Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All three of you are making some good points at times. It is an interesting discussion. But all three of you missed my point and the point of the links I provided. Real estate is NOT the only way to develop wealth and stability and security for yourselves and your families. There are many ways to invest in your future. Your own businesses, other businesses / corporations, stocks, currency trading, precious metals, art and other collectables even, and plenty more.
Rising rents and such are a function of market rates. Your investments should be able to keep pace, if not exceed, the real estate market.
You are all expressing the American conditioning that home ownership is THE benchmark for "success". That is a psychological condition. I can buy a house in San Francisco (and I only just retired from a modestly paid blue-collar career) - but I have never wanted to own a house. I invested the money most folks pay in principal - and paid again in interest, roughly doubling the cost of their homes. I NEVER paid a dime in interest. My total investment went directly to equity value (precious metals mostly in my case).
You want to measure life by home ownership - fine. No problem. If you buy by mortgage, you pay half again to double the purchase for the satisfaction of living in it. Okay. But it certainly isn't the ONLY way to get ahead financially and prepare for a good retirement. Nor is it the ONLY way to live comfortably.
I never said it was the only way to develop wealth or stability. All your links showed what millennials "think" and a list of home ownership rates in various countries.
Of course rising rents are a function of market rates and owning a home prevents anyone from raising rent on you. That's a big reason why I want to own and you come as really narrow minded acting like people shouldn't strive to buy a house because you and others have built wealth other ways. FYI, I never said anything about measuring life by home ownership but don't sit there and try to tell me that not's something I should strive for or what I've been conditioned to believe. "Psychological condition"? Are you serious with that babble? Get over yourself and how you built your life, if others want do it differently that doesn't mean its any worse or that they shouldn't.
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,143,755 times
Reputation: 3145
The sports teams here are another big part of the Bay Area lifestyle. For our size, it's pretty amazing to have two MLB teams, two NFL teams, an NBA team and an NHL team. Plus, Cal and Stanford both have great followings.
I hope the A's can get something done for a ballpark like AT&T Park. The Giants' park has really turned SF into a big baseball town. Part of that is walking from the Financial District to the park for games on summer evenings. All along the way, there are sports bars, patio restaurants, food truck parks, and places to grab something to take inside the park if you want. It's like a street festival on game days for several blocks around the park.
Oakland fields a team worthy of this same kind of fan interest. Their fans are die-hards, but are too few in numbers. A new park in Jack London Square would have positive repercussions all across downtown Oakland. The fan base would increase and businesses would open to serve the crowds.
Football is great here too. On streets like Polk St. There is a big collection of sports bars that specialize in out-of-town fans' teams. I even found a Texans place for those of us who hold on to that delusion.
I like that it gets started at 10:00 am and goes all day. The bars have their doors and windows open and the street is lively. It's a great atmosphere--far better than going to the game in person. I casually follow the Niners and Raiders and go to one or two games per season for either of them. The atmosphere in the neighborhood on game day is much more fun.
The Warriors have a great following across the Bay Area. The Sharks do too. Both play to packed houses and packed bars in several areas.
Overall, a great area for sports and definitely a big plus for enjoying the lifestyle here. It's not over-the-top like some places. There's a solid baseball culture, which brings a much different (and to me, preferable) dimension from a primarily football culture. There's a bit of friendly rivalry within the Bay and heated ones with teams outside the Bay Area. All the games are televised, so you don't have to be rich to follow your teams. And, with so many local teams, there's always a local game on. Pretty nice.
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,143,755 times
Reputation: 3145
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
I never said it was the only way to develop wealth or stability. All your links showed what millennials "think" and a list of home ownership rates in various countries.
Of course rising rents are a function of market rates and owning a home prevents anyone from raising rent on you. That's a big reason why I want to own and you come as really narrow minded acting like people shouldn't strive to buy a house because you and others have built wealth other ways. FYI, I never said anything about measuring life by home ownership but don't sit there and try to tell me that not's something I should strive for or what I've been conditioned to believe. "Psychological condition"? Are you serious with that babble? Get over yourself and how you built your life, if others want do it differently that doesn't mean its any worse or that they shouldn't.
Home ownership is a great thing. It's not always everything it's cracked up to be, though. And when the market is the way it is here, the smartest move can be to sit on the sidelines, as both you and I are doing.
The points he makes about paying into interest rather than equity are valid, especially when you are near the top of the market, as many suggest we are. In a rapidly expanding market like we have seen here for the past couple of years and many also believe will continue for some time, you can temper your lack of ability to buy equity with value that grows to offset interest costs and builds equity. You just have to be realistic.
The bottom line is this seems like a very volatile market! It is definitely not for the meek. There's a huge chance you could make out like a genius, or take a serious dive. That's where the advice to use investments or other means besides real estate to build wealth is coming from, I think.
For a cash buyer, it's a bit simpler. For a mortgage buyer in this market, there are a lot of factors to be mitigated and the same money you'd put into a mortgage could conservatively return 10-15% every year in investments--more, if you don't mind taking some risks. Homes in SF are returning about 20% before the cost of the mortgage, upkeep, taxes, insurance, etc. are factored in.
