awgee - 09 January 2009 12:56 AM

This board has been existent for a couple or years now with thousands of posts and it seems like some folks have learned nothing.  I give up.

Look at it as entertainment.  Remember it’s impossible to be rich if everybody viewed things intelligently.  You need idiots around to #1 make yourself feel better, and #2 to profit from.

trrenter - 08 January 2009 10:49 PM

On the otherhand, if someobody came to me and asked me, when it’s the best time to buy in general…
I’m going to say..

WHEN YOU CAN AFFORD IT!

That is very short sighted almost stupid statement.

What you could buy for 700k two years ago is much less desirable then what you could buy today for that. 

So you are saying don’t worry about the value of what you can buy.  I guess if you want less house for more money that is a great philosophy.

I bet the people that could afford to buy a home two years ago and took that advice are not to happy today!

You guys are missing the point. A question of buying is very personal. A question of happiness is even more so.

For Awgee or anybody here to take upon themselves to answer it by saying to wait, wait, wait, till when? is short sighted in itself.
What is the difference between this versus somebody saying buy, buy, buy?

You shouldnt take what’s happen 2 years ago as an example because you would only have to go back to 7 years ago for a counter example.

awgee - 08 January 2009 10:59 PM

Trip to Europe?

Yeah!  Let’s do it…that’s always fun!

awgee - 09 January 2009 12:56 AM

This board has been existent for a couple or years now with thousands of posts and it seems like some folks have learned nothing.  I give up.

I think some folks need to realize that everybody has their way of doing things.
It is neither stupid nor smart, it is their way and can have the same results even
though the philosophy is different.

asianinvasian - 08 January 2009 09:57 PM

awgee - 08 January 2009 05:51 PM

That is just plain stupid.  Many of us can afford to buy now and have been able to buy since 2005 or 2006 or 2007 or 2008.  And waiting to buy is working out rather well.

Rather well for who?  If you pay $2,500/month for rent you just threw $120,000 out the door since 2005.  Congratulations, you’re a genius.

I would like to address this since it is similar to my situation.

Back in 2005, $2500 a month could rent you a 4br/2ba. That would have probably cost you about $600k in 2005. So running the numbers through the calculator using 20% down and some conservative expenses puts monthly cost at about $3300 a month.

4 years later, you’ve spent about $158,400 and add your DP it comes up to $278,400.

That same house is probably worth about $520k. You’ve probably paid the principal down about $10k. So if you sell, you’ll net out close to nothing… losing almost your entire DP.

In this case, waiting to buy nets you at the very least, $38,400. And… you wouldn’t be out your $120,000 that you put down.

This is the reality that I have to deal with (with higher numbers of course)... I wish I had thought about rental parity back then.

blackvault_cm - 09 January 2009 12:54 AM

asianinvasian - 08 January 2009 11:20 PM

acpme - 08 January 2009 10:40 PM

asianinvasian - 08 January 2009 09:57 PM

I’m in a different boat all together.  I would rent the rest of my life to be honest just because my cost of placing 20% down or more is astronomical compared to what others might calculate.  I don’t include a 5% rate of return as my loss of opportunity on 20% down.  I calculate a much higher rate compounded out 30 years.  So unless the home is appreciating, I have a hard time even putting 20% down on a home that has equal rent/morgage ratio.  150K x r% x 30yr = $$$,$$$,$$$

What is r in that equation?

Also, if you are such a good investor…why don’t you make gazillions on Wall Street?  I’m not making fun of you, but asking a serious question. You are extremely confident about your ability to beat the market and it seems like you’ve done it for some time now.

awgee - 08 January 2009 11:03 PM

Major Schadenfreude - 08 January 2009 10:55 PM

asianinvasian - 08 January 2009 09:57 PM

awgee - 08 January 2009 05:51 PM

That is just plain stupid.  Many of us can afford to buy now and have been able to buy since 2005 or 2006 or 2007 or 2008.  And waiting to buy is working out rather well.

