|
wrote in message oups.com... NOYB wrote: The tax collector sees very little additional income from the rapid appreciation. "Save Our Homes" ensures that the rate can't go up more than 3% per year. ************************** That's a local program, not a general economic situation. Does the 3% limit millage, assessment, or total tax bill? Assessment. When the house sells, does your program carry forward based on the taxes paid by the previous owner (who purchased at a lower price) or does it extend to the new owner who is usually replacing his previous residence with something carrying an even higher price tag? New owner pays the new assessed rate. It's *very* expensive to move from an existing home because you lose the "Save Our Homes" protection. There are a lot of folks who bought their homes on the water for $125k in the 1960's. They're paying tax rates that are around $2-3k per year on properties worth $1.5million. When they sell and downsize to a new condo that they buy for $300k, their taxes *increase*. Of course, the $1.2 million that they netted from the move can pay for a whole lotta' years at the new tax rate. ;-) |
"P.Fritz" wrote in message ... "NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... wrote in message ups.com... NOYB wrote: Chuck is the first person that I've heard say that a home in a rapidly appreciating real estate market is *not* a good investment. **************************** I'm seriously surprised. Your house is a house. It's not an investment. Sky high and soaring housing prices are only a good thing if you own other real estate in addition to your primary home. You can have your home, (which you need), or the money tied up in it, but not both. When you cash out an "investment" your options in life should increase substantially. When you cash out your house, you get to live in a yurt. But a really, really nice yurt. Of course, I could retire to Snellville, buy an entire trailer park, and still put a million in my pocket. I'm really beginning to wonder about some people. An increse in net worth is an increase in net worth. You will have a housing expense whether you rent or invest in a residence. The tax law allows you to invest in a better space than you could rent for the same net cost. Your equity is protected from brankruptcy judgement, The first (150k -250k) capital gains is typically tax free. Damn good investment to me. Let's spread the word! Imagine how high house prices would be if *everybody* knew how wonderful and investment it is. Of course, the monthly income from Chuck's rental properties would go to ****... |
Here's the real life example:
I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit". |
wrote in message ups.com... Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit". Round and round we go...where it stops nobody knows. |
wrote in message ups.com... Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit" But my example had me replacing my current house with my old house (which, BTW, is a nicer *house*...but not on the water). And when I was done with everything, I'd end up in my original house with a mortgage that had been reduced by $250k in just one year. How'd I reduce my mortgage by a quarter of a million dollars in one year? From the *PROFIT* I made in the house on the water. Waterfront homes are appreciating at twice the rate of non-waterfront homes. |
"JimH" wrote in message ... wrote in message ups.com... Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit". Round and round we go...where it stops nobody knows. I wonder if he agrees with asslicker that schnapps is whiskey...........it make as much sense. |
"P.Fritz" wrote in message ... "JimH" wrote in message ... wrote in message ups.com... Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit". Round and round we go...where it stops nobody knows. I wonder if he agrees with asslicker that schnapps is whiskey...........it make as much sense. Some folks just cannot find it in themselves to admit when they are wrong. |
wrote in message ups.com... Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit". Another example for the slow and/or stubborn: Chuck has $100k. He buys a house not on the water for $500k, and puts 20% down. His mortgage is $400k. In one year, he sells the house for $575k. He pays off the mortgage and the realtor, and walks away with $135k. NOYB has $100k. He buys a house on the water for $1m, and puts 10% down. His mortgage is $900k. In one year, he sells the house for $1.5m. He pays off the mortgage and the realtor, and walks away with $510k. They both decide to buy a new home next to each other. The purchase price is $500k. Chuck puts $135k down, takes out a new loan for $365k. NOYB pays cash...and uses the extra $10k leftover to buy a trailer for his boat...and a new T-top, kicker motor, and fishfinder. The money that NOYB would normally pay towards a mortgage on a home now goes towards buying a second home in the mountains. Chuck says "How the hell did that happen!?!?" |
