Are you "Upper Middle Class"?

[Kat Kid]

If you didn't have two kids, you could totally afford to have one kid!

I'm laughing because I am hurting on the inside.

[sys]

I keep forgetting that I put roughly a mortgage payment every month in to day care for 2 kids, I guess I could afford all sorts of things if I was not doing that.

 

heh.  i prolly display the opposite cognitive bias.

[michigancat]

then i think my rent point is relevant again.

What is your rent point?

[slobber]

If you didn't have two kids, you could totally afford to have one kid!

I'm laughing because I am hurting on the inside.

THREE KIDS!!!!!!


Gonna win 'em all!

[sys]

then i think my rent point is relevant again.

What is your rent point?

the rent of the 150k house is likely greater than .5x the rent of the 300k house.

[michigancat]

Do you mean the mortgage?

[Kat Kid]

Do you mean the mortgage?

no, he's talking rent vs. rent vs. mortgage

[sys]

no.  the potential house buyer has to live somewhere.  either they rent or buy.  the 150k house buyer pays .5x what the 300k house buyer costs (excluding proportional differences in closing costs).  in most markets, i think the 150k house renter pays more than .5x the rent that the 300k house renter pays.

without considering other factors, it makes more sense for the potential occupant of a 150k house to buy than the potential occupant of the 300k house.

[chum1]

They could just live with their parents, though.

[slobber]

They could just live with their parents, though.

This has been a good strategy for most of us!

[michigancat]

no.  the potential house buyer has to live somewhere.  either they rent or buy.  the 150k house buyer pays .5x what the 300k house buyer costs (excluding proportional differences in closing costs).  in most markets, i think the 150k house renter pays more than .5x the rent that the 300k house renter pays.

without considering other factors, it makes more sense for the potential occupant of a 150k house to buy than the potential occupant of the 300k house.

That makes sense. I was referring strictly to buying vs. buying (while recognizing there are other options).

[michigancat]

no.  the potential house buyer has to live somewhere.  either they rent or buy.  the 150k house buyer pays .5x what the 300k house buyer costs (excluding proportional differences in closing costs).  in most markets, i think the 150k house renter pays more than .5x the rent that the 300k house renter pays.

without considering other factors, it makes more sense for the potential occupant of a 150k house to buy than the potential occupant of the 300k house.

That makes sense. I was referring strictly to buying vs. buying (while recognizing there are other options).

And I still say that the $50k household still would have a far more difficult time paying their mortgage, even considering the fact that renting the same house would be more than 0.5x the $300k house.

[slobber]

Get a job delivering pizza and appliances on the side.

[chum1]

Get a job delivering pizza and appliances on the side.

If they lived with your parents, delivering pizza can be their only job!

[Emo EMAW]

Get a job delivering pizza and appliances on the side.

Good way to get some side handies, and maybe even a cold brew!

[sys]

And I still say that the $50k household still would have a far more difficult time paying their mortgage, even considering the fact that renting the same house would be more than 0.5x the $300k house.

you're right.  maintainance costs also probably aren't proportional to house value and may offset any allometry in rent.

[Skipper44]

no.  the potential house buyer has to live somewhere.  either they rent or buy.  the 150k house buyer pays .5x what the 300k house buyer costs (excluding proportional differences in closing costs).  in most markets, i think the 150k house renter pays more than .5x the rent that the 300k house renter pays.

without considering other factors, it makes more sense for the potential occupant of a 150k house to buy than the potential occupant of the 300k house.

That makes sense. I was referring strictly to buying vs. buying (while recognizing there are other options).

And I still say that the $50k household still would have a far more difficult time paying their mortgage, even considering the fact that renting the same house would be more than 0.5x the $300k house.

true but making the mortgage payment may be the only real investing a $50k household will ever do even if the $150k house appreciates a lower rate than the $300k

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I keep forgetting that I put roughly a mortgage payment every month in to day care for 2 kids, I guess I could afford all sorts of things if I was not doing that.

 

Have you considered hiring a nanny? Could save you a lot of money.

[Kat Kid]

I keep forgetting that I put roughly a mortgage payment every month in to day care for 2 kids, I guess I could afford all sorts of things if I was not doing that.

 

Have you considered hiring a nanny? Could save you a lot of money.

1. There is no way this is true. 
2. My mortgage is cheap.

[sys]

i also think people are unreasonably fearful of not being able to afford their mortgage/losing their house.  the ability to be able to walk away from a bad purchase and stick a bank with the results is a benefit to the house buyer, not something to worry about.

[michigancat]

no.  the potential house buyer has to live somewhere.  either they rent or buy.  the 150k house buyer pays .5x what the 300k house buyer costs (excluding proportional differences in closing costs).  in most markets, i think the 150k house renter pays more than .5x the rent that the 300k house renter pays.

without considering other factors, it makes more sense for the potential occupant of a 150k house to buy than the potential occupant of the 300k house.

That makes sense. I was referring strictly to buying vs. buying (while recognizing there are other options).

And I still say that the $50k household still would have a far more difficult time paying their mortgage, even considering the fact that renting the same house would be more than 0.5x the $300k house.

true but making the mortgage payment may be the only real investing a $50k household will ever do even if the $150k house appreciates a lower rate than the $300k

that's just another example of how much easier it is for a $100k family to have a 3x salary mortgage than a $50k family.

[lopakman]

It amazes me that people can live off of 50k a year.  I don't understand why they don't get better jobs. weird

[slobber]

It amazes me that people can live off of 50k a year.  I don't understand why they don't get better jobs. weird

it amazes me that people that make more money than $50k don't understand this. Basically, I think you should understand this, or you are stupid.


Gonna win 'em all!

[star seed 7]

lopak could learn a lot from checking his privilege

[Cartierfor3]

It amazes me that people can live off of 50k a year.  I don't understand why they don't get better jobs. weird

you can chose to be content living at any income level you are at as long as your most basic needs are met. i know miserable people making a lot and joyful people making a little. you can live off much less than 50k and have a wonderfully content life if you choose to do so.