Rather well for who?  If you pay $2,500/month for rent you just threw $120,000 out the door since 2005.  Congratulations, you’re a genius.

Agreed.  The housing bubble has made EVERYONE who was part of the first-time-buyer pool the past 8 years spend more money on keeping a roof over their head and will continue to do so for the forseable future.  This is in comparison to if the lending environment had been the normal, sane 20% down, 28% DTI on a 30 year fixed.  Renting really is “throwing money away”.  Although renters have been throwing a lot less of it away compared to the homedebtors during this bubble.

Thank your leaders for this situation.  Yet, incumbants were recently voted back into office, so I guess everyone is okay with the situation.

You can call it whatever you want, but more than once I have calculated the difference between renting and owning and when figuring everything, including ROI, renting is throwing less money away right now.  I don’t get it.  Haven’t you read any of IRs articles on the cost of renting vs. owning?  There are cross points at which one becomes more or less expensive than the other.

My point is that had real estate prices progressed normally; that is, proportional to inflation and incomes, then home prices would have been much closer to rental parity during this decade and all the renters who are now sitting on large down payments would have bought homes much earlier because we would have reached those cross points long ago.  Today’s rent money would be building up equity in the home we would have purchased.  Instead, we are throwing our money away on rent because the lenders, borrows & politicians made home ownership a losing proposition for practically this wholde decade.

They retarded the normal growth process of that small percentage of responsible people who exactly or intuitively knew that the numbers for owning a home didn’t pan out.

And yet John Cambell was re-elected with 30’000 votes to spare.  A big “screw you” to all the responsible renters who have been waiting a long time to buy their first home in his jurisdiction.

rickhunter - 09 January 2009 01:38 AM

trrenter - 08 January 2009 10:49 PM

On the otherhand, if someobody came to me and asked me, when it’s the best time to buy in general…
I’m going to say..

WHEN YOU CAN AFFORD IT!

That is very short sighted almost stupid statement.

What you could buy for 700k two years ago is much less desirable then what you could buy today for that. 

So you are saying don’t worry about the value of what you can buy.  I guess if you want less house for more money that is a great philosophy.

I bet the people that could afford to buy a home two years ago and took that advice are not to happy today!

You guys are missing the point. A question of buying is very personal. A question of happiness is even more so.

For Awgee or anybody here to take upon themselves to answer it by saying to wait, wait, wait, till when? is short sighted in itself.
What is the difference between this versus somebody saying buy, buy, buy?

You shouldnt take what’s happen 2 years ago as an example because you would only have to go back to 7 years ago for a counter example.

No, you are putting words in my mouth.  I said that it is stupid to say that affordability is the only factor in response to your saying that one should buy a home when one can afford it.  You are the one who did not recognize how many factors, personal and otherwise, are used to buy a home.  Again, affordability is only one factor one should consider when deciding to purchase a house or anything else and to say that one should buy when one can afford it is stupid.  You failed to recognize and communicate how personal a home buying decision is.
Here is your post in case you do not remember.
“For the average person,

Dont overthink or make things more complicated than that…”

So considering anything other than affordability is too complicated for the average person and whatever personal reasons they may have other than affordability is overthinking?  That is just plain stupid.

Who said I was taking the last two years as an example.  You really need to stop making strawman arguments.  I never said anything about the last two years.  I base my analysis of the Southern California re market on the last seventy years.  Do you have any idea how long the average So Cal re cycle lasts from one top to the next or from one bottom to the next?

irvine_home_owner - 09 January 2009 01:59 AM

asianinvasian - 08 January 2009 09:57 PM

awgee - 08 January 2009 05:51 PM

That is just plain stupid.  Many of us can afford to buy now and have been able to buy since 2005 or 2006 or 2007 or 2008.  And waiting to buy is working out rather well.

Rather well for who?  If you pay $2,500/month for rent you just threw $120,000 out the door since 2005.  Congratulations, you’re a genius.

I would like to address this since it is similar to my situation.