It is more stable, I agree, but like I said, it's a bit nerve-racking at this point in the market. I think I'll wait for a correction to come along, but I certainly do understand why you want to get in. Good luck.
I never said it was the only way to develop wealth or stability. All your links showed what millennials "think" and a list of home ownership rates in various countries.
Of course rising rents are a function of market rates and owning a home prevents anyone from raising rent on you. That's a big reason why I want to own and you come as really narrow minded acting like people shouldn't strive to buy a house because you and others have built wealth other ways. FYI, I never said anything about measuring life by home ownership but don't sit there and try to tell me that not's something I should strive for or what I've been conditioned to believe. "Psychological condition"? Are you serious with that babble? Get over yourself and how you built your life, if others want do it differently that doesn't mean its any worse or that they shouldn't.
I never said people shouldn't strive to buy a house. Never said it. In fact I said if you want that "fine". Plain as day I wrote that.
Now you are also reacting very personally defensively about my phrase "psychological condition." You have taken that to mean a negative disorder. I didn't use it that way at all. We are all conditioned to believe in things by our cultural traditions and orientations. That results in a psychological position. Not a "psycho - logical" position.
And you continue to miss the message of the article I linked. It doesn't merely report what millennials think. It reports an observation that home ownership is exactly what I said: no longer the best track to financial success as it has been considered for the past few generations before. That is not to say it isn't one of many workable choices. But this thread includes discussion of how impossible it is for unsubsidized new middle class to afford many Bay Area home purchases. My point was: that limitation in itself doesn't make the Bay Area an impossible or even bad choice for a quality lifestyle.
So relax. If you want to buy a home, buy one. I couldn't care less to judge you for that. If you can't afford to buy in the Bay Area, and your life plan is focused on owning real estate, guess you'll have to pursue your life plan elsewhere. But that doesn't make a non-real estate Bay lifestyle a bad choice.
I never said people shouldn't strive to buy a house. Never said it. In fact I said if you want that "fine". Plain as day I wrote that.
Now you are also reacting very personally defensively about my phrase "psychological condition." You have taken that to mean a negative disorder. I didn't use it that way at all. We are all conditioned to believe in things by our cultural traditions and orientations. That results in a psychological position. Not a "psycho - logical" position.
And you continue to miss the message of the article I linked. It doesn't merely report what millennials think. It reports an observation that home ownership is exactly what I said: no longer the best track to financial success as it has been considered for the past few generations before. That is not to say it isn't one of many workable choices. But this thread includes discussion of how impossible it is for unsubsidized new middle class to afford many Bay Area home purchases. My point was: that limitation in itself doesn't make the Bay Area an impossible or even bad choice for a quality lifestyle.
So relax. If you want to buy a home, buy one. I couldn't care less to judge you for that. If you can't afford to buy in the Bay Area, and your life plan is focused on owning real estate, guess you'll have to pursue your life plan elsewhere. But that doesn't make a non-real estate Bay lifestyle a bad choice.
You come off as very condescending and make assumptions on why some people want to buy a house. I don't know what exactly you're getting from your link but all I see is what millenials "think" which do partly based off some of them struggling to make some housing payments which could have been caused by a variety of factors.
You're right, a non-real estate owning Bay Area lifestyle isn't necessarily a bad choice at all and I never claimed it was. It many instances renting is a better option as it is for me right now.
The thing is it's not just buying a home that's an issue, its all housing costs in general including renting. Even after rent a lot of people don't have the funds to invest in precious metals or whatever.
You really don't see the irony in the fact his coach is getting a few million a year, his school is getting 10s of millions a year. And this kid is going to bed starving. It would take an additional $100-200 a month to meet his basic needs, and his school is cashing in on his talents. Treating him like an employee, but not actually giving him the benefits of a living wage. All for the "privilege" of playing basketball, while his school makes about $100 million over his (and his peers) 4 year tenure. They can't spare another $10k a year so the players can go to bed full?
With his practice and training schedule, he has no time for a job. Without playing basketball, he can't afford college. And you say he should suck it up and go to the soup kitchen?
There you have it, we totally lost logical empathy here.
Absolutely agree 100%. The coach has no success without the players that make it happen on the court. They give the coach job security and essentially provide for his family's mansion and make it possible for the coach to send his teenagers to a good college, too. No one can logically argue otherwise. Those are the facts.
Not to inject myself into all this "banter" but really---STOP!! Not just you---the other posters need to quit--it's ridiculous and childish and everyone has their own opinions---positive OR negative. There is nothing to be gained from this thread anymore for people just looking for information . Anyone that is actually interested in the Bay Area has stopped reading by now. It's just pro SF vs anti- SF...stoopid.
