Wealthy benefit disproportionately from the mortgage interest deduction

[^_^ 5,021]

I wouldn't dream of taking on more than 300K in mortgage debt on a 100K salary around here. Maybe more IF property taxes are low and stable.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

Parking a trailer in NYC will cost you $1000 per month.

That sounds like a bargain. Are you sure prostitute's aren't turning tricks in your trailer for such a good parking rate, like in that episode of Seinfeld?

[scandal 951]

My trailer was only $1999. Used.

If you bought it in Australia it would cost $199999. Which proves that everything is better in Australia.

[dalegg 143]

How much can you afford with a $100k salary? A $400-500k home? In NYC, that's a tiny studio.

NYC doesn't count. The average price of a home in Manhattan is 1.4 million for Pete's sake.

[^_^ 5,021]

Boo yah has been gone a looooooong time, yo.

[dalegg 143]

I wouldn't dream of taking on more than 300K in mortgage debt on a 100K salary around here. Maybe more IF property taxes are low and stable.

In 2002 I bought my house for $350,000 and I was making less than $80,000/ year. Single income. Zero down. After a couple of refinances I am now 12 years from paying it off and I will be 10 years from retirement at that time. Best purchase I ever made.

[^_^ 5,021]

In 2002 I bought my house for $350,000 and I was making less than $80,000/ year. Single income. Zero down. After a couple of refinances I am now 12 years from paying it off and I will be 10 years from retirement at that time. Best purchase I ever made.

How did you manage getting a loan with zero down?

Edited July 18, 2011 by \

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

How did you manage getting a loan with zero down?

Veteran's Administration loans for one.

[mawilson 2,133]

How did you manage getting a loan with zero down?

2002, man. How did everybody?

[^_^ 5,021]

2002, man. How did everybody?

I put 60 down back in 2003. I wanted to put down 40 but my bank was being a PITA.

[dalegg 143]

How did you manage getting a loan with zero down?

VA

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Boo yah has been gone a looooooong time, yo.

Gone but not forgotten.

[SMR 368]

I don't believe that housing prices should or will recover to 2006-2007 levels any time soon. It's not that housing prices are too low now. They were just too high then. Housing is a major part of the cost of living. Why if the price of gas or bread or milk goes through the roof while wages/salaries stay the same do we think that the economy is going through the toilet but yet when housing prices go through the roof and wages/salaries stay the same we think we are living in a good economy? The idea of considering your primary residence an investment is a crock perpetuated by Wallstreet bank elites who are making bonuses off it. You can make money and do well investing in real estate after your primary residence but it isn't that simple and should have more to do with income derived from the property than the changing sale price.

For the record, I don't own my own house and don't plan to any time soon. I also don't make $100k but I could afford a house if I wanted one (I don't live in an incredibly expensive part of the country). It's just that I would be paying more in property taxes, interest, and insurance than I am currently paying in rent on an apartment. Right now, I have relative mobility, pay less, don't have to take care of anything that breaks or a lawn, and have access to a pool and sport courts. If I bought a house, I would be stuck, would have to take care of things myself, wouldn't have the access, and would be paying more for it. I would have a little more room, but who needs more than a kitchen, bathroom, bed room and living room? It's not like I'd be everywhere at once. I'd just have to get more junk to store in the extra rooms.

I could understand the whole "you'll own it argument," if I would actually own it. But the bank would own it. Home ownership in America is, for the vast majority, an illusion. And even if I did own it, property taxes would still come knocking.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I think it's bad. If you can't purchase a home with a $100,000 salary then either housing prices are either still too high in a lot of areas of the country, or people are in serious debt, or there are just that many people who don't believe in owning. None of which is good.

I agree. Subprime mortgages aren't the answer though. If the housing market worked as it should, prices would hover at an amount that is affordable for a majority of people, living in that area.

[SMR 368]

I agree. Subprime mortgages aren't the answer though. If the housing market worked as it should, prices would hover at an amount that is affordable for a majority of people, living in that area.

Precisely. Provided, of course, that there are enough houses for everyone that wants to live in the area. The problem is, subprime mortgages just allow people to buy houses they can't afford. The increase in demand further causes the prices of those houses to go up. It's really the same thing that is happening with university tuition. Whenever there is a glut of easily accessible credit to buy something, the prices on that thing will go up as more and more people buy it. People will be less able to afford it but since they can still get credit they will continue to buy it anyways. The problem will spiral out of control. More and more people will borrow more and more money to buy things they can less and less afford.

Naturally, this doesn't apply in situations where there isn't a capacity problem or barrier to entry for supplying that good or service but I digress since that isn't the case for either quality university education or housing. Both are a limited resource. Although they can be increased, that requires significant investment and time.