Back in 2005, $2500 a month could rent you a 4br/2ba. That would have probably cost you about $600k in 2005. So running the numbers through the calculator using 20% down and some conservative expenses puts monthly cost at about $3300 a month.

4 years later, you’ve spent about $158,400 and add your DP it comes up to $278,400.

That same house is probably worth about $520k. You’ve probably paid the principal down about $10k. So if you sell, you’ll net out close to nothing… losing almost your entire DP.

In this case, waiting to buy nets you at the very least, $38,400. And… you wouldn’t be out your $120,000 that you put down.

This is the reality that I have to deal with (with higher numbers of course)... I wish I had thought about rental parity back then.

Don’t confuse people with facts.

blackvault_cm - 09 January 2009 12:54 AM

I know of a family that aren’t house flippers. They bought a home in Riverside for 840K, currently worth 310k?!?!  According to your theory a house flipper won’t get his money back but this family will?
This family at the time felt it was the right time to buy and that they can afford it.  They still can afford it, but they are sick about it everyday. 
Regardless of a flipper or a permanent resident do you think this family will ever see their home at 840K again? As a numerical figure maybe…30 years from now. But inflation adjusted…never.  Unless their home has an undiscovered oil field or several tons of limestone sitting underneath it.

You bring up a good example.  Let’s say after 30 years the value goes back to 840k, so they have that much at least.  Had they instead been renting at 2.5k/month during that time they’d be down 900k, permanently. 

But the key is they can afford it.  No one is suggesting anyone buy a house they can’t afford.  During the bubble most bought when they couldn’t really afford it.

asianinvasian - 09 January 2009 02:48 AM

blackvault_cm - 09 January 2009 12:54 AM

I know of a family that aren’t house flippers. They bought a home in Riverside for 840K, currently worth 310k?!?!  According to your theory a house flipper won’t get his money back but this family will?
This family at the time felt it was the right time to buy and that they can afford it.  They still can afford it, but they are sick about it everyday. 
Regardless of a flipper or a permanent resident do you think this family will ever see their home at 840K again? As a numerical figure maybe…30 years from now. But inflation adjusted…never.  Unless their home has an undiscovered oil field or several tons of limestone sitting underneath it.

You bring up a good example.  Let’s say after 30 years the value goes back to 840k, so they have that much at least.  Had they instead been renting at 2.5k/month during that time they’d be down 900k, permanently. 

But the key is they can afford it.  No one is suggesting anyone buy a house they can’t afford.  During the bubble most bought when they couldn’t really afford it.

You are ignoring the differential between the cost of ownership and the cost to rent.  Obviously this family is paying way more to own vs. rent.  If they rented the same house for cheaper, the difference between cost to own and cost to rent produces a return the compounds, and compounds, and compounds over those 30 years theortically.

$500 per month savings componding at 6% over 30 years is $500K.

Roo - 09 January 2009 02:07 AM

Also, if you are such a good investor…why don’t you make gazillions on Wall Street?  I’m not making fun of you, but asking a serious question. You are extremely confident about your ability to beat the market and it seems like you’ve done it for some time now.

Many reasons.  Wall Street doesn’t make gazillions, its broke, and going to jail.  Thats just the tip of it, not to mention that New York is cold and I hate the cold.
FYI, I invest because it thrills me, not because of the money.  I can live the rest of my life with what I have today, don’t need anymore…maybe several more kids.
If you really want to know about my life, I suggest you PM me with a place/time and a cup of coffee waiting for me, and I’ll spill you my life story if it really fascinates you.  Just not now, and especially not on this thread as it relates to housing and not my personal life.

ipoplaya - 09 January 2009 03:05 AM

asianinvasian - 09 January 2009 02:48 AM

blackvault_cm - 09 January 2009 12:54 AM

I know of a family that aren’t house flippers. They bought a home in Riverside for 840K, currently worth 310k?!?!  According to your theory a house flipper won’t get his money back but this family will?
This family at the time felt it was the right time to buy and that they can afford it.  They still can afford it, but they are sick about it everyday. 
Regardless of a flipper or a permanent resident do you think this family will ever see their home at 840K again? As a numerical figure maybe…30 years from now. But inflation adjusted…never.  Unless their home has an undiscovered oil field or several tons of limestone sitting underneath it.