NOYB wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit". Another example for the slow and/or stubborn: Chuck has $100k. He buys a house not on the water for $500k, and puts 20% down. His mortgage is $400k. In one year, he sells the house for $575k. He pays off the mortgage and the realtor, and walks away with $135k. NOYB has $100k. He buys a house on the water for $1m, and puts 10% down. His mortgage is $900k. In one year, he sells the house for $1.5m. He pays off the mortgage and the realtor, and walks away with $510k. They both decide to buy a new home next to each other. The purchase price is $500k. Chuck puts $135k down, takes out a new loan for $365k. NOYB pays cash...and uses the extra $10k leftover to buy a trailer for his boat...and a new T-top, kicker motor, and fishfinder. The money that NOYB would normally pay towards a mortgage on a home now goes towards buying a second home in the mountains. Chuck says "How the hell did that happen!?!?" Yeah, how DID that happen, when you've stated here that you have an interest only mortgage? Not only did you NOT pay cash, you're not even paying down the balance. |
"NOYB" wrote in message link.net... wrote in message ups.com... Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit" But my example had me replacing my current house with my old house (which, BTW, is a nicer *house*...but not on the water). And when I was done with everything, I'd end up in my original house with a mortgage that had been reduced by $250k in just one year. How'd I reduce my mortgage by a quarter of a million dollars in one year? From the *PROFIT* I made in the house on the water. Waterfront homes are appreciating at twice the rate of non-waterfront homes. Or you could just rent........you have no obligation to reinvest your capital gains, thus you have increased your net worth. |
NOYB wrote:
(elementary level example of leverage deleted) Your additional properties are investments. Your house is your home. If you cannot grasp that very simple concept, you likely do not realize that hyper accelerated real estate markets in many parts of the country (Calif being a frequent example) are not always one way streets. When your house that you're choosing not to sell for $1.2 million possibly corrects to a value of $975k, (and you hold the $1mm mortgage you mentioned elsewhere in the thread), it won't be Chuck wondering "How the hell did that happen?" Chuck knows. BTW, I could write the book on leverage. You don't want or need to know the details, but write it I could. |
P.Fritz wrote: "NOYB" wrote in message link.net... wrote in message ups.com... Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit" But my example had me replacing my current house with my old house (which, BTW, is a nicer *house*...but not on the water). And when I was done with everything, I'd end up in my original house with a mortgage that had been reduced by $250k in just one year. How'd I reduce my mortgage by a quarter of a million dollars in one year? From the *PROFIT* I made in the house on the water. Waterfront homes are appreciating at twice the rate of non-waterfront homes. Or you could just rent........you have no obligation to reinvest your capital gains, thus you have increased your net worth. I suppose, you could rent, if your wife took the house in the divorce settlement. After all, seeing how you don't have what it takes to raise a child, you need all the help you can get. What a low life scum you are. |
wrote in message oups.com... Yeah, how DID that happen, when you've stated here that you have an interest only mortgage? Not only did you NOT pay cash, you're not even paying down the balance. LOL! You really do get dumber by the day. |
.... NOYB is
playing a sucker bet, to the sure profit of the bank, the insurance co, & his local tax collector... leaving him holding the risk and an uncertain gain. NOYB wrote: You don't know what you're talking about: Actually, I know exactly what I'm talking about. The tax collector sees very little additional income from the rapid appreciation. "Save Our Homes" ensures that the rate can't go up more than 3% per year. Until the town needs more new schools or a new landfill or a new water treatment plant or it's bonds are about to get downgraded or something. Isn't it amusing that you are determined to avoid having to pay your fair share while urgin tremendous deficits on everybody else... The insurance company also gets very little money from the appreciation. The insurance company isn't taking their profit from appreciation. They're taking it out of your wallet. The bank sees no additional money either. The principal doesn't increase. You have no concept of compund interest, do you? You seem to have a problem distinguishing between your wishful thinking & reality. No surprise considering your political views... DSK |
"Joe" wrote in message news:7AnVd.51855$uc.46260@trnddc08... wrote in message oups.com... Yeah, how DID that happen, when you've stated here that you have an interest only mortgage? Not only did you NOT pay cash, you're not even paying down the balance. LOL! You really do get dumber by the day. Every time you think asslicker has reached his low point, he goes out and proves he's got lots of room to spare. He's the "KING" |
