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.

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.

"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.

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.

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."

John H wrote:
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,

Hmm, so you think, that if someone asks "do you STILL beat your wife",
that that wouldn't conotate a lie???? Now, notice, John, he didn't ask
IF I had ever beat my wife. If he had, I would have answered. But,
being how Fritz isn't very bright, he IMPLICATED me, which is a total
lie. Do you condone that behavior? Do you think someone who would
implicate me in a total fabrication would have integrity?

nor smoke pot,
Not true. Jim has, several times. Go look. Fritz even accused me of
smoking pot with my kids. Go look again. Jim has accused me of growing
pot, of growing pot with my kids' knowledge, of buying seeds on the
internet, of having a "crop" of pot, and on and on. All lies. Do you
condone his lying about such? Do you think a person that would post
such lies would have integrity?

nor do nasty things with
your kids,

Nobody said "nasty things". See above.

nor live in a trailer,

Again, Smithers, and NOYB have, without any facts.

nor any of the other multitude of things with
which you take issue.

Again, I see that you apparently don't understand "implication". It is
a lawfully binding statement, so, that in turn means that those three
are nothing short of liars.

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.

On 2 Mar 2005 12:04:43 -0800, wrote:


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.

I think 'low life' should be hyphenated when used in this manner, i.e., "...you
low-life..." Also, I believe 'scum bag' is, in fact, one word, i.e., 'scumbag'.

Other than that, your post was quite well written.


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."