You bring up a good example.  Let’s say after 30 years the value goes back to 840k, so they have that much at least.  Had they instead been renting at 2.5k/month during that time they’d be down 900k, permanently. 

But the key is they can afford it.  No one is suggesting anyone buy a house they can’t afford.  During the bubble most bought when they couldn’t really afford it.

You are ignoring the differential between the cost of ownership and the cost to rent.  Obviously this family is paying way more to own vs. rent.  If they rented the same house for cheaper, the difference between cost to own and cost to rent produces a return the compounds, and compounds, and compounds over those 30 years theortically.

$500 per month savings componding at 6% over 30 years is $500K.

I’m not ignoring the difference because this is obviously an extreme example.  What if their rent was 10k?  If you buy an 840k house now do you think it will go down to 310k?

Let me clarify what I meant earlier when I talked about opportunity costs.  When I re-read my post, I can see how it can be taken the wrong way.

Opportunity cost is an opportunity you are forgoing in order to pursue something else.  In my case I have to take what my average yearly return is in the stock market, and use that as my opportunity cost.  If I have 1M dollars, and my average return is 10% then I shouldn’t take any other investment if it doesn’t yield me at least 10%.  Everybody has different opportunity costs and they are not always financial.  If you are a lawyer working for a lawfirm, then perhaps you need to save that money and start your own firm.  If you enjoy baking perhaps you should save and start your own pastry shop.  If you are a MRI tech, perhaps you should start your own outpatient imaging clinic once you saved enough cash.  I’m sure for awgee his opportunity cost is gold.  He looks at 200K and decides if he should invest in gold today or invest in a home today. 

Thats all I meant by my statement, I didn’t meant sound like I return more than the 5%, I just meant that we shouldn’t just apply a 5% Opp. Cost, and instead to be more creative, use your skills, and explore your possible opportunities.  We all have our niche.

awgee - 09 January 2009 02:34 AM

rickhunter - 09 January 2009 01:38 AM

trrenter - 08 January 2009 10:49 PM

On the otherhand, if someobody came to me and asked me, when it’s the best time to buy in general…
I’m going to say..

WHEN YOU CAN AFFORD IT!

That is very short sighted almost stupid statement.

What you could buy for 700k two years ago is much less desirable then what you could buy today for that. 

So you are saying don’t worry about the value of what you can buy.  I guess if you want less house for more money that is a great philosophy.

I bet the people that could afford to buy a home two years ago and took that advice are not to happy today!

You guys are missing the point. A question of buying is very personal. A question of happiness is even more so.

For Awgee or anybody here to take upon themselves to answer it by saying to wait, wait, wait, till when? is short sighted in itself.
What is the difference between this versus somebody saying buy, buy, buy?

You shouldnt take what’s happen 2 years ago as an example because you would only have to go back to 7 years ago for a counter example.

No, you are putting words in my mouth.  I said that it is stupid to say that affordability is the only factor in response to your saying that one should buy a home when one can afford it.  You are the one who did not recognize how many factors, personal and otherwise, are used to buy a home.  Again, affordability is only one factor one should consider when deciding to purchase a house or anything else and to say that one should buy when one can afford it is stupid.  You failed to recognize and communicate how personal a home buying decision is.
Here is your post in case you do not remember.
“For the average person,

The best time to buy is when you can afford to do so!

Dont overthink or make things more complicated than that…”

So considering anything other than affordability is too complicated for the average person and whatever personal reasons they may have other than affordability is overthinking?  That is just plain stupid.

Who said I was taking the last two years as an example.  You really need to stop making strawman arguments.  I never said anything about the last two years.  I base my analysis of the Southern California re market on the last seventy years.  Do you have any idea how long the average So Cal re cycle lasts from one top to the next or from one bottom to the next?

