect of being a landlord more expensive so less people do it. It prioritizes the house as an asset for people to actually live in a community.

This isn’t the politics or otherwise thread so won’t keep making this point. But a number of people here were posting about housing and how they are landlords and the younger generation is weak or lazy etc. The fact is that homes are more expensive relative to income compared to any point in the last 70 years except a few months during the bubble, and the trend is for them to get worse. Policy needs to support capitalism but put guard rails on as well. Supply needs to increase. Renters can save but without gaining equity and current price pressures you can be at a decent job and not be able to afford a house nor have a plausible way to save for a down payment. This situation existed in large cities for a while and is now creeping farther out. Maybe apartment construction will bring rents down, but society cannot tolerate over the even medium term to have housing unaffordable for people to live in if they hadn’t already bought. This is not the same as when you or I were grinding our way up.
 

Blazin

Creative Title
<Nazi Janitors>
6,864
35,837
i'm looking at possible homes/area for the next move (i might be back to jersey)

and i see this crap

it's obviously a remodel
72f329c015790f64924fd49950df458b.png

how do you remodel but put a janky ass cheap island?

i'm not saying they should have splurged, but they should have made it a permanent fixture w/ either a mini sink or where they raise half of it and have a 4seater bar top

If its a fixed island building code will require at least one outlet, now your project just became more complicated
 

OU Ariakas

Diet Dr. Pepper Enjoyer
<Silver Donator>
7,218
19,958
Taxing multiple home ownership accurately, wether the owner is a mom and pop or corporation is the best way to effectively disincentive wealthier entities, wealthier through whatever means, of taking a disproportionate share of single family homes. Taxing would increase some rents, and also make the prospect of being a landlord more expensive so less people do it. It prioritizes the house as an asset for people to actually live in a community.

This isn’t the politics or otherwise thread so won’t keep making this point. But a number of people here were posting about housing and how they are landlords and the younger generation is weak or lazy etc. The fact is that homes are more expensive relative to income compared to any point in the last 70 years except a few months during the bubble, and the trend is for them to get worse. Policy needs to support capitalism but put guard rails on as well. Supply needs to increase. Renters can save but without gaining equity and current price pressures you can be at a decent job and not be able to afford a house nor have a plausible way to save for a down payment. This situation existed in large cities for a while and is now creeping farther out. Maybe apartment construction will bring rents down, but society cannot tolerate over the even medium term to have housing unaffordable for people to live in if they hadn’t already bought. This is not the same as when you or I were grinding our way up.

We are not in some horrible dystopian nightmare where homeownership is sinking to unimaginably low levels; in fact, much like everything else in this country, we are coming off an absolute high and actually returning closer to a century long mean. Have you ever thought that long term home ownership may be a negative to a large portion of the population and they just don't realize it because they have been preached at for so long that owning a home is tied to being successful? Sort of like going to college?

1694367171619.png
 

Gravel

Mr. Poopybutthole
38,705
125,729
It's hard to answer that question for the broader population, since I think so many of us have a bias towards our own upbringing/current means which is likely middle class to lower upper class.

For someone with the means, home ownership is the single best hedge against inflation. I don't like to think of a home as an appreciating asset only because you need a roof no matter what. Yeah, it happens, and even the majority of the time lately. But it shouldn't be a given. As a tool to fight inflation though, when you're talking anywhere from 15-35% of your expenses being housing, it's massive.

But yeah, if you're perennial poor, I'm not sure it makes sense. But I'm not going to say definitely either way since I just have no clue.
 

Palum

what Suineg set it to
26,020
39,814
It's hard to answer that question for the broader population, since I think so many of us have a bias towards our own upbringing/current means which is likely middle class to lower upper class.

For someone with the means, home ownership is the single best hedge against inflation. I don't like to think of a home as an appreciating asset only because you need a roof no matter what. Yeah, it happens, and even the majority of the time lately. But it shouldn't be a given. As a tool to fight inflation though, when you're talking anywhere from 15-35% of your expenses being housing, it's massive.

But yeah, if you're perennial poor, I'm not sure it makes sense. But I'm not going to say definitely either way since I just have no clue.
Well you can buy apartments and condos too. At one point those were very affordable unless you were in a tourist area.

I think the difference is "home" vs. "house".