"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... wrote in message oups.com... I suppose, you could rent, if ...the Feds seized your home for growing marijuana. I hope not, that would be seizing a liability as opposed to seizing an asset. ;-) |
NOYB wrote: wrote in message oups.com... I suppose, you could rent, if ...the Feds seized your home for growing marijuana. There you go, NOYB. I once thought you had at least enough fortitude to not stoop to the level of Fritz, JimH, and Smithers, ie: letting things pop into your head without any facts to back it up. But, alas, I see that you are at the bottom of the barrel with them, now, making up stories about me in order to bolster your pathetic lowly ego. Now, do you have ANY facts to back your allegations up? |
Joe wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Yeah, how DID that happen, when you've stated here that you have an interest only mortgage? Not only did you NOT pay cash, you're not even paying down the balance. LOL! You really do get dumber by the day. Really? You don't think that NOYB has an interest only mortgage? YOU are the dumb one, JoeTechnician. He has stated just EXACTLY that, right here. |
NOYB wrote: wrote in message ups.com... NOYB wrote: Chuck is the first person that I've heard say that a home in a rapidly appreciating real estate market is *not* a good investment. **************************** I'm seriously surprised. Your house is a house. It's not an investment. Sky high and soaring housing prices are only a good thing if you own other real estate in addition to your primary home. You can have your home, (which you need), or the money tied up in it, but not both. When you cash out an "investment" your options in life should increase substantially. When you cash out your house, you get to live in a yurt. But a really, really nice yurt. Of course, I could retire to Snellville, buy an entire trailer park, and still put a million in my pocket. Yeah, right. You are financially scraping by. You've said here that you have an interest only mortgage. Anyone solvent would be paying on the principal. |
NOYB wrote: wrote in message oups.com... NOYB wrote: There is one home (out of 31 for sale in my neighborhood) under 7 figures. It's 1500 sq ft., was built in 1960, and is priced at $959k. ************ 31 homes for sale in your "neighborhood"? Either its a big neighborhood, or that full size Bush billboard in your front yard has everybody p-o'd. :-) (kidding) Illustrating my point, exactly. Lets say you paid $500,000 for you pad, and it would now sell for $1.3mm. If you sold your house for that price and needed to move to another just as nice, it would cost you $1.3mm to buy an equivalent home in the same area. Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? I could always sell my house and move a little bit inland...and make a huge profit in the process. Or I could move to Lee County instead of Collier County. This from a person who has an interest only loan because he's maxed out..... |
NOYB wrote: wrote in message ups.com... NOYB wrote: Chuck is the first person that I've heard say that a home in a rapidly appreciating real estate market is *not* a good investment. **************************** I'm seriously surprised. Your house is a house. It's not an investment. Sky high and soaring housing prices are only a good thing if you own other real estate in addition to your primary home. You can have your home, (which you need), or the money tied up in it, but not both. When you cash out an "investment" your options in life should increase substantially. When you cash out your house, you get to live in a yurt. But a really, really nice yurt. Of course, I could retire to Snellville, buy an entire trailer park, and still put a million in my pocket. Really? How many "trailer parks" are there in Snellville, GA? Do you want the answer? |
P.Fritz wrote: "JimH" wrote in message ... wrote in message ups.com... Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit". Round and round we go...where it stops nobody knows. I wonder if he agrees with asslicker that schnapps is whiskey...........it make as much sense. I wonder if you'll ever be man enough to quit acting like a spoiled little ****ing child. What a pathetic crumb of **** you are. |
P.Fritz wrote: "JimH" wrote in message ... wrote in message ups.com... Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit". Round and round we go...where it stops nobody knows. I wonder if he agrees with asslicker that schnapps is whiskey...........it make as much sense. I wonder if you'll ever answer my question to you, you low life scum bag. |
P.Fritz wrote: "NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... wrote in message oups.com... I suppose, you could rent, if ...the Feds seized your home for growing marijuana. I hope not, that would be seizing a liability as opposed to seizing an asset. ;-) Well, smart ass, tell the group what you know. What type of house do I live in? What is it worth? Where did you get this data? Have any answers, or are you just wasting your cum stinking breath? |