Rickhunter and Awgee,

I can totally see where both of you guys are coming from. Awgee bought his first home in 1990 and saw his entire 20% downpayment disappear and saw his home painfully decline for five years and the scar probably still remains with him until this day. Reading Awgee’s posts for the past two years, he definitely understands the commodity and real estate cycles and has a keen sense to when commodities are undervalued or overvalued against the price of real estate. He understands that commodity prices peak every 30 years from 1920, 1951, and 1980 with another one coming in the near future. He sold his overvalued house in 2005 and converted that asset into undervalued precious metals with incredible timing. I applaud him for that as he is going to wait it out until real estate hits the floor and prices of precious metals hit the ceiling.

At the same time, Rickhunter is saying that buying a home is a personal decision and can bring happiness when you can easily afford the home you are buying. I do agree with him especially as we are much more closer to the bottom than to the top in you are buying in 2010. It is a good feeling when you can decorate and customize your home the way you like, becoming rooted with the community and your neighbors, and your kid not having to switch to another elementary school. I guess what Rick may be saying is waiting until 2011 - 2013 to buy at the ultimate bottom ( 5 - 10% below where prices may be between 2009 - 2010 ) may not be worth the sacrifice for him to live a happy life becoming a home owner.

PANDA - 09 January 2009 04:19 AM

Rickhunter and Awgee,

I can totally see where both of you guys are coming from. Awgee bought his first home in 1990 and saw his entire 20% downpayment disappear and saw his home painfully decline for five years and the scar probably still remains with him until this day. Reading Awgee’s posts for the past two years, he definitely understands the commodity and real estate cycles and has a keen sense to when commodities are undervalued or overvalued against the price of real estate. He understands that commodity prices peak every 30 years from 1920, 1951, and 1980 with another one coming in the near future. He sold his overvalued house in 2005 and converted that asset into undervalued precious metals with incredible timing. I applaud him for that as he is going to wait it out until real estate hits the floor and prices of precious metals hit the ceiling.

At the same time, Rickhunter is saying that buying a home is a personal decision and can bring happiness when you can easily afford the home you are buying. I do agree with him especially as we are much more closer to the bottom than to the top in you are buying in 2010. It is a good feeling when you can decorate and customize your home the way you like, becoming rooted with the community and your neighbors, and your kid not having to switch to another elementary school. I guess what Rick may be saying is waiting until 2011 - 2013 to buy at the ultimate bottom ( 5 - 10% below where prices may be between 2009 - 2010 ) may not be worth the sacrifice for him to live a happy life becoming a home owner.

Well said Panda, if you consider a second career you should be a mediator.  The best mediators are from Wedding Crashers!

More on “renting is throwing away your money”.
You have to live someplace and you have to pay for shelter one way or another.
If you rent, you obviously pay money which you will never see again.
If you buy with a mortgage, you pay interest which you will never see again, and you are paying principal which may involve depreciation, (opportunity cost), which you will never see again.
If you buy with cash, you are paying opportunity cost, which you will never see again.  If you do not understand why the opportunity cost is throwing money away when paying principal or paying cash, please see BVs explanation of o.c. above.

No matter how you pay for your shelter, you are not throwing your money away.  You are paying for shelter.  And if you time your purchase or lease adequately, you may end up paying less than someone who thinks that predicting market values, interest rates, etc. is over thinking the process.

The idea that renting is throwing your money away is a fallacy promulgated by those who wish to separate you from your money via commissions.

PANDA - 09 January 2009 04:19 AM

awgee - 09 January 2009 02:34 AM

rickhunter - 09 January 2009 01:38 AM

trrenter - 08 January 2009 10:49 PM

On the otherhand, if someobody came to me and asked me, when it’s the best time to buy in general…
I’m going to say..

WHEN YOU CAN AFFORD IT!

That is very short sighted almost stupid statement.