It's great that you love it here and are living a great life here!! You cannot expect everyone that moves here from somewhere else to love it....No biggie---this pathetic thread has gone on for far too long. It's like a gang warfare thing---really childish and pathetic. You cannot convince people that their lives are supposed to be exactly like yours. (I'm actually a native, so I can step back and accept that it's not everyone's cup of tea). It's not a cup of tea for most of my childhood friends, either---it's LIFE.
But the back and forth of people that hate it and the people that love it has grown extremely tiresome and inane.
Drop your over the top praise---it's merely your personal experience. I know a lot of LOCALS that struggle to raise kids and/or have moved out once they have kids and really understand all the cra* it entails.
It's not Disneyland---I'm truly glad that you're loving it right now and hope you continue to do so for as long as possible...but you must understand that for a lot of people it's a culture/paycheck shock and for a lot of long time residents/locals, it's become the Disneyland for the 20-30 something single crowd.
You have to understand what it used to be like to truly understand where (some) people might be coming from or understand where it might be a complete shock.
Please don't take this personally---time to move away from the board and get out to enjoy what you say you already love. Arguing back and forth with anonymous posters with ideas that are different than your own is a complete waste of time.....and VICE VERSA! Opinions. Accept and move on.
Twenty something person in the high COL Bay Area...maybe recently graduated from college with a large student loan to pay back. Not enough experience in the workplace to be highly paid yet. I seriously doubt most are living a Disneyland existence unless they are well connected with Mark Zuckerberg or the higher ups at Apple and Cisco. The majority are not. Most are struggling actually. People that are living closer to the Disneyland existence are a couple that are both working good jobs in their 30's or 40's without children. Maybe some working empty nesters are able to do that, too. Not most twenty somethings.
As to dalparadise, I would fall off my chair if he were under 40. I seriously doubt it. Anyways, the guy committed the unpardonable crime of sharing his experience enjoying a sandwich and some fine wine on Treasure Island and his appreciation for the area. He got attacked by people that were mysteriously upset about it. His comments were just responses to their attacks. If others had been reasonable and realized that normal people used to appreciate hearing about other people's good experiences, this could have been avoided. You are blaming the wrong person IMO. Respectfully disagree.
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,143,755 times
Reputation: 3145
Quote:
Originally Posted by chessgeek
Twenty something person in the high COL Bay Area...maybe recently graduated from college with a large student loan to pay back. Not enough experience in the workplace to be highly paid yet. I seriously doubt most are living a Disneyland existence unless they are well connected with Mark Zuckerberg or the higher ups at Apple and Cisco. The majority are not. Most are struggling actually. People that are living closer to the Disneyland existence are a couple that are both working good jobs in their 30's or 40's without children. Maybe some working empty nesters are able to do that, too. Not most twenty somethings.
As to dalparadise, I would fall off my chair if he were under 40. I seriously doubt it. Anyways, the guy committed the unpardonable crime of sharing his experience enjoying a sandwich and some fine wine on Treasure Island and his appreciation for the area. He got attacked by people that were mysteriously upset about it. His comments were just responses to their attacks. If others had been reasonable and realized that normal people used to appreciate hearing about other people's good experiences, this could have been avoided. You are blaming the wrong person IMO. Respectfully disagree.
You are right. I am just over 40. I'm not in any field directly related to tech, other than the fact that advertising is highly dependent on a healthy economy and tech fuels that in the Bay Area.
Thank you for recognizing what happened in this thread, as well. It's odd that clongirl chose that post to quote. At that point, I was actually responding to a request for further information, having left my two antagonists behind some time before.
Thanks for contributing substantively to the thread. It was good and bad, but entertaining all along the way.
Do I? Wasn't my intention. I am surprised to read you feel that way since I didn't attack or ridicule you in any way. I merely expressed a legitimate point of view, just as you and others have here. You have even acknowledged the POV I expressed.
Curious, I went back to my original comment in this thread that started this exchange between you and I. I wrote one sentence: "Why does it need to be a part of a life plan?"
That was it. And I added a couple links to an article and in my next, equally brief post, another link to a list of places where home ownership is low. I fail to see anything condescending. Perhaps you feel defensive because you don't like to be challenged on issues you feel personally strong about. Dunno. I recommend fishing.
I don't have any beef with you or your desire to buy real estate. Enjoy your day
Do I? Wasn't my intention. I am surprised to read you feel that way since I didn't attack or ridicule you in any way. I merely expressed a legitimate point of view, just as you and others have here. You have even acknowledged the POV I expressed.
Curious, I went back to my original comment in this thread that started this exchange between you and I. I wrote one sentence: "Why does it need to be a part of a life plan?"
That was it. And I added a couple links to an article and in my next, equally brief post, another link to a list of places where home ownership is low. I fail to see anything condescending. Perhaps you feel defensive because you don't like to be challenged on issues you feel personally strong about. Dunno. I recommend fishing.
I don't have any beef with you or your desire to buy real estate. Enjoy your day
It was your follow up post,not your original comment, that I found very condescending and that should have been pretty clear that is what I was referring to. I guess you don't realize how you can come off on this site.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