wrote in message oups.com... NOYB wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit". Another example for the slow and/or stubborn: Chuck has $100k. He buys a house not on the water for $500k, and puts 20% down. His mortgage is $400k. In one year, he sells the house for $575k. He pays off the mortgage and the realtor, and walks away with $135k. NOYB has $100k. He buys a house on the water for $1m, and puts 10% down. His mortgage is $900k. In one year, he sells the house for $1.5m. He pays off the mortgage and the realtor, and walks away with $510k. They both decide to buy a new home next to each other. The purchase price is $500k. Chuck puts $135k down, takes out a new loan for $365k. NOYB pays cash...and uses the extra $10k leftover to buy a trailer for his boat...and a new T-top, kicker motor, and fishfinder. The money that NOYB would normally pay towards a mortgage on a home now goes towards buying a second home in the mountains. Chuck says "How the hell did that happen!?!?" Yeah, how DID that happen, when you've stated here that you have an interest only mortgage? Not only did you NOT pay cash, you're not even paying down the balance. Appreciation you dimwit. |
wrote in message oups.com... NOYB wrote: (elementary level example of leverage deleted) Your additional properties are investments. Your house is your home. If you cannot grasp that very simple concept, you likely do not realize that hyper accelerated real estate markets in many parts of the country (Calif being a frequent example) are not always one way streets. When your house that you're choosing not to sell for $1.2 million possibly corrects to a value of $975k, (and you hold the $1mm mortgage you mentioned elsewhere in the thread), it won't be Chuck wondering "How the hell did that happen?" Chuck knows. BTW, I could write the book on leverage. You don't want or need to know the details, but write it I could. And I could write the preface. (I did notice how you didn't address the facts though) |
"NOYB" wrote in message link.net... wrote in message oups.com... NOYB wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? ***************** No, it's merely the reorganization of numbers on the asset side of your balance sheet. Even if your house was in investment, you haven't realized a gain until you sell it. Your neighbor's sale didn't put any money in your pocket. You need the house to live in. The amount of money the house is worth is meaningless, as long as you are going to personally consume the asset by taking it for exclusive use. The good news is that if the average income in Nipples doubles in the next couple of years, (is that likely?) your $1.2mm pad will be "worth" $2.4mm. The bad news is that if you sell the one you've got, and don't elect to lower your standard of housing, you'll simply have a higher number attached to an asset you don't have the flexiblity to sell. Now, it you had purchased *two* or more homes for $825k and sold oneof more of them for $1.225, that $400k spread would indeed be gross profit. You'd probably walk off with about $300k net after commissions, cap gains taxes, local conveyance taxes, etc. Selling your personal house, and immediately replacing it with one costing as much or more, does not create "profit". Another example for the slow and/or stubborn: Chuck has $100k. He buys a house not on the water for $500k, and puts 20% down. His mortgage is $400k. In one year, he sells the house for $575k. He pays off the mortgage and the realtor, and walks away with $135k. NOYB has $100k. He buys a house on the water for $1m, and puts 10% down. His mortgage is $900k. In one year, he sells the house for $1.5m. He pays off the mortgage and the realtor, and walks away with $510k. They both decide to buy a new home next to each other. The purchase price is $500k. Chuck puts $135k down, takes out a new loan for $365k. NOYB pays cash...and uses the extra $10k leftover to buy a trailer for his boat...and a new T-top, kicker motor, and fishfinder. The money that NOYB would normally pay towards a mortgage on a home now goes towards buying a second home in the mountains. Chuck says "How the hell did that happen!?!?" Yeah, how DID that happen, when you've stated here that you have an interest only mortgage? Not only did you NOT pay cash, you're not even paying down the balance. Appreciation you dimwit. Dimwit? That is the understatement of the year. |
wrote in message oups.com... NOYB wrote: wrote in message ups.com... NOYB wrote: Chuck is the first person that I've heard say that a home in a rapidly appreciating real estate market is *not* a good investment. **************************** I'm seriously surprised. Your house is a house. It's not an investment. Sky high and soaring housing prices are only a good thing if you own other real estate in addition to your primary home. You can have your home, (which you need), or the money tied up in it, but not both. When you cash out an "investment" your options in life should increase substantially. When you cash out your house, you get to live in a yurt. But a really, really nice yurt. Of course, I could retire to Snellville, buy an entire trailer park, and still put a million in my pocket. Really? How many "trailer parks" are there in Snellville, GA? Do you want the answer? Besides yours? |