What you could buy for 700k two years ago is much less desirable then what you could buy today for that. 

So you are saying don’t worry about the value of what you can buy.  I guess if you want less house for more money that is a great philosophy.

I bet the people that could afford to buy a home two years ago and took that advice are not to happy today!

You guys are missing the point. A question of buying is very personal. A question of happiness is even more so.

For Awgee or anybody here to take upon themselves to answer it by saying to wait, wait, wait, till when? is short sighted in itself.
What is the difference between this versus somebody saying buy, buy, buy?

You shouldnt take what’s happen 2 years ago as an example because you would only have to go back to 7 years ago for a counter example.

No, you are putting words in my mouth.  I said that it is stupid to say that affordability is the only factor in response to your saying that one should buy a home when one can afford it.  You are the one who did not recognize how many factors, personal and otherwise, are used to buy a home.  Again, affordability is only one factor one should consider when deciding to purchase a house or anything else and to say that one should buy when one can afford it is stupid.  You failed to recognize and communicate how personal a home buying decision is.
Here is your post in case you do not remember.
“For the average person,

The best time to buy is when you can afford to do so!

Dont overthink or make things more complicated than that…”

So considering anything other than affordability is too complicated for the average person and whatever personal reasons they may have other than affordability is overthinking?  That is just plain stupid.

Who said I was taking the last two years as an example.  You really need to stop making strawman arguments.  I never said anything about the last two years.  I base my analysis of the Southern California re market on the last seventy years.  Do you have any idea how long the average So Cal re cycle lasts from one top to the next or from one bottom to the next?

Rickhunter and Awgee,

I can totally see where both of you guys are coming from. Awgee bought his first home in 1990 and saw his entire 20% downpayment disappear and saw his home painfully decline for five years and the scar probably still remains with him until this day. Reading Awgee’s posts for the past two years, he definitely understands the commodity and real estate cycles and has a keen sense to when commodities are undervalued or overvalued against the price of real estate. He understands that commodity prices peak every 30 years from 1920, 1951, and 1980 with another one coming in the near future. He sold his overvalued house in 2005 and converted that asset into undervalued precious metals with incredible timing. I applaud him for that as he is going to wait it out until real estate hits the floor and prices of precious metals hit the ceiling.

At the same time, Rickhunter is saying that buying a home is a personal decision and can bring happiness when you can easily afford the home you are buying. I do agree with him especially as we are much more closer to the bottom than to the top in you are buying in 2010. It is a good feeling when you can decorate and customize your home the way you like, becoming rooted with the community and your neighbors, and your kid not having to switch to another elementary school. I guess what Rick may be saying is waiting until 2011 - 2013 to buy at the ultimate bottom ( 5 - 10% below where prices may be between 2009 - 2010 ) may not be worth the sacrifice for him to live a happy life becoming a home owner.

Panda - If that is what he said, I would have to agree, but that is not what he said.  He said that any considerations other than affordability is complicating or over thinking the issue, which is pretty much the opposite of what you just said he said.  Let’s not put words in people’s mouth.  Here is what he said:

“For the average person,

Dont overthink or make things more complicated than that…”

awgee - 09 January 2009 05:06 AM

The idea that renting is throwing your money away is a fallacy promulgated by those who wish to separate you from your money via commissions.

I dare you to say NAR puts their interest before the general public…

I guess the question should be more on your investment horizon. If you are planning to make a 30 year investment then buying a house now is probably not a bad idea. If you are going to track it like stocks in real time and looking to sell it, you should invest using rental parity. But rental parity math DOES NOT make sure you can time this right either. Matters of fact you can buy a house based on rental parity and be under the water in a massive way if there are simply no buyers. The benefits of rental parity is that you could at least rent it out for less of a pain but if you need liquidity you are screwed. This is similar to buying stocks. Who is to say 10 PE is correct or a certain DCF is correct,the market can fall all the way to 5 if it feels like it. And it doesn’t matter if awgee’s model say 10 is correct. Vice versa, stocks might never get to 10 PE and instead bottoms out at 12 and then moves up to 24 PE then who is right? Same can be said about rental parity, it might not hit parity and then zooms up to beyond parity again in the next five years.

I am personally a model freak and believe in rent parity etc but there is no right or wrong on if you should buy now or not. Each person have their own situation and rental parity can only be used as a guide. For godsakes, it might never hit rental parity for 10 years so what do you tell you 10 year old when he turns 20 and is ready to leave the house? Hey kiddo, it now makes sense to buy a place because of rental parity?

I suggest the following, if you need a place try to wait until it is more reasonable in terms of rental parity, but keep in mind that rent could fall. I just did the math for some places in Las Vegas and it looks reasonable. But if you need to buy now just do it as long as you do not need to move out of your house or need the money in the intermediate term, because when you need the liquidity that is when it hurts the most. For investment purposes, you have to go beyond rental parity, rental parity is bull crap if unemployment rate goes up to 12 percent and you can not rent your place out. Look ADP numbers and you know unemployment is rising quickly.

If one decides to buy, they won’t easily and cheaply be able to change that decision for at least 5 years and likely ten or more years.

The decision to wait for better prices, more motivated sellers or better affordability can readily be changed tomorrow, next week, next month, in three months, or next year with little to no perceivable downside.

PANDA - 09 January 2009 04:19 AM

Rickhunter and Awgee,

I can totally see where both of you guys are coming from. Awgee bought his first home in 1990 and saw his entire 20% downpayment disappear and saw his home painfully decline for five years and the scar probably still remains with him until this day. Reading Awgee’s posts for the past two years, he definitely understands the commodity and real estate cycles and has a keen sense to when commodities are undervalued or overvalued against the price of real estate. He understands that commodity prices peak every 30 years from 1920, 1951, and 1980 with another one coming in the near future. He sold his overvalued house in 2005 and converted that asset into undervalued precious metals with incredible timing. I applaud him for that as he is going to wait it out until real estate hits the floor and prices of precious metals hit the ceiling.

At the same time, Rickhunter is saying that buying a home is a personal decision and can bring happiness when you can easily afford the home you are buying. I do agree with him especially as we are much more closer to the bottom than to the top in you are buying in 2010. It is a good feeling when you can decorate and customize your home the way you like, becoming rooted with the community and your neighbors, and your kid not having to switch to another elementary school. I guess what Rick may be saying is waiting until 2011 - 2013 to buy at the ultimate bottom ( 5 - 10% below where prices may be between 2009 - 2010 ) may not be worth the sacrifice for him to live a happy life becoming a home owner.

Panda,

For somebody that asks so many questions, you have impressed me by reading between the lines. Thanks for clearing this up.
I didnt know I had to explain everything on a blog, nor do I care to. Other people will never determine when I buy. I check these blogs
for the price updates and will buy when I want to. Would you give up a few years of ownership for a 5-10% decrease in price,
a decline that’s not even a sure thing?

I know you asks all these questions, and have been given mostly the advice of waiting, waiting, and waiting.
But if the right opportunity came along, I know you would jump in a heartbeat.

On my other point, if everybody listened and waited, yes, we would have a gigantic price decrease.
But most people dont give a shit, and home ownership is what they want. You can see it in the sales in irvine.
You have the data, dont let anybody tell you different. Whether you want to wait or not, I know it’s not because of the advice you
get on this blog, it’s because you havent found the deal you want.

rickhunter - 09 January 2009 07:43 AM

Whether you want to wait or not, I know it’s not because of the advice you
get on this blog, it’s because you havent found the deal you want.

That’s wrong.

I was on the fence and this blog guided my decision to rent based on the various comments and analysis.

I am 100% sure I am not the only one.

Mr. Hunter, by any chance - did you just purchase a house?

awgee - 09 January 2009 05:06 AM

The idea that renting is throwing your money away is a fallacy promulgated by those who wish to separate you from your money via commissions.

You mean the guy you are paying your rent to?