"NOYB" wrote in message link.net... wrote in message oups.com... NOYB wrote: wrote in message ups.com... NOYB wrote: Chuck is the first person that I've heard say that a home in a rapidly appreciating real estate market is *not* a good investment. **************************** I'm seriously surprised. Your house is a house. It's not an investment. Sky high and soaring housing prices are only a good thing if you own other real estate in addition to your primary home. You can have your home, (which you need), or the money tied up in it, but not both. When you cash out an "investment" your options in life should increase substantially. When you cash out your house, you get to live in a yurt. But a really, really nice yurt. Of course, I could retire to Snellville, buy an entire trailer park, and still put a million in my pocket. Really? How many "trailer parks" are there in Snellville, GA? Do you want the answer? Besides yours? You'd think that asslicker would be stuffed to the gills with all the dough balls you've thrown him. |
wrote in message oups.com... Joe wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Yeah, how DID that happen, when you've stated here that you have an interest only mortgage? Not only did you NOT pay cash, you're not even paying down the balance. LOL! You really do get dumber by the day. Really? You don't think that NOYB has an interest only mortgage? That's not why he called you stupid. He called you stupid because you failed to realize that you can build equity in a house even when you don't pay down the principal...and then turn around and apply that equity as a downpayment on your next house. |
wrote in message ups.com... NOYB wrote: wrote in message oups.com... NOYB wrote: There is one home (out of 31 for sale in my neighborhood) under 7 figures. It's 1500 sq ft., was built in 1960, and is priced at $959k. ************ 31 homes for sale in your "neighborhood"? Either its a big neighborhood, or that full size Bush billboard in your front yard has everybody p-o'd. :-) (kidding) Illustrating my point, exactly. Lets say you paid $500,000 for you pad, and it would now sell for $1.3mm. If you sold your house for that price and needed to move to another just as nice, it would cost you $1.3mm to buy an equivalent home in the same area. Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? I could always sell my house and move a little bit inland...and make a huge profit in the process. Or I could move to Lee County instead of Collier County. This from a person who has an interest only loan because he's maxed out..... I am maxed out...but a huge chunk of my debt will be retired in 4 years. That'll free up $60,000/year in *additional* net disposable income. |
Bassy,
You need to tell NYOB that you call them mobile home communities. wrote in message oups.com... NOYB wrote: wrote in message ups.com... NOYB wrote: Chuck is the first person that I've heard say that a home in a rapidly appreciating real estate market is *not* a good investment. **************************** I'm seriously surprised. Your house is a house. It's not an investment. Sky high and soaring housing prices are only a good thing if you own other real estate in addition to your primary home. You can have your home, (which you need), or the money tied up in it, but not both. When you cash out an "investment" your options in life should increase substantially. When you cash out your house, you get to live in a yurt. But a really, really nice yurt. Of course, I could retire to Snellville, buy an entire trailer park, and still put a million in my pocket. Really? How many "trailer parks" are there in Snellville, GA? Do you want the answer? |
"Dr. Jonathan Smithers, MD Phd." wrote in message ... Bassy, You need to tell NYOB that you call them mobile home communities. Asslicker needs to 'man enough' to live up to his word regarding posting to this NG wrote in message oups.com... NOYB wrote: wrote in message ups.com... NOYB wrote: Chuck is the first person that I've heard say that a home in a rapidly appreciating real estate market is *not* a good investment. **************************** I'm seriously surprised. Your house is a house. It's not an investment. Sky high and soaring housing prices are only a good thing if you own other real estate in addition to your primary home. You can have your home, (which you need), or the money tied up in it, but not both. When you cash out an "investment" your options in life should increase substantially. When you cash out your house, you get to live in a yurt. But a really, really nice yurt. Of course, I could retire to Snellville, buy an entire trailer park, and still put a million in my pocket. Really? How many "trailer parks" are there in Snellville, GA? Do you want the answer? |
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 16:02:03 -0500, "Dr. Jonathan Smithers, MD Phd."
wrote: Bassy, You need to tell NYOB that you call them mobile home communities. No, they're "Manufactured Home Developments" in the back-counties of Virginia. John H "All decisions are the result of binary thinking." |
On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 20:22:53 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... NOYB wrote: wrote in message oups.com... NOYB wrote: There is one home (out of 31 for sale in my neighborhood) under 7 figures. It's 1500 sq ft., was built in 1960, and is priced at $959k. ************ 31 homes for sale in your "neighborhood"? Either its a big neighborhood, or that full size Bush billboard in your front yard has everybody p-o'd. :-) (kidding) Illustrating my point, exactly. Lets say you paid $500,000 for you pad, and it would now sell for $1.3mm. If you sold your house for that price and needed to move to another just as nice, it would cost you $1.3mm to buy an equivalent home in the same area. Here's the real life example: I paid $825k for the current home on the water. The last house to sell just like mine sold for $1.225m. After realty and closing costs, I'd clear about $360k I sold my old house for $560k last year (not on the water) The last house to sell like my old one just sold for $625k. If I bought the new house for $625k, after closing costs, I'd be in it for under $650. So I would net a quarter of a million dollars if I sold my current home and bought my old one again. That's profit, right? I could always sell my house and move a little bit inland...and make a huge profit in the process. Or I could move to Lee County instead of Collier County. This from a person who has an interest only loan because he's maxed out..... I am maxed out...but a huge chunk of my debt will be retired in 4 years. That'll free up $60,000/year in *additional* net disposable income. With that much free money you could afford to buy a quadruple-wide with a triple-wide on top. Just be sure to put a lightning rod up there. John H "All decisions are the result of binary thinking." |
On 2 Mar 2005 12:03:46 -0800, wrote:
I wonder if you'll ever be man enough to quit acting like a spoiled little ****ing child. What a pathetic crumb of **** you are. basskisser, a while back this post was made: ************************************************** ****** On 2 Mar 2005 06:54:20 -0800, wrote: John H wrote: Here we go again. B'assikisser, it *was* kind of nice not having you around for a while. Some find it nice when YOU aren't around. John, a few simple questions for you. Do you find it acceptable to knowingly post lies about other people? Do you think someone who does so should be thought of as a person of integrity? Do you think that someone who does this does so possibly because they've failed in life, and need to bolster their ego? Do you think that a person would do such things should should be taken seriously? Do you further think that someone who has strange, untrue, unfactual ideas just pop into their head (ie: thinking I beat my wife), as mentally stable? Is this like the SAT? basskisser, you're simply making your hole bigger. If you don't want to read the comments written by others, then *kill file* them. That's how easy it is! In answers to your questions (in order of the questions): No, so I don't do it, and I'm not sure that others do, unless they are making a statement on a subject about which I am knowledgeable. No, if they *knowingly* told a lie. No, I don't believe that lying is an indication of life failure or ego bolstering. I believe that lying will be detrimental to a person's ego. No, I don't think liars should be taken seriously (you should know this by now!). I don't think a super imagination is an indicator of a lack of mental stability. Now. No one has said you beat your wife, nor smoke pot, nor do nasty things with your kids, nor live in a trailer, nor any of the other multitude of things with which you take issue. From responses some make, I can see that Harry is still calling me names and making statements that aren't true. Go back for the last several weeks and see how many times Harry has posted in this fashion. I don't know, but I'm sure it's several times. Now, count the number of times I responded to him. Now count the number of times I responded to him with a paragraph full of capital letters and requests for proof. Are you getting the drift yet? John H "All decisions are the result of binary thinking." ************************************************** ************* Did you read it? Did you think about it? Did you reach any conclusions? Is the post this post is in response to an example of adult behavior? John H "All decisions are the result of binary thinking." |
|
wrote in message oups.com... JimH wrote: wrote in message ups.com... JimH wrote: wrote in message oups.com... DELTETED BY CHUCK: First of all, the quality of your argument is diminished with your childess munipulation of the name of the city of Naples. It is Naples, not Nipples. Grow up Chuck. Secondly, you have to look at the end result of the real estate process. Let us compare owning vs. renting. Example (real life) I have $30,000: EXAMPLE 1: If purchasing a house: I buy a 4 bedroom house for $150,000, putting $30,000 down. I owe the bank $120,000 and I put nothing into the house over the years I own it other than the mortgage payment. I then sell that house for $250,000, yielding $75,000 net after commision, payments to the bank and expenses. My initial investment was $30,000. I now have $75,000. I then buy a house for $350,000, putting the entire $75,000 down. I owe the bank $275,000 and I put nothing into the house over the years I own it other than the mortgage payment. I then sell that house for $450,000, yielding $133,000 net after commision, payments to the bank and expenses. My intial investment was $30,000. I now have $133,000 I downsize and look back at that $150,000 starter home I once owned. It is now selling for $300,000. I buy it, put down my $133,000 in down payment and thus owe the bank $167,000. I eventually sell the house and move into a retirement community (paid for by my insurance). The house sells for $325,000. After expenses and commisions I net $155,000. My initial investment was $30,000. I yielded a net profit of $125,000 on a $30,000 investment, *and* I had ZERO living expenses over all those years. EXAMPLE 2: If renting a house/apartment: A $30,000 investment over 30 years at at 5% rate of return would yield a return of $130,000. With an average cost of rental housing over 30 years for a 4 bedroom apartment @ $000/month (a very low average) of $180,000, I yield a a net loss of -$50,000. Compare to that the ownership scenario and realize almost a $1000,000 return. RESULTS: A net profit of $100,000 to own. A net loss of $50,000 to rent. The difference....$150,000 over 30 years on a $30,000 ownership investmet. My scenarios were very conservative. Real estate is not an investment? Bull****. You know absolutely nothing about real estate Chuck. *************** Funny, you would have thought I might have learned at least something after all these years. I've bought and sold a total dozens of investment properties since the early 70's, as well as several non investment primary residences. My primary current income is from rents and royalties. Real estate can be an *excellent* investment, but your personal house is not an investment property in the most accurate sense of the word. Even if you could sell your left leg, that wouldn't make in an "investment". You need it. Just like you need your house. If the food in your kitchen cupboards doubled in price, you wouldn't be any richer unless you could get by without eating. As soon as you sold your "appreciated" food you would need to spend an equal amount to replace it. Summing up: Real estate = investment. Primary residence= housing expense. This is ever so typical. a. You delete the majority of my reply. b. You make up things and present them as facts, then surround your entire argument around those made up *facts. c. You delete sections of the post you respond to then twist the facts as they were originally presented. Dispute the facts all you want Chuck. The facts show that you are wrong. BTW: Get over it, stop whining and move on. At least he's not a proven liar like you, Jim. It's a damned shame that you and your two circle jerk buddies have resorted to the lowest of the low, in that you choose to knowingly post lies about other people, in order to bolster your pathetic egos. Glad to see you survived your week in detox ok. Yet another lie from JimH. The most prolific liar on usenet. Please show what you know about me EVER being "in detox". What a good for nothing ****ing liar you are. How is your marijuana crop this year? What "marijuana crop", Jim? Please show any evidence you have that I have one. Another ****ing lie, from the ****ing liar. What a nasty little piglet you are. By the way, my wife's doing fine, and she likes to go fishing with me on my boat. The one you planted after your order from Heaven's Stairway arrived...remember? If not, try this to refresh your memory: http://tinyurl.com/6kllf And that Heaven's Stairway site is located he http://www.hempqc.com/ So how good of crop did you have last year? |
"JimH" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... JimH wrote: wrote in message ups.com... JimH wrote: wrote in message oups.com... DELTETED BY CHUCK: First of all, the quality of your argument is diminished with your childess munipulation of the name of the city of Naples. It is Naples, not Nipples. Grow up Chuck. Secondly, you have to look at the end result of the real estate process. Let us compare owning vs. renting. Example (real life) I have $30,000: EXAMPLE 1: If purchasing a house: I buy a 4 bedroom house for $150,000, putting $30,000 down. I owe the bank $120,000 and I put nothing into the house over the years I own it other than the mortgage payment. I then sell that house for $250,000, yielding $75,000 net after commision, payments to the bank and expenses. My initial investment was $30,000. I now have $75,000. I then buy a house for $350,000, putting the entire $75,000 down. I owe the bank $275,000 and I put nothing into the house over the years I own it other than the mortgage payment. I then sell that house for $450,000, yielding $133,000 net after commision, payments to the bank and expenses. My intial investment was $30,000. I now have $133,000 I downsize and look back at that $150,000 starter home I once owned. It is now selling for $300,000. I buy it, put down my $133,000 in down payment and thus owe the bank $167,000. I eventually sell the house and move into a retirement community (paid for by my insurance). The house sells for $325,000. After expenses and commisions I net $155,000. My initial investment was $30,000. I yielded a net profit of $125,000 on a $30,000 investment, *and* I had ZERO living expenses over all those years. EXAMPLE 2: If renting a house/apartment: A $30,000 investment over 30 years at at 5% rate of return would yield a return of $130,000. With an average cost of rental housing over 30 years for a 4 bedroom apartment @ $000/month (a very low average) of $180,000, I yield a a net loss of -$50,000. Compare to that the ownership scenario and realize almost a $1000,000 return. RESULTS: A net profit of $100,000 to own. A net loss of $50,000 to rent. The difference....$150,000 over 30 years on a $30,000 ownership investmet. My scenarios were very conservative. Real estate is not an investment? Bull****. You know absolutely nothing about real estate Chuck. *************** Funny, you would have thought I might have learned at least something after all these years. I've bought and sold a total dozens of investment properties since the early 70's, as well as several non investment primary residences. My primary current income is from rents and royalties. Real estate can be an *excellent* investment, but your personal house is not an investment property in the most accurate sense of the word. Even if you could sell your left leg, that wouldn't make in an "investment". You need it. Just like you need your house. If the food in your kitchen cupboards doubled in price, you wouldn't be any richer unless you could get by without eating. As soon as you sold your "appreciated" food you would need to spend an equal amount to replace it. Summing up: Real estate = investment. Primary residence= housing expense. This is ever so typical. a. You delete the majority of my reply. b. You make up things and present them as facts, then surround your entire argument around those made up *facts. c. You delete sections of the post you respond to then twist the facts as they were originally presented. Dispute the facts all you want Chuck. The facts show that you are wrong. BTW: Get over it, stop whining and move on. At least he's not a proven liar like you, Jim. It's a damned shame that you and your two circle jerk buddies have resorted to the lowest of the low, in that you choose to knowingly post lies about other people, in order to bolster your pathetic egos. Glad to see you survived your week in detox ok. Yet another lie from JimH. The most prolific liar on usenet. Please show what you know about me EVER being "in detox". What a good for nothing ****ing liar you are. How is your marijuana crop this year? What "marijuana crop", Jim? Please show any evidence you have that I have one. Another ****ing lie, from the ****ing liar. What a nasty little piglet you are. By the way, my wife's doing fine, and she likes to go fishing with me on my boat. The one you planted after your order from Heaven's Stairway arrived...remember? If not, try this to refresh your memory: http://tinyurl.com/6kllf And that Heaven's Stairway site is located he http://www.hempqc.com/ So how good of crop did you have last year? Did asslicker stop beating his wife yet? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